Who: SoN Faculty, Clinical Instructors, Teaching Assistants

What: Teaching in a Blended Learning Environment  (6-week course, combined online/ face-to-face sessions)

When: June 3 to July 29, 2015 (face-to-face sessions: June 9 and July 29)

Where: UBC Center for Teaching, Learning and Technology

Past participants from SoN: Ranjit Dhari (Lecturer) and Khristine Carino (Flexible Learning Coordinator)

“I learned so much…I would highly recommend it.” That’s what Ranjit Dhari, a Lecturer in the School of Nursing, said about her experience taking the TBLE six week course. To read more about Ranjit’s experience, click here.

T-BLE is a short, immersive blended course aimed at instructors who are teaching in the classroom and are considering moving to a blended environment.  The course takes approximately 30 hours over 8 weeks and offers the following take–aways to participants:

•  An orientation to flexible learning and its potential impact on their practice
• An opportunity to redesign a module from a current course to a blended learning environment with support and input from your colleagues and course facilitators.
• A chance to collaborate with and learn from others in different disciplines
• An opportunity to gain an authentic experience with the blended learning environment from a student point of view.

Deadline for applications: June 1, 2015
Registration link: http://ctlt.ubc.ca/tble-application/

By Maura MacPhee

Please see the reference and notes (below) from our April 14 brown bag session. In this brown bag, we began the discussion of rubrics–should we be working together as faculty to create consistent, well-designed rubrics to guide students in their courses and across the curriculum? There was particular interest in clinical evaluation tools and rubrics. We will be holding a May workshop to begin this work: identifying core practice competencies and measurable indicators for rubrics or checklists—beginning with our Term 1 students. Stay tuned for the May workshop announcement…

Rubrics

Shipman, D., Roa, M., Hooten, J., & Wang, Z.J. (2012). Using the analytic rubric as an evaluation tool in nursing education: the positive and the negative. Nurse Education Today, 32, 246-249.

“The desire to sufficiently evaluate students’ achievement has created the passion for utilizing rubrics.” (p. 246)

“For the past 30 years there has been overwhelming evidence that new graduate nurses are not prepared to enter the workforce… An effective evaluation process begins in education with reliable tools ensuring nursing students are competent and safe to enter into practice.” (p. 246)

“A rubric is an assessment tool that uses clearly defined evaluation criteria and proficiency levels to gauge student achievement of those criteria’” (Montgomery, 2000, p. 235 cited in article on page 248)

The History:

• Since the 1960s
• Secondary and higher education
• One study found that 94% of 300 student papers were not graded consistently
• The ‘first’ 5-point rubric:
  • Relevance of ideas
  • Organization
  • Style
  • Mechanics/grammar
  • Wording
• The analytic rubric:
  • Concise performance criteria
  • Rating scale
  • Descriptions of expected performance at each rating level

• Well-designed analytic rubrics:
• Minimize inconsistency in grading
• Delineate instructor expectations for grading criteria
• Increase grading efficiency and feedback
• Identify specific areas where students are having difficulty
• Equalize “understanding” for all students-no matter what their background is
• Produce more concrete, reliable grading guidelines for faculty
• Promote student self-assessment
• Provide an open, transparent assessment process
• Directly link assessment to expected learning outcomes
• Avoid career-altering decisions without concrete, documented evidence
• Capture ‘hard-to-assess’ concepts, such as critical thinking, communications, collaboration

• Rubrics have been used for:
  • Clinical evaluation
  • Simulation/lab
  • Oral and written assignments
  • Online discussion forums and blogs*

*One 2015 study found that students have different learning outcomes from peer-shared postings vs private postings. There are more intellectual risks and gains with online peer-shared postings; more personal insights and introspection with private postings.

• There are pitfalls to avoid:
  • When graders know the students, subjectivity/bias may result
  • Faculty often have a mental conception of different types of students: their mental representations can bias their use of rubrics
  • Rubrics rarely include categories for student effort-graders like to reward conscientious students for effort
  • Poorly designed rubrics are typically too rigid, inflexible, and narrow (criteria)
  • Criteria/levels are at the instructor’s discretion: instructors may differ in criteria they use*
  • Instructors may have inconsistent ‘rules’ for transforming rubric levels into grades
  • Faculty fail to have regular conversations about grading fairness, reliability, validity.**

*Faculty need to agree on consistent criteria for rubrics used in an undergraduate program. “As more instructors use the rubric tool, an increase in inter-rater reliability may be evident.” (p. 248)

** Reliability=everybody grades the same way. Validity=grades truly reflect student learning/competence

NOTES:

• There are many great rubrics available online to use/adapt. See examples (handout).
• Lasater (2007, 2011) is known for her clinical judgment rubric-used in practice and with simulation.

