1. Developing Open Educational Resources for Interprofessional Education Jacqui Williams, TIGER Academic Lead, De Montfort University Ming Nie, TIGER Evaluator, University of Leicester 12 May 2011 OER 11, Manchester

2. 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.

3. What is IPE ? IPE occurs when students learn about each other’s professional practice to enable more effective collaboration and improve health outcomes (Barr, 2002).

4. Regional IPE strategy

5. Developing interprofessional competencies, before and beyond registration The Three Strand Model Learning beyond registration Strand One Strand Two Strand Three Practise where possible Practise where possible How IPE is taught?

6. Competence Framework How IPE is taught?

7. The Leicester Model of IPE How IPE is taught?

8. Students in an IPE session

10. TIGER OERs Topics of TIGER OERs Learning hours Leicester model (Inequalities in Health) 170 Learning Inter-Professionally 30 Team working and collaborative practice (undergraduate & postgraduate) 52 Patient safety 50 Service improvement 30 Learning public health 200 Interprofessional proactive care and rehabilitation 10 TOSCE: Team Objective Structured Clinical Examination 10 Postgraduate certificate in practice education 400 Disability 30 Mental health 50 Dementia 22.5 Prescribing 90 Stroke 20 Diabetes 20 Diabetes in the young 100 Neuro rehabilitation 200 Listening 50 Police, paramedic and midwifery IPE 30 Interviews with IPE experts 20 Total 1584.5

11. TIGER repository

12. TIGER quality process Teaching Material Publicly Usable Material OER Input from partners Screening IPR and © clearing Validation by users Release Evaluation Transformation In e-format Accuracy, currency Understood by a non-specialist Can be used ‘as is’ Used in the teaching Recognise CAIPE principles Initial screening passed Align with health education curricular outcomes Self-contained Coherent standalone OER Editorial issues removed Legally clean and clear to be moved to the public domain Appropriate metadata Tagged for easy search Available in different formats Appropriate license assigned Created in accessible forms Easy navigation Easy to find the available formats Easy to download Accurate content Sufficient information attached to each OER Easy to repurpose User-friendly interface Upload to each agreed platform Feedback form associated with each OER Clear mechanism for end user to submit revised or repurposed OER Evaluate the use of OERs by stakeholders CRITERIA QUALITY If quality criteria not met

13. TIGER evaluation Key stakeholders Evaluation angles Data collection methods Staff (academics, managers, copyright officer, technical support) Considerations in pedagogical design; challenges and problems in the process Semi-structured interviews Students Use of and access to OERs; benefits to learning; problems and difficulties in use Focus group interviews Semi-structured interviews Online questionnaire survey Practitioners Wider and open access in work-based settings Problems and difficulties in use Semi-structured interviews

17. Contact us Email: Website: Blog: Twitter: http://www.northampton.ac.uk/tiger Jacqui Williams (JWilli13@dmu.ac.uk) Ming Nie (ming.nie@le.ac.uk)