Traditionalist, supplementer, or reformer? medical student use of non-official curricular resources

The purpose of this study was to explore why and how medical students use non-traditional learning resources relative to the formal curriculum, to inform curriculum development efforts, and support self‑directed learning.

A qualitative study grounded in a pragmatic research approach was conducted using semi structured interviews with medical students at the University of Ottawa. Participant recruitment occurred via email/social media, and a pre survey was used to ensure sampling of both low- and high-level resource users. Transcripts were analyzed using reflexive thematic analysis in NVivo. Analysis was both deductive, guided by self-regulated learning (motivation, goal setting, feedback, self-monitoring), and inductive to capture unanticipated themes.

Twenty-nine students participated (18 pre-clerkship; 11 clerkship). Four themes were developed: two addressing motivations  for using non‑traditional resources-the traditional curriculum is repetitive and inflexible and non‑traditional resources are high‑yield and flexible; one addressing goal setting-studying for today's exam or tomorrow's patient; and one addressing how students engage with resources, captured through three archetypes-the Traditionalist, the Supplementer, and the Reformer.

This study demonstrates how medical students navigate learning by turning to non-traditional resources, shaped by their motivations, goal orientations, and distinct engagement patterns. These insights highlight opportunities to streamline and modernize curricula, integrate vetted high yield resources, and strengthen students' self-regulated learning skills. Leveraging the three learner archetypes can further guide curriculum planning by recognizing diverse learning approaches, engaging Supplementers as indicators of curricular gaps, supporting Traditionalists with structured pathways, and viewing Reformers' non-attendance as an expression of SRL rather than disengagement.