QUESTION: Should we create rubrics for PeP competencies to standardize clinical performance evaluation in lab and clinicals?

by Maura MacPhee

This workshop focused on online module development. At the beginning of the session, Lucas and Namsook reviewed strategies for student engagement—to get students invested in blended learning (i.e., learning that involves online and in-class experiences). They discussed five major engagement strategies:

1. Primers (onboarding)—provide students with a taste of what they will discuss in class.
2. Teacher presence-introductory videos by faculty introduce topics and provide orientation to course/class content.
3. Authentic tasks– learning activities (online, in class) that connect concepts to real-life.
4. Timely feedback—online quizzes/in-class quizzes that provide quick feedback to students: to let them know their learning is on track.
5. Clear content structure—navigational tools or “signposts” help students navigate online modules. It’s helpful to use similar content structure across courses/curriculum.

Lucas and Namsook used SoN faculty online modules to demonstrate the five strategies. They have created a Sandbox for SoN faculty to use—to share resources and examples on online modules. If you would like access to this Sandbox, please contact khristine.carino@ubc.ca.

During the majority of the 3-hour workshop, faculty worked together on online module development, using templates created by Namsook and Lucas (available in the Sandbox).

Season Greetings to all!

This will be my final blog post as the outgoing EKM Scholar at the UBC School of Nursing, as my time in this role has come to an end. It has been a fantastic two years of activity, and many thanks for all the contributions by faculty and students to all the journal clubs, workshops and forums we have held, that have made all of these events excellent. I am confident we have the development of a strong scholarship of teaching and learning (SoTL) community of practice underway. We have also managed to support a wide variety of student and faculty SoTL research and professional dissemination projects over the last two years.

Watch this space for an announcement regarding the new EKM Scholarship holder, and her forthcoming work in the New Year.  I wish everyone a relaxing seasonal break, and Happy New Year to come.

Regards

Bernie Garrett

Hello everyone,

Thank you to all who attended the Elizabeth Kenny McCann Educational Forum on Wednesday November 26th. We had great discussions surrounding technological and online learning, education and learning within the UBC School of Nursing, and innovative ideas regarding the future of education. Below is a summary of the key points of interest for this year’s event. Here are the slides used during the presentation: EKM Forum 2014

The forum kicked off with a group activity where participants were asked to discuss one of four topics related to teaching and learning:

1.   What are the current gaps in provision of educational-technology support in the School of Nursing?

The group assigned to this topic broke it down into four main areas of concern: equipment (lack of tablets, old computers, monitors, and video cards), programming (lack of access to software i.e. trying to get up to speed with ATI), support (lack of IT support i.e. being able to sync hand-held devices with work station computers), and time (delays in terms of requests from IT and trying to learn new technologies in the midst of demanding workloads).

2.   From an IT infrastructure point of view, pedagogically what would you like to accomplish in the future that you are not able to do today?

The group assigned to the second topic brainstormed several ideas, such as video capture tools, a technology sandbox that would serve as a space to “try things out” without having to wait for support, secure collaborative online tools for faculty and students, and repository. Others outside the group expressed the need to sync the portal and the website. An underlying theme throughout these departments was said to be a lack of good quality support.

3.   What educational technology support and/or service do you need to realize your teaching goals?

Several helpful resources were identified by the third group: a resource person available in a timely manner, demonstrations on how to use new technological features, simple ‘how to’ guidelines that are easily understandable, regular educational events, ways to support student engagement, better role clarity, funding to update technological support, and proactive support, where help is offered when it’s needed. One attendee mentioned the importance of distinguishing between flexible learning and IT, and to remember that technology is a facilitating tool for flexible learning.

4.   How should the university measure and report effectiveness of its learning ecosystem?

The fourth group suggested evaluation at both the project and program levels. At the project levels, a systematic student and faculty survey was recommended. They emphasized the need to utilize both qualitative and quantitative approaches, as well as finding out what students and faculty consider a success. At the program level, communication, the need to find metrics across outcomes and student feedback were highlighted.

Next we revisited the topic and role of clinical simulation in the undergraduate program which was previously discussed in a journal club meeting.

