Category: Nurse Educator

The Applicability of Community of Inquiry Framework (Journal Club)

Paul Ross

Journal Club Article: Smadi, O., Parker, S., Gillham, D., & Müller, A. (2019). The applicability of community of inquiry framework to online nursing education: A cross-sectional study. Nurse education in practice, 34, 17-24.

Background

The lack of rigorous evidence based research to guide e-learning in higher education, which is especially relevant with the rapid adoption of e-learning, which is often part of a blended learning approach (Garrison, 2011).

“While discussion forums and video conferencing are very common in online courses, LMS also include a range of more interactive features and advanced functions such as customized learning pathways, collaborative content, peer interaction and assessment workshops, file sharing, real-time messaging, and wiki forums. However, according to Christie and Jurado (2009), these interactive features are not widely used by the course designers. Shea and Bidjerano (2009b) report that designers of online courses and educational providers are often confused about how to integrate new technologies into online learning environments in ways that will enrich student learning.”

The Community of Inquiry Framework

“The Community of Inquiry framework originated in the work of Dewey (1938), Peirce (1955), and Lipman (2003). Garrison et al. (2000) broadened and adapted the Community of Inquiry framework for e-learning education by viewing it through the lens of social, cognitive, and teaching presences.”

Community of Inquiry framework (Garrison et al., 2000):

  1. Social Presence
  2. Cognitive Presence
  3. Teaching Presence

Study Aim

The projects aims were to explore the following questions:

1. What is the awareness and knowledge of Australian nursing educators about the CoI framework?
2. What is the participants’ attitudes on the applicability of the CoI framework to online nurse education courses?

Study Design

An online survey tool which was divided into three sections:

  1. Demographic information,
  2. The applicability of community of inquiry presences,
  3. Awareness and knowledge of  Community of Inquiry.

Participants: Nurse educators from 34 higher education universities providing nurse education to international students.

Limitations: The survey tool was an adaptation of a validated tool. The limited response from using an online survey approach.

Results

From 138 respondents from a possible 1201 (response rate 11.5%):

    • The current used mode of teaching is blended learning (BL) (83%).
    • Nurse educators ranked BL as the best suited teaching mode for nursing education (90%).
    • Ninety percent (90%) of the participants are involved in curriculum design.
    • (90%) of the participants viewed instructional design and framework as significant to build an online course.
    • However, (70%) declared they don’t use explicit theoretical framework to guide the design/evaluation of online education.
    • Participants highly ranked the three core concepts of CoI framework as applicable for online nursing education.
  • (20%) of the participants are familiar with CoI framework, of them (79%) are likely to recommend CoI framework to a colleague.

Summary

“This study has shown the perceived importance of instructional design and theoretical framework to build an online courses for nurse educators using blended learning. Since Community of Inquiry framework has been shown to improve student satisfaction and decrease attrition in non-health disciplines, the implementation of Community of Inquiry framework in nurse education should be investigated more. Community of Inquiry provides a comprehensive framework relevant to face-to-face, blended, and online education with the potential to embed numerous technology-linked interventions within a Community of Inquiry framework.

These results provide the impetus for further investigation of factors influencing the development of online nurse education including the specific consideration of CoI frameworks.”

Keywords: Community of inquiry; Online education; Theoretical framework; Blended learning; E-learning

Reference

Smadi, O., Parker, S., Gillham, D., & Müller, A. (2019). The applicability of community of inquiry framework to online nursing education: A cross-sectional study. Nurse education in practice, 34, 17-24.

Spaced Learning

Paul Ross

Spaced Learning is a “learning method in which highly condensed learning content is repeated three times, with two 10-minute breaks during which distractor activities such as physical activities are performed by the students” (Wikipedia, 2018).

Spaced Learning in School 

Themes from the Monkseaton High School experience:

  • What could do we do better and what we are doing
  • Drivers for change are technology and new science
  • Neurological research focused on learning and retention
  • Repetition of content
  • Culture of sharing amongst teachers

Additional Resources

Keywords: Spaced Learning; Repetition; Sharing; Experience; Cognitive learning; Neuroscience.

References

Eich, E. (2018). The Cognitive Science of Learning Enhancement: Optimizing Long-Term Retention. The University of British Columbia, Department of Psychology.

