Comparison of dental hygiene clinical instructor and student opinions of professional preparation for clinical instruction.
OBJECTIVE
The purpose of this study was to determine the degree of professional preparation among clinical instructors employed in baccalaureate dental hygiene programs in the U.S. and to examine clinical instructors' and students' perceived need for educational preparation. The  data-generating sample consisted of 285 dental hygiene clinical students and 76 dental hygiene clinical instructors from the 48 dental hygiene programs in the U.S. that offered a baccalaureate or higher degree in dental hygiene.


METHODS
Online survey instruments contained  both qualitative and quantitative questions and were completed by 285 clinical dental hygiene students and 76 clinical dental hygiene instructors from dental hygiene programs in the U.S. Using descriptive statistics, Chi-square analysis and the Mann-Whitney U test, the data from  clinical dental hygiene instructors and students were compared to determine if the preparation in educational methods being offered to dental hygiene clinical instructors was meeting the perceived needs of both clinical dental hygiene students and instructors.


RESULTS
According  to dental hygiene clinical students (n=285), 60% (n=171) indicated that 6 to 10 years of clinical dental hygiene experience was optimal, while 37% of clinical instructors (n=28) identified having less than 5 years of clinical experience prior to clinical teaching. Therefore, the majority of  clinical instructors have less than optimal years of clinical dental hygiene experience prior to clinical instructing. Regarding methods of pre-employment preparation, more than half (n=40) of the dental hygiene clinical instructors (n=76) reported most professional preparation occurred  through informal discussion with fellow clinical instructors. Significant differences were found between the clinical dental hygiene instructors' and clinical dental hygiene students' opinions of importance of clinical instructors being given formal guidance in educational methodologies (p=0.002),  communication skills (p=0.027), grading and evaluation techniques (p=0.001) and use of technology (p=0.008). Although the majority of instructors and students rated training in teaching methods and communication skills as most important, the majority of clinical dental hygiene instructors  (74%, n=53) identified grading and evaluation techniques as the most addressed subject of training.


CONCLUSIONS
Both dental hygiene clinical instructors and students identified areas of potential improvement in the professional educational guidance of dental hygiene clinical instructors.  Dental hygiene clinical education may benefit from including formal clinical instructor pre-employment preparation programs.
Fones School of Dental Hygiene at the University of Bridgeport, Connecticut, USA.
Marie R
MR
Paulis
D000328:Adult; D001290:Attitude; D001291:Attitude of Health Personnel; D003142:Communication; D003756:Dental Hygienists / Q000193:education*; D004521:Educational Measurement; D018961:Educational Technology; D004651:Employment; D005178:Faculty; D005260:Female; D006801:Humans; D008297:Male; D008611:Mentors; D008875:Middle Aged; D011364:Professional Practice; D013334:Students / Q000523:psychology*; D013663:Teaching / Q000379:methods*; D013997:Time Factors; D014481:United States; D055815:Young Adult