Positive Use for Simulation:

• the ability to simulate high risk events which are often quite infrequent and absent from clinical practice
• increased incidences to improve decision- making skills
• ability to offer a safe learning environment; free of toxic interactions growing within the workforce
• reduce learning delays that occur with each rotation change
• increase learning opportunities within rotations that have difficulty securing placements

Negative Use for Simulation:

• narrow view of the “real world,” for example, patient and family interaction and unexpected events; “there is nothing more bizarre than reality”
• hard to simulate interpersonal conflict
• risk of losing the complexity of a situation and how a unit functions
• expectation are different in a simulation versus clinical practice

Different participants also voiced the importance of defining exactly what simulation is. Simulation can be considered an umbrella term that does not only include a lab setting with a mannequin but rather the clinical environment as a whole where interactions and more can be manipulated and presented as they would appear in a clinical setting.

When posed with the question, “How much clinical time do you think we should replace with simulation in a BSN program?” there was some differences of view. The majority of the group chose 25% or less.

Teaching & Learning Strategies for Flexible Learning

Dr. Maura MacPhee and Marc Legacy spoke about varied FL teaching and learning strategies as well as applications for curriculum and design. The following are some key points for their discussion:

• Memory research: while students often study by reading material repetitively, this method is not the most effective way to retain information. Self-testing throughout the study process has been reported to enhance retention and promote more effective learning.
• Formative testing evidence: short answer testing was found to increase retention of information compared to multiple choice testing.
• Spacing effects: it’s better to distribute learning over time, and revisit and build on concepts in a thoughtful manner in order to maximize learning. How to thoughtfully connect concepts between thread course levels is a key area of focus in our curriculum at the moment.
• Pushing students outside of their comfort zone has been shown to create additional brain pathways. For example, asking bridging questions such as identifying the differences between human and giraffe kidneys stimulates learning and enhances retention compared to a simple human anatomy lesson.
• Threshold concepts: it’s important to base curriculum on threshold concepts, which are concepts central to learning and mastering.
• Jewels in the curriculum: focus on “jewels” for richer, complex insights. Listen to students when they are struggling and pay attention to how they are shaping their knowledge. Use this as a diagnostic to then solve the problem.
• There’s a level at which students learn concepts with more complexity. Without the support they need to reach this level, students resort to plagiarism.
• Curriculum redesign: issues with curriculum design can be identified by looking at retention from one term to the next. Students should be involved in curriculum redesign.

Dr MacPhee also discussed the need to adapt to the increasingly technological world we live in. How is authenticity maintained in teaching and learning with an increase in technology? How are students kept engaged and motivated to become active learners; online authenticity versus face to face? It’s important to be present online and in the classroom for both teachers and students. In regards to students, there was a comment made about how being physically present by signing on to an online forum is not enough but to actually engage with meaning and purpose is considered to be present.

Also presented was a study that looked at three components of learning activities which go hand in hand; these included worked examples, practice workouts and matched assignments. Worked examples were a way for students to check their reasoning rather than just checking if they had the correct answer. The rationale would model the way one would think about a problem instead of just providing an answer. Practice workouts were a series of questions that provided students with questions similar to the ones they would be evaluated with. Matched assignments are assignments that are matched to the skill or knowledge base of the student it is given to. Giving students assignments matched to their appropriate skill level helped them retain the information better. Weak students would receive questions closer to their level at an incremental progression to help build and establish a base of knowledge with confidence.

Getting Started with Publishing in SoTL

Dr. Bernie Garrett gave an overview and tips on how to get started in publishing in the scholarship of teaching and learning field. See the attached slides for details of the presentation.

Conclusion

The session ending with a discussion on the planned revisions of the current BSN program. Overall, the event was a success,  Thank you to everyone who participated in the Elizabeth Kenny McCann Education Forum as well as the Journal Clubs and Workshops throughout the year. Your contributions made each session unique.

Hello everyone,

Thank you to all who attended the Elizabeth Kenny McCann Journal Club on Monday, November 3^rd. We had a great discussion regarding the replacement of instructor demonstration with online videos within laboratory sessions. Click here to view the article. Below is a summary of the key points we discussed in the meeting.

We reviewed a multi-method study by Kelly et al. (2009) aimed at evaluating an e-learning approach to teaching clinical nursing skills online. The case study was small and it was not entirely clear how many students were involved and how many were allocated to each group (i.e. students who watched the online videos versus students in the control group). While students in the control group did not have access to the online videos, there was no specific regulation on how many times the intervention group were able to watch the videos or if they were watched at all. The study found no significant difference between the students who watched the online videos versus those who received instructor demonstration, however, the sample size was too small to make any concrete conclusions.

