Open Educational Resources for Interprofessional Education

1,031 views

Published on

Published in: Education, Health & Medicine
1 Comment
1 Like
Statistics
Notes
No Downloads
Views
Total views
1,031
On SlideShare
0
From Embeds
0
Number of Embeds
9
Actions
Shares
0
Downloads
5
Comments
1
Likes
1
Embeds 0
No embeds

No notes for slide

Open Educational Resources for Interprofessional Education

  1. 1. Developing Open Educational Resources for Interprofessional Education Ming Nie, TIGER Evaluator, The University of Leicester Gemma Towle, TIGER Copyright Officer, De Montfort University Alejandro Armellini, TIGER Advisor, The University of Leicester Rob Howe, TIGER Project Manager, The University of Northampton Dr Liz Anderson, TIGER Academic Lead, The University of Leicester Ali Ewing, TIGER Academic Lead, The University of Northampton Jacqui Williams, TIGER Academic Lead, De Montfort University
  2. 2. Our Regional IPE Strategy - for 10 years
  3. 3. Examples of evaluated IPE materials <ul><li>Classroom-based </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Three-Strand Model: Anderson ES, Thorpe NT (2008). Early Interprofessional Interactions: Does student age matter? Journal of Interprofessional Care . 22(3): 1-19. </li></ul></ul><ul><li>Practice-based </li></ul><ul><ul><li>With patients: Anderson ES, Smith R. (2010) Learning from Lives together: lessons from a joint learning experience for medical and social work students. Health and Social Care in the Community . 18(3): 229-240. </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Patient Safety: ES Anderson, N Thorpe, Heney, D, Petersen, S. (2009) Medical Students benefit from learning about patient Safety in an interprofessional team; Medical Education;43: 542-552. </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Communication: Anderson ES, Ford J, Thorpe L. Learning to Listen: Improving students communication with disabled people. Medical Teacher; Volume 33, Number 1, January 2011, pp. 44-52(9). </li></ul></ul>
  4. 4. TIGER collects, develops and shares reusable, customisable Open Educational Resources (OERs) designed for Interprofessional Education (IPE) in Health and Social Care between the three institutions, academics, their existing communities of practice, employers and the wider community.
  5. 5. Developing interprofessional competencies, before and beyond registration Learning beyond registration Strand One First year Strand Two Middle years Strand Three Pre registration In practice, workshops and e-learning In practice, workshops and e- learning Our Strategy: The Three-Strand Model Class-room
  6. 6. Students in IPE events
  7. 7. TIGER repository TIGER OERs Leicester Model (and applications) Theory and early concepts on team working Team working and collaborative practice Patient safety Service improvement Leading public health Interprofessional care planning/discharge TOSCE: Team Objective Structured Clinical Examination Postgraduate certificate in practice education Disability Mental health Dementia Prescribing Stroke Diabetes Diabetes in the young Neuro rehabilitation Listening Police, paramedic and midwifery IPE Interviews with IPE experts Total: 1960 learning hours
  8. 8. TIGER evaluation Key stakeholders No. of participant Evaluation angles Data collection methods Staff 13 Considerations in pedagogical design; challenges and problems in the process Semi-structured interviews Students 36 Use of the repository and OERs; potential benefits to learning; problems in use Focus group Questionnaire survey Reflective notes Practitioners In Sept 2011 Wider and open access in work-based settings Problems and difficulties in use Semi-structured interviews
  9. 9. <ul><li>Copyright </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Licence compatibility </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Raising awareness </li></ul></ul><ul><li>Pedagogical design </li></ul><ul><ul><li>Pedagogical ‘wrap-around’ </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><ul><li>Interaction and collaboration are essential components of IPE </li></ul></ul></ul><ul><ul><ul><li>Complexity of IPE across professional domains </li></ul></ul></ul><ul><ul><ul><li>Converting face-to-face to OER </li></ul></ul></ul><ul><ul><li>Design for openness and repurposing </li></ul></ul><ul><ul><ul><li>Context specific vs. generic </li></ul></ul></ul>Staff views
  10. 10. Student views The repository ‘ easy to navigate ’, ‘ user-friendly ’, ‘ attractive ’, ‘ flexible ’, ‘ visually very appealing ’, ‘ clear and easy to follow ’, ‘ visual aids ’, ‘ responds well to different learning needs ’ The OERs informative ’, ‘ very easy to use , follow and understand ’, ‘ well categorised ’, ‘ nicely divided up ’, ‘ well structured , organised , and presented ’ Potential benefits The resources are useful for both learning and work : Before : additional readings before seminars After : refreshing memory, enhancement, reflection, assignment, revision In practice : self-directed learning, professional development, sharing practice with health professionals internationally “ It’s good resource, much better than the handbook .” “ Overall, I feel the site with its sections gives more structure to the IPE Strand One event .” Criticisms The purpose of the repository and resources could be explained further. More information about the topics/types of the resources and more guidance on how to use them. Organising the resources under the ‘4-level’ theoretical framework (on the TIGER homepage) is found confusing.
  11. 11. Beyond TIGER <ul><li>SCORE Fellowship: Sept 2011 – Jun 2012 </li></ul><ul><li>Support of 10 UK wide practice IPE champions in the use of the TIGER repository </li></ul><ul><li>Evaluate the use and impact of the TIGER OERs on health care professionals in the UK </li></ul>
  12. 12. Contact us Email: Website: Blog: Twitter: http://www.northampton.ac.uk/tiger Ming Nie (ming.nie@le.ac.uk)

×