Kelley, P. (2007). Making Minds: What’s Wrong with Education-and What Should We Do about It?. Routledge. [preview]

Smolen, P., Zhang, Y., & Byrne, J. H. (2016). The right time to learn: mechanisms and optimization of spaced learning. Nature Reviews Neuroscience, 17(2), 77.

Storm, B. C. (2011). The benefit of forgetting in thinking and remembering. Current Directions in Psychological Science, 20(5), 291-295.

Nursing Education Network Stats 2018

Paul Ross

As part of open access and the #FOANed community, here is a summary of this blogs yearly stats (ending Dec 7, 2018). Thank you to everyone who follows and supports this site.  

Views by Countries (Top 12)

In this one year period there were visitors from 144 different countries.  

Views by Post (Top 12) 

Views & Visitors Monthly Data 2018



Warm wishes for a happy new year from Nursing Education Network. Posts will start again from 8th Jan, 2019. 

Education Delivery Resources

Paul Ross

This is part III of organising posts from this blog into grouped resources for the nurse educator, and the focus is on the delivery of education (Part I: The Nurse Educator Role and Part II: Adult Learning Theory).

Subject intended learning outcomes (SILOs) are explicit statements of what a learner is expected to achieve, and to what standard or level of achievement (Biggs and Tang, 2011). When creating nurse education and training in the workplace, simulation centre or higher education setting, the importance of designing intended learning outcomes are vital. ILOs are central to the design of teaching and assessment so should be part of the initial planning phases.

Education Delivery

Choosing the delivery method of the learning activity and any related tasks provides a stage for effective teaching and engagement from the participants perspective. The nurse educator needs to consider the best method/s for delivering content. Here are some education delivery focused resources:

The below links are to the resources focusing on the educator role and education theory.

 

IRIS Cricoid Pressure Trial & Deimplementation (Journal Club)

Paul Ross

Journal Club Article: Birenbaum, A., Hajage, D., Roche, S., Ntouba, A., Eurin, M., Cuvillon, P., … & Menut, R. (2018). Effect of Cricoid Pressure Compared With a Sham Procedure in the Rapid Sequence Induction of Anesthesia: The IRIS Randomized Clinical Trial. JAMA Surgery.

Background: 

Cricoid pressure or Sellick’s maneuver (first described by Dr. Sellick in the 1960’s) aims to reduce the risk of regurgitation. The technique involves the application of pressure over the cricoid cartilage with the thumb and 1-2 additional fingers, to to occlude the esophagus and prevent regurgitation of stomach contents into the upper airway.

Study Aim:

Does the cricoid pressure prevent pulmonary aspiration in patients undergoing rapid sequence induction of anesthesia?

Study Design:

A randomized, double-blind, noninferiority trial conducted across 10 academic centers. Patients undergoing anesthesia with rapid sequence intubation (RSI) were enrolled from February 2014 until February 2017 and followed up for 28 days or until hospital discharge. 3472 patients were assigned to cricoid pressure (Sellick group) or a sham procedure group. Mean age was 51 years and 51% were men. Inclusion: all adults; Exclusion: pregnancy.

Key Results: 

Primary measure of pulmonary aspiration, occurred in 10 patients (0.6%) in the Sellick group and in 9 patients (0.5%) in the sham group.

Secondary Measures:

  • No significant difference in pneumonia, length of stay and mortality.
  • The Cricoid (Sellick maneuver) group had significantly longer intubation time (median, 27 vs. 23 seconds).
  • Longer intubation time >30 seconds, Cricoid 47% vs Sham 40%; P <.001.
  • Comparison of the Cormack and Lehane grade (Grades 3 and 4) in Cricoid (10%) vs Sham (5%; P <.001).
  • All suggests an increased difficulty of tracheal intubation in the Cricoid (Sellick) group.

Summary: 

Investigators summary: “the results failed to demonstrate the noninferiority of a sham procedure in preventing pulmonary aspiration compared with the cricoid pressure. Mortality, pneumonia, and length of stay did not differ significantly between groups, and differences in intubation time and laryngoscopic exposure suggest more difficulties in the Sellick group”.

Nursing Clinical Questions:

  • Is cricoid pressure needed if there is no harm prevention and gives inferior views of the airway?
  • This study population was in theatre, can the results be transferred into the pre-hospital, ED or ICU populations (and in pregnancy)?
  • Should nurses use the evidence base to encourage the deimplementation of ‘ritualistic’ practice? See below in Deimplementation Resources.
  • Should nurses just refuse to perform a non-evidence based procedure?

