Scholl, Linda

Abstract Purpose Clinicians and scientists often take a different path in developing competence and confidence as educators compared with peers who have received formal pedagogical teaching. This study explores how award-winning health professions educators reflect on the development and fluctuation of their teaching self-efficacy over time. Guided by social cognitive theory, the study investigates how educators notice, make meaning of, and respond to diverse teaching-related experiences across their careers. Method Between May and August 2023, 31 Mayo Clinic educators in clinical medicine, basic science, and allied health who had been recognized for teaching excellence in the past 10 years were invited to participate in semistructured interviews. Each participant first completed a preinterview survey and created a graph of their teaching confidence over time, which served as an anchor for the interview discussion. Reflexive thematic analysis identified patterns in how participants described sources of fluctuation in teaching self-efficacy. Results Of the 31 invited educators, 21 (11 women, 10 men) took part in an interview. Educators described varied trajectories of teaching self-efficacy over time shaped by different experiences, interpretations, and instructional experimentation. Four themes were identified: (1) interpreting implicit and explicit feedback, (2) revising beliefs in response to successes and setbacks, (3) adapting to changing contexts, and (4) using social models to gauge effectiveness. Participants reported becoming more responsive to situational demands and learner needs over time. Conclusions For these award-winning educators, teaching self-efficacy was constructed and reconstructed through an adaptive, socially situated process of interpretation and reflection. The same events may have affected self-efficacy differently, depending on how individuals framed and acted on their experiences. Findings support a model that emphasizes adaptive expertise and offers implications for faculty development.

When COVID-19 caused worldwide cancellations of summer research immersion programs in 2020, Mayo Clinic rallied to create an alternate virtual experience called Summer Foundations in Research (SFIR). SFIR was designed not only to ensure the continuance of science pathways training for undergraduate scientists but also to support undergraduate mental wellbeing, given the known pandemic stressors. A total of 170 participants took part in the program and were surveyed pre-post for outcomes in biomedical research career knowledge, biomedical research career interest, research skills confidence, and three dimensions of mental wellbeing. Knowledge of and interest in careers involving biomedical research rose significantly following participation in SFIR. The participants’ mean research skills confidence also rose between 0.08 and 1.32 points on a 7-point scale across 12 items from the Clinical Research Appraisal Inventory. Success in science pathways support was accompanied by positive shifts in participant mental wellbeing. Measurable decreases in stress (Perceived Stress Scale, p < 0.0001) accompanied gains in resilience (Brief Resilience Scale, p < 0.0001) and life satisfaction (Satisfaction with Life Scale, p = 0.0005). Collectively, the data suggest that core objectives of traditional in-person summer research programming can be accomplished virtually and that these programs can simultaneously impact student wellbeing. This theoretical framework is particularly salient during COVID-19, but the increased accessibility of virtual programs such as SFIR can continue to bolster science education pathways long after the pandemic is gone.