Graduation Year

2025

Document Type

Thesis

Degree

M.S.P.H.

Degree Name

MS in Public Health (M.S.P.H.)

Degree Granting Department

Global Health

Major Professor

Deborah Cragun, Ph.D., M.S., CGC

Committee Member

Nevena Krstić, M.S., CGC

Committee Member

Sara Friedman, M.S.

Keywords

Active strategy, Behavioral factors, Correlation, Metacognitive strategy, Passive strategy

Abstract

With a 76% pass rate for the 2024 American Board of Genetic Counseling (ABGC) certification exam, it's crucial to evaluate the study strategies used by candidates and their alignment with evidence-based practices. This study surveyed 84 genetic counseling students and graduates from 35 U.S. and Canadian training programs, focusing on demographic data, study strategy usage, anxiety, and self-efficacy. Study strategies were categorized into one of three groups: 1) active strategies, which promote recall and understanding, 2) passive strategies, and 3) hybrid, for strategies that involve both active and passive engagement as well as three metacognitive strategies: regulating learning, monitoring learning, and reflecting on mistakes. Results showed that the most common passive strategy was reviewing notes (33% spent over an hour/week), while flashcards were the most used active strategy (42% spent over an hour/week). Other active strategies, like self-testing (37%), elaboration (27%), and problem sets (24%), were less frequently used. These findings suggest that students invest a lot of time on flashcards that help with memorization and recall. However, increasing the use of other active strategies, which are more effective in promoting deeper understanding and application of knowledge, is particularly important given that 75-80% of questions on the ABGC board exam are application questions. Monitoring learning was the most common metacognitive strategy, with 18% dedicating over an hour/week. Correlations revealed that frequent use of metacognitive strategies was strongly associated with more time spent on both active (r = .754) and passive (r = .693) study strategies. Higher anxiety was linked to more time spent on board exam study (r = .288, p = 0.008). Additionally, anxiety and self-efficacy were moderately negatively correlated (r = -0.535, p <.001). These findings suggest that while anxiety may act as a motivator for increased study time, integrating metacognitive strategies could enhance study effectiveness and improve overall exam preparation.

Download

Included in

Genetics Commons

Share

COinS