Validation of the Learner Engagement Instrument for Continuing Professional Development

• Published in: Academic medicine Vol. 99; no. 9; p. 1024
• Main Authors: Cook, David A, Stephenson, Christopher R
• Format: Journal Article
• Language: English
• Published: United States 01.09.2024
• Subjects: Adult; Education, Medical, Continuing - methods; Female; Humans; Learning; Male; Psychometrics - methods; Reproducibility of Results; Surveys and Questionnaires
• ISSN: 1938-808X
• DOI: 10.1097/ACM.0000000000005749

Learner engagement is the energy learners exert to remain focused and motivated to learn. The Learner Engagement Instrument (LEI) was developed to measure learner engagement in a short continuing professional development (CPD) activity. The authors validated LEI scores using validity evidence of internal structure and relationships with other variables. Participants attended 1 of 4 CPD courses (1 in-person, 2 online livestreamed, and 1 either in-person or livestreamed) in 2018, 2020, 2021, and 2022. Confirmatory factor analysis was used to examine model fit for several alternative structural models, separately for each course. The authors also conducted a generalizability study to estimate score reliability. Associations were evaluated between LEI scores and Continuing Medical Education Teaching Effectiveness (CMETE) scores and participant demographics. Statistical methods accounted for repeated measures by participants. Four hundred fifteen unique participants attended 203 different CPD presentations and completed the LEI 11,567 times. The originally hypothesized 4-domain model of learner engagement (domains: emotional, behavioral, cognitive in-class, cognitive out-of-class) demonstrated best model fit in all 4 courses, with comparative fit index ≥ 0.99, standardized root mean square residual ≤ 0.031, and root mean square error of approximation ≤ 0.047. The reliability for overall scores and domain scores were all acceptable (50-rater G-coefficient ≥ 0.74) except for the cognitive in-class domain (50-rater G-coefficient of 0.55 to 0.66). Findings were similar for both in-person and online delivery modalities. Correlation of LEI scores with teaching effectiveness was confirmed (rho=0.58), and a small correlation was found with participant age (rho=0.19); other associations were small and not statistically significant. Using these findings, we generated a shortened 4-item instrument, the LEI Short Form. This study confirms a 4-domain model of learner engagement and provides validity evidence that supports using LEI scores to measure learner engagement in both in-person and livestreamed CPD activities.