Additional Resources:

Recommended Viewing on Cricoid: Cricolol by John Hinds on Vimeo.

Deimplementation Resources

Rogers, E. M. (1995) Diffusion of innovations. (5th ed.) Simon and Schuster, New York, USA. [summary article]

Nursing Education Network. (2017) Deimplementation of Practice.

Nursing Education Network. (2016) Human Centred Design.

 

 

 

 

 

Adult Learning Theory Resources

Paul Ross

This is part II of organising posts from this blog into grouped resources for the nurse educator, and the focus is on learning theories. Part I were resources to support and direct the understanding of the nurse educator. Part III will focus on education delivery methods.

Adult Learning Theory

Constructivist Theory 

Social Learning Theory

Experiential Learning Theory

Cognitive Learning Theory

Educational Challenges of Interprofessional Practice Education

Paul Ross

What Is Interprofessional Learning?

Interprofessional practice education (IPE) has been defined by the Centre for Advancement of Interprofessional Education (CAIPE) as two or more professions “learning with, from and about each other to improve collaboration and quality of care” (Barr, 2002).

In order to improve outcomes across healthcare through collaboration there is the need to “learn with, from, and about each other” (World Health Organization, 2010).

WHO (2010) framework for interprofessional education and collaborative practice key messages are:

  • “Interprofessional education occurs when students from two or more professions learn about, from and with each other to enable effective collaboration and improve health outcomes.
  • Interprofessional education is a necessary step in preparing a collaborative practice-ready health workforce that is better prepared to respond to local health needs.
  • Collaborative practice happens when multiple health workers from different professional backgrounds work together with patients, families, carers and communities to deliver the highest quality of care” (pg 7).

 

The Players

Nursing, medical, allied health (physical therapist, pharmacy, social work, speech and language) and this is within the hospital environment, the next level is how to then collaborate between the hospital with community services.

IPE occurs formally and informally, from a clinical practice view, we have likely experienced the debrief of a clinical incident within the workplace (Nisbet et al. 2007).

Educational Challenges

One of the main questions from an educational perspective will be to consider what IPE learning should focus on (O’Keefe, Henderson & Chick, 2017). Is it the procedural (technical skills) or soft skills (non-technical skills) that are key learning? There will be the need for education faculty to be trained in delivering IPE (Watkins, 2016).

There is an identified need in healthcare for experiential learning opportunities, set in the clinical environment and not just in the simulation laboratory or higher education settings, (Shrader et al, 2018). Difficulties of delivering IPE in the higher education, such as logistics of collaboration around busy schedules, resources, accreditation and varied assessments (O’Keefe, Henderson, & Chick, 2017). To deliver within the clinical environment these factors need to be considered to ensure effective training focuses on improving consumer outcomes, collaboration and evidence based practice.

 

IPE Barriers

  • Professional silo’s, not to breakdown but connect.
  • Understanding each professions roles and responsibilities.
  • Scope of practice.
  • Difficulties of delivering IPE in higher education.
  • Traditional workplace hierarchy of top down approach, the collaborative IPE challenges these values and beliefs in order to change culture.
  • Interprofessional feedback process across different professions and skill mix. Skilled and structured feedback is required to maintain trust and enquiry in a safe environment.
  • Resources to deliver quality simulation, both technical and non-technical skill training.
  • Learning from mistakes and shared learning in the no-blame culture of healthcare.

Essential Components For IPE

Steven et al. (2017) identified these essential components from IPE education programs:

  1. Knowledge for practice,
  2. Skills for practice,
  3. Ethical approach,
  4. Professionalism,
  5. Continuing professional development (CPD),
  6. Patient-centered approach,
  7. Teamwork skills.

The Future

The recognition for collaborative practice and improved consumer outcomes through dedicated IPE programs delivered by specific IPE faculty (Bridges et al, 2011).

There will be a need for interprofessional competencies as IPE in the education and the workplace occurs, and how these fit into specific regulatory requirements will have to be considered (Englander et al, 2013).

References

Ausmed (2018). Position Statement: Interprofessional Continuing Education.