An interesting finding was that male participants seemed to prefer the online videos to instructor demonstration. Older students also seemed to rate the online videos higher than younger students. Overall, however, students preferred demonstration over online videos. Our group agreed that there is value in being able to ask questions when something is not completely understood. Demonstration is also more hands on and therefore can integrate multiple learning styles. Since there was no significant difference seen in the outcomes of the study, why not continue to perform demonstration?

The question presented to the group was whether we should replace demonstration with videos. In general, the consensus was to have both and that the online videos would be available as an adjunct to instructor demonstration. While videos should be used to enhance learning in labs, they should not necessarily replace demonstration.

We also discussed if the UBC School of Nursing should incorporate more videos. What is stopping us from integrating more technology into our curriculum? One issue is finding the resources and support to make the videos to begin with. It might be beneficial to explore this option instead of asking speakers to come in and repeat a lecture every six weeks. Another reason brought forward was the amount of time and effort needed in relation to needs of the students. Usually change in a curriculum occurs as a result of the request, opinion, and push from the students. If a clear indication for more technology existed and students were actively voicing concerns, then perhaps the request would be considered more seriously.

Overall, the results int he paper were quite inconclusive. Although instructional videos do contribute to learning within a lab setting, it may not be beneficial to use them in place of teachers. Further studies with larger sample sizes are required to explore this. While online learning is a good option, blended learning seems optimal. This particularly makes more sense for the profession of nursing due to the aspect of human interaction and the enhanced process of learning that occurs when having discussions with other students, faculty, and health care professionals.

Below are the presentation slides used throughout the discussion:

EKM JC Slides Nov 3

Thank you to all who attended and contributed to the discussion. Our next EKM event will be the Nursing Education Forum which is being held on Wednesday November 26th from 12:00-3:30 at the Sage Bistro. There are still available seats for registration. If you are interested, please email Erendira Silva (erendira.silva@alumni.ubc.ca) to be added to the guest list. This event does require registration as lunch is provided and space is limited. We look forward to exploring some contemporary issues in nursing education with you!

Hello all,

We are pleased to invite you to join our annual Elizabeth Kenny McCann Nursing Education Forum to explore some contemporary issues in nursing education. We will be examining some of the latest trends in SoTL; including changes in the UBC learning and teaching ecosystem, the role of clinical simulation, learning design for the a new BSN curriculum, how to kick-off your own small-scale educational research projects, and publishing in the SoTL field. A buffet lunch will be provided. See  below for event details:

November 26, 2014
12:00 pm – 3:30 pm
Sage Bistro, University Centre

As space is limited, we ask that you please register ASAP at the following link:

http://events.ctlt.ubc.ca/event-registration/?regevent_action=register&event_id=726

We look forward to seeing you there!

Hello all,

We hope you had a wonderful Halloween weekend and are ready to join us for yet another Elizabeth Kenny McCann (EKM) Journal Club this Monday, Nov 3 from 12:00 – 1:00 in room T220.

We will be discussing a multi-method study aimed at evaluating an e-learning approach to teaching clinical nursing skills online. Is this a reasonable solution to the challenge of teaching clinical skills to large class sizes? How do students feel about this approach? Come out and let us know what you think. Both staff and students are welcome to join the discussion. See below for article details:

Kelly, M., Lyng, C., McGrath, M., & Cannon, G. (2009). A multi-method study to determine the effectiveness of, and student attitudes to, online instructional videos for teaching clinical nursing skills. Nurse Education Today, 29(3), 292-300. doi:10.1016/j.nedt.2008.09.004

Please be sure to RSVP to Erendira if you plan to attend (erendira.silva@alumni.ubc.ca). Bring your lunch, and cookies will be provided as usual. Hope to see you all there!

Hello everyone,

Thank you to all who attended the journal club on October 6^th. A great discussion was had with many interesting thoughts and ideas put forth. Below is a summary of the key points we discussed at the meeting. Click here to download a pdf of the paper.

Last week we reviewed a national study by Hayden et al. (2010) that explores the idea of replacing clinical hours with high-fidelity simulation in prelicensure nursing education due to concerns regarding shortages of clinical placements. While we currently have more patients and nurses in hospitals than ever before, attendees agreed that the growing number of nursing schools and seats available has caused competition for clinical placements. While simulation may offer a range of benefits and serve as an effective clinical educational tool, how much of it is really appropriate in replacing actual practice?

