Expectation and experience: dissonances between novice and expert perceptions in medical education research

There is both qualitative and quantitative variation in the research methods training provided for Masters and doctoral students on medical education programmes across the UK. Unlike other higher-degree programmes, there are no requirements for higher-degree medical education students to have studied the subject at degree level or for their supervisors to have training in social science research methods. This study explores the ways in which a panel of experts responded to novices' presentations of their research in progress.

This qualitative, case-based study of a 1-day education research consortium generated data in two phases. The author collected detailed field notes as a non-participant observer and subsequently analysed the data they contained. A second set of data was generated from written reflexive accounts of the day e-mailed to the author by all participants 1 month after the event and was subsequently analysed.

Thematic coding revealed wide degrees of variance between the research experiences and abilities of the novices and the expectations of the experts. These levels of dissonance are ascribed to the limited amounts of research training undertaken by students and the variable guidance provided by research supervisors, some of whom were themselves novices in this area.

If medical education research is to thrive, it requires a properly developed infrastructure with training and support for research supervisors and students alike. Communities of practice need to be fostered to enable researchers to collaborate and disseminate good practice. This will ensure that medical education research practitioners can produce theoretically sound, rigorously designed and executed studies that can contribute to the evidence base for medical education.