Ausmed (2018). Interprofessional Education in Healthcare – Exploring the Benefits.

Ausmed (2018). Meeting the Challenges of Interprofessional Collaboration.

Barr, H. (2002). Interprofessional Education: Today, Yesterday and Tomorrow. CAIPE and LTSN Centre for Health Science and Practice.

Bridges, D., Davidson, R. A., Soule Odegard, P., Maki, I. V., & Tomkowiak, J. (2011). Interprofessional collaboration: three best practice models of interprofessional education.

Englander, R., Cameron, T., Ballard, A. J., Dodge, J., Bull, J., & Aschenbrener, C. A. (2013). Toward a common taxonomy of competency domains for the health professions and competencies for physicians. Academic Medicine, 88(8), 1088-1094.

Hunt, S. (2007). Participatory community practice: Developing interprofessional skills. Focus on Health Professional Education: A Multi-Disciplinary Journal, 8(3), 71.

O’Keefe, M., Henderson, A., & Chick, R. (2017). Defining a set of common interprofessional learning competencies for health profession students. Medical teacher, 39(5), 463-468.

Nisbet, G., Thistlethwaite, J., Moran, M., Chesters, J., Jones, M., Murphy, K., & Playford, D. (2007). Sharing a vision for collaborative practice: the formation of an Australasian interprofessional practice and education network (AIPPEN). Focus on Health Professional Education: A Multi-disciplinary Journal, 8(3), 1.

Shrader, S., Jernigan, S., Nazir, N., & Zaudke, J. (2018). Determining the impact of an interprofessional learning in practice model on learners and patients. Journal of interprofessional care, 1-8.

Steven, K., Howden, S., Mires, G., Rowe, I., Lafferty, N., Arnold, A., & Strath, A. (2017). Toward interprofessional learning and education: Mapping common outcomes for prequalifying healthcare professional programs in the United Kingdom. Medical teacher, 39(7), 720-744.

Watkins, K. D. (2016) ‘Faculty development to support interprofessional education in healthcare professions: A realist synthesis’, Journal of Interprofessional Care, 30(6), pp.

World Health Organization. 2010. Framework for action on interprofessional education and collaborative practice. WHO Press.

 

 

 

Barriers to using research findings in practice: The clinician’s perspective

Paul Ross

Journal Club Article: Funk, S. G., Champagne, M. T., Wiese, R. A., & Tornquist, E. M. (1991). Barriers to using research findings in practice: The clinician’s perspective. Applied Nursing Research, 4(2), 90-95. [abstract]

In 1991, Funk and colleagues highlighted the progress made in the quantity, quality and new areas of nursing research being instigated.  This paper produced the BARRIERS scale, which has been used as a validated tool to further investigate research in nursing in different settings and countries.

Aim: To determine clinicians’ perceptions of the barriers to using research findings in practice and to solicit their input as to what factors would facilitate such use.

Method:  Questionnaires to 5000 selected full time working nurses based on five educational strata (those with diplomas, associate degrees, bachelor’s, master’s, and doctoral degrees). 40% completion of the questionnaire.

Nice touch part: “Each questionnaire included an individual packet of coffee and a letter inviting the recipient to take a few moments to relax and complete the questionnaire”.

BARRIERS scale: 28-item scale requires respondents to rate the extent to which they think each item is a barrier to nurses’ use of research to alter or enhance their practice. Responses are circled on a 4-point scale (I, to no extent; 2, to a little extent; 3, to a moderate
extent; and 4, to a great extent).

The scale is divided into four subscales:

  1. characteristics of the nurse (related to the nurse’s research values, skills, and awareness).
  2. characteristics of the setting (related to the barriers and limitations perceived in the work setting).
  3. characteristics of the research (methodological soundness and the appropriateness of conclusions drawn from the research).
  4. characteristics of the presentation of the research and its accessibility.

Results:  “Insufficient time on the job to implement new ideas was cited most frequently, with lack of support from administration and physicians following closely behind.

The two greatest barriers were the nurse’s not feeling that she/he had “enough authority to change patient care procedures” and “insufficient time on the job to implement new ideas,” both of which are barriers of the setting.

The characteristics of the setting were rated among the top 10 barriers. They included lack of cooperation and support from physicians, administration, and other staff; inadequate facilities for implementation; and insufficient time to read research.”