The study looked at both ADN and BSN degree programs in the USA. While the ADN curriculum is quite different and geared primarily towards individuals who are perceived as not wishing to progress to higher level nursing, the same outcomes were used for both. Outcome measures consisted of six different performance related scoring tools, including the ATI RN Comprehensive Predictor® 2010 (Assessment Technologies Institute, LLC) and the National Council Licensure Examination (NCLEX®). Looking at these two tools, the group concluded that there is a significant amount of overlap between them, and many are in fact measuring the same outcomes. This makes it difficult to identify what each tool is specifically measuring, and to consider whether they have measured additional criteria that do not in fact pertain to the study.

The study was a longitudinal randomized trial, where 25% of traditional clinical hours were replaced by simulation in one group, and 50% in the other, and a control with less than 10% simulation. The study revealed that there were no significant differences in the outcomes assessed between the two groups. A significant problem, however, was the multitude of confounding variables associated with the study (and with trials in educational research in general). The inclusion of two entirely different programs with very differing curricula was seen as problematic. Furthermore, despite attempts at standardizing the intervention, the two increased-simulation groups appear to be using different simulations, chosen based on what was deemed appropriate for their respective curricula. These variables make it difficult to determine the factors that truly contributed to the outcome. Additionally, blinding was not feasible in this type of study, causing further skepticism with regards to the findings.

Throughout the meeting, there was certainly debate regarding the value of simulation. One attendee suggested that whilst some clinical hours cannot be replaced, there are instances where clinical experience may be minimally engaging, such as observational activities, where simulation may, in fac,t be more useful. Additionally, simulation allows the instructor to target very specific scenarios that students may not gain exposure to in clinical.  Another argued that the current level of simulation fidelity lacks many of the real-world environmental cues that present in clinical, such as cyanosis and cool, clammy skin; as indicators that help guide nursing care. Additionally, it was noted that part of the value of clinical experience is immersion and socialization in the multiprofessional team in an actual clinical setting. Much of the learning that occurs there takes place in clinical practice occurs outside of focused clinical cases. This will be missed in any simulated activity.

Overall, most agreed that there was certainly value to simulation exercises, however, clinical hours are invaluable and ultimately should not be replaced.

Below are the presentation slides used throughout the discussion:

EKM Journal Club Slides: Replacing Clinical with Simulation

Thank you to all who attended and contributed to the discussion. Our next EKM Journal Club will be held on Monday, November 3rd from 12:00-1:00 in room T220. Hope to see you there!

Hello all,

Below is all you need to know about a great upcoming workshop titled The Flipped Lab Network: Evaluating the Effectiveness of the Flipped Classroom. 

To what extent does the flipped classroom approaches enhance student learning? How can we start measuring the impact of using flexible and flipped approaches in our teaching and learning practice?

This interactive presentation and workshop will explore questions about the impact of the flipped classroom and provide you with an opportunity for considering, sharing and getting feedback on your own approaches to evaluating the flipped classroom in your teaching and learning context.

Facilitators

Simon Bates: Senior Advisor, Teaching and Learning, Academic Director,  Centre for Teaching, Learning and Technology, and Professor of Teaching, Faculty of Science, Physics

Paul Carter: Professor of Teaching, Faculty of Science, Computer Science

Jim Cooke: Instructor, Faculty of Science, Biology, University of British Columbia

Andrea Han: Associate Director, Strategic Curriculum Services, Centre for Teaching Learning and Technology

Ido Roll: Senior Manager for Research and Evaluation, Centre for Teaching, Learning and Technology

Event Details:

Date: October 14, 2014
Time: 12:00 pm – 2:00 pm
Location: Irving K Barber Learning Centre, Lillooet Room 301
Register: http://events.ctlt.ubc.ca/event-registration/?ee=632

The first UBC SoTL Journal Club meeting for this academic year has been scheduled. Please see the event description below and join us for an engaging conversation on university-community partnership and its implications for teaching and learning.

SoTL Journal Club – September Meeting
Date: September 23, 2014
Time: 1:30 pm – 2:30 pm
Place: Irving K Barber Learning Centre, Fraser River Room (Room 2.27)
Registration: http://events.ctlt.ubc.ca/event-registration/?ee=608

The Scholarship of Teaching and Learning (SoTL) Journal Club offers you a great opportunity to learn about and discuss current scholarly work on teaching and learning, reflect on your teaching practice, and share your teaching and learning experiences with other participants. Each month, we select an article prior to the meeting, and we will discuss the article at the meeting. This month, we will discuss the following article:

Reardon, K. (2000). An experiential approach to creating an effective community-university partnership: The East St. Louis action research project. Cityscape, 5(1), 59-74.

We welcome participants from a wide range of disciplines and with various teaching and learning experiences. If you have any questions, please contact Hanae Tsukada at hanae.tsukada@ubc.ca.

Hope to see you there!