The characteristics of the nurse in recognising the limits of their knowledge and skills to review and conduct research.

Summary: Nurses need to use and understand research to deliver evidence based practice. Research improves critical thinking and clinical decision making in clinicians. There are numerous barriers that hinder the use of research in the clinical setting, mainly linked to culture and traditional leadership hierarchies.

Limitation: The world and healthcare has changed since 1991, so aspects such as technology and the mass of information may lead to questions of validity for the BARRIERS scale, despite it’s historic use. Take a read of this systematic review by Kajermo et al. (2010). It may also help to understand the drivers of change, which can then be replicated in other settings to increase nurses involvement in research.

Resources

The Barriers Scale. (2018). The BARRIERS to Research Utilization Scale. UNC.edu

Kajermo, K. N., Boström, A. M., Thompson, D. S., Hutchinson, A. M., Estabrooks, C. A., & Wallin, L. (2010). The BARRIERS scale–the barriers to research utilization scale: A systematic review. Implementation Science, 5(1), 32.

Journal Club: Defining the key roles and competencies of the clinician–educator of the 21st century.

Paul Ross

Journal Club: Sherbino, J., Frank, J. R., & Snell, L. (2014). Defining the key roles and competencies of the clinician–educator of the 21st century: a national mixed-methods study. Academic Medicine, 89(5), 783-789.

Background

This paper looks at the challenges of the clinician educator in the medical profession, the challenge of being a clinician and an educator. Defining an educator and the roles they perform in the clinical and educational environments varies considerably in terms of the scope of abilities or competencies.

Aims

  1. Create a consensus definition of what is a clinician–educator.
  2. Understand the domains of competence of being a clinician–educator.
  3. Types of training and preparation is required for the clinician–educator.

Method

Two-phased mixed method study:

  • Phase 1: focus groups using a grounded theory analysis.
  • Phase 2: a survey of 1,130 deans, academic chairs, and residency program directors to validate the focus group results.

Results

Results from phase 1 focus groups:

  1.  Being active in clinical practice,
  2. Applying education theory to education practice,
  3. Engaging in education scholarship.

Results from phase 2 survey:

Domains of competence and core competencies for clinician–educators:
  1. Designs assessment designs programs.
  2. Employs effective communication strategies.
  3. Learning theories and best practice for curriculum development, and conducts evaluations.
  4. Knowledge of education theory and application to education practice.
  5. Leadership in educational programs.
  6. Scholarship: “Contributes to the development, dissemination, and translation of health
    professions education knowledge and practices.”
  7. Uses effective teaching in teaching environments. Develops other faculty members.

Conclusion

Key roles of the clinician-educator: participates in clinical practice, applies theory to education practice, engages in education scholarship and consults on education issues. Identified the need for clinician-educator formal training programs.

Relevance For Nursing

What is interesting in this article is the continued mention of clinical competence or expertise in medical education. In nursing is the higher education setting seen as the source of educational knowledge, research and scholarship? But is higher education too far removed from the clinical environment to understand real world clinical challenges? Is there a different approach to engage both worlds for delivery of evidence based practice?

Resources

ICE Blog. (2014). Defining a Clinician Educator.

Sherbino, J., Frank, J. R., & Snell, L. (2014). Defining the key roles and competencies of the clinician–educator of the 21st century: a national mixed-methods study. Academic Medicine, 89(5), 783-789.

Artificial Intelligence in The Classroom: A Step Too Far?

Paul Ross

Education Approach

This is called the Intelligent Classroom Behavior Management System and is using facial recognition technology system to scan and observe student’s behaviour in the classroom. 7 difference expressions are recognised such as angry, disappointed, happy, neutral, sad, scared and surprised (yet no bored classification!). The system scans the students every 30 seconds so no room for a quick sleep or messing around here.

A.I. Too Far?

Imagine being constantly watched in the classroom. The systems allows greater feedback and classroom awareness, but what about the impact on behaviour and creativity? This has the potential for enforcing expected behaviours and expressions, rather than allowing individuality. All to much like big brother for me, take a read of 1984 by George Orwell. But it will be interesting to see how surveillance and AI is viewed by students and societies across the world. Let’s hope student freedom to learn is the focus and not safety fears.

Resource

Techjuice. (2018). This school scans classrooms every 30 seconds through facial recognition technology.