No description available.

Syftet med denna studie var att jämföra tandläkarstudenters reella resultat på en Objective Structured Clinical Examination (OSCE) med deras egenskattade resultat. Dessa resultat jämfördes sedan med avseende på genus. Ett flertal studier finns publicerade där man har beskrivit skillnader i självvärdering mellan kvinnor och män på teoretiska examinationer. Dock saknas kunskap där man granskar dessa skillnader vid examination av kliniska moment. Vid teoretiska prov har man funnit att män har en tendens att värdera sina prestationer högre än vad kvinnor gör. Om dessa skillnader i självvärdering beror på överskattning hos män, underskattning hos kvinnor, en kombination av båda eller att värderingen faktiskt överensstämmer med de verkliga resultaten varierar mellan olika studiers resultat. Samtliga elever (35 kvinnor och 16 män) på sjätte termin på Odontologiska fakulteten på Malmö högskola examinerades med en OSCE bestående av 13 stationer. Studenternas reella resultat på OSCE jämfördes med deras självvärdering för varje station. Kvinnliga och manliga studenters bedömningar jämfördes. På de flesta av de 13 stationerna förekom inga signifikanta skillnader i över- och underskattning mellan kvinnor och män. Män hade svårare än kvinnor att korrekt värdera sin prestation gällande avtryckstagning med alginat. Dessa missbedömningar berodde främst på överskattning. Ingen tendens till att kvinnor underskattade sin prestation i större utsträckning än män kunde konstateras. Till skillnad från studier där man undersöker genusskillnader i självvärdering vid teoretiska examinationer fann man i denna studie inga signifikanta skillnader i över- och underskattning mellan könen. / The objective of this study was to compare dental student’s results at an Objective Structured Clinical Examination (OSCE) with their self-assessed results. These results were compared depending on gender. There are several studies published comparing gender differences in self-assessment in theoretical written exams. However there is a lack of knowledge regarding clinical examinations. At theoretical examinations it has been found that men tend to over-estimate their performance more frequently than women do. Whether these differences in self-assessment exist because men tend to over-estimate themselves, women tend to under-estimate themselves, a combination of both or the self-assessment is consistent with the result at the examination vary between different studies. All students (35 women, 16 men) at the Faculty of Odontology, Malmö University (sixth semester) were examined with an OSCE with 13 stations. The student’s real results at OSCE were compared with their self-assessed results at each station. The assessments were compared regarding gender. At most of the 13 stations there were no significant differences in over- and under-estimation regarding women and men. It was more difficult for men to assess their performance regarding impression with alginate, this difference was statistically significant. These misjudgments were mainly caused by over-estimation. There were no results indicating that women under-estimate their performance at greater extent than men. As opposed to studies where gender differences concerning self-assessment in theoretical examinations are studied, there were no significant differences in over- and under-estimation between genders in clinical examination evaluated in the present study.

Yes / Sourcing healthcare practice placements continues to present a challenge for higher education institutions. Equally, the provision of clinical placements by healthcare providers is not at the forefront of their agenda. In view of this, the historic and traditional models of clinical placements is becoming more difficult to provide. In light of this, new models of clinical placements are being explored. Aims: This literature review explores the differing models of clinical placements in use and examines the merits and limitation of each. Methods: A mixed-methods literature review with a pragmatic approach has been used. Findings: Several placement models were described, including the traditional 1:1 model as well as 2:1, 3:1. The hub and spoke, capacity development facilitator, collaborative learning in practice and role emerging placement models were also discussed. Conclusion: There is a considerable paucity of high-quality evidence evaluating differing placement modules. Further research is required to evaluate the differing placement models from a students, clinical educators and service user’s perspective.

Each radiography program has a system to collect important data from didactic and clinical settings in order to accurately assess the progress and success of students, provide the needed student intervention, and provide accreditation agencies with appropriate documentation that demonstrates student success in reaching program learning outcomes. The purpose of this research study was to determine the method of data collection and documentation used by radiography programs to evaluate student progress and to examine if MEDs play a role in evaluating and documenting student skills at the point of care. The majority of radiography programs in this study were using paper methods for data collection and program directors reported value in using MEDs in clinical education but revealed that barriers still exist and will need to be addressed in order to increase their usage in clinical education.

Masters of Science - Msc (Physiotherapy) / The roles of doctors and nurses in clinical supervision and clinical education are well defined in literature. However, the role of the physiotherapist in clinical education has not been clearly defined. This could be because the understanding of a clinical supervisor varies from discipline to discipline.

Radiologic technologists who transition into the role of clinical instructor are usually expert practitioners but may lack knowledge of best practices regarding student instruction and evaluation. The purpose of this phenomenological qualitative study was to investigate how CIs experience the transition from practitioner to educator and what knowledge or education of best practices of instruction and evaluation they bring to the position. This study consisted of interviews with radiography CIs from one associate degree radiography program in the southeastern part of the United States. While some CIs felt prepared to transition into the CI role, none of them had previously had education regarding instruction. They were provided support as they transitioned, but little formal orientation or training. The results of this study should challenge radiography programs to implement or strengthen current orientation programs for new CIs who are critical to student success.

Peer learning är en handledningsmetod, som tydliggör anknytningen mellan teoretisk och praktisk kunskap samtidigt som ett större antal studenter kan erbjudas verksamhetsförlagd utbildning. Därför vore det av intresse att undersöka om det är en tillämpar metod i specialistsjuksköterskeutbildningen mot intensivvård. Syftet med studien var att undersöka peer learning som handledningsmetod inom specialistsjuksköterskeutbildningen mot intensivvård utifrån handledares perspektiv. Studien utfördes genom fokusgruppsintervju med en beskrivande design med induktiv ansats där data analyserades med manifest kvalitativ innehållsanalys. I studien framkom sex kategorier och fyra underkategorier. Interaktionen mellan studenterna ansågs utveckla förmågan till kommunikation och samarbete. Studenterna kunde fortsätta att bygga på befintlig kunskap, betraktades mer som jämbördiga och frångick en hämmande studentroll. Patient och anhöriga upplevdes inte misstycka till studenternas resonemang utan uttryckte snarare att de tog lärdom av det. Det unika sättet att tillvarata studenternas kunskaper och färdigheter på ledde till en tidig vidareutveckling av deras befintliga kunskaper. Den tidiga träningen i kommunikation och samarbete kan ses fördelaktigt eftersom brister i dessa genererar flest avvikelser idag. Slutsatsen är att peer learning är lämplig som handledningsmetod inom specialistsjuksköterskeutbildningen mot intensivvård. Fortsatt forskning om peer learning inom specialistsjuksköterskeutbildningar samt patienters och anhörigas upplevelser av studenternas resonemang är av stort intresse. / Peer learning is a precepting method that clarifies the link between theoretical knowledge and practical skills, and at the same time enables more students to be offered placement for clinical education. Therefore, it would be of interest to explore if the precepting strategy can be appropriate in the postgraduate nursing education in critical care. The purpose of the study was to explore peer learning as a precepting method in the postgraduate nursing education in critical care in preceptors’ point of view. The study was conducted by a focus group interview with a descriptive design with an inductive approach and data was analysed with manifest content analysis. The study revealed six categories and four subcategories. The interaction between the students was considered to develop the ability of communication and cooperation. The students could build on their former knowledge, considered as equals, and went from an inhibitive role as students. The patient and the relatives were not perceived to resent the student reasoning, they rather expressed they learned from it. The unique way to preserve students' knowledge and skills led to an early development of their already existing knowledge. The early training in communication and cooperation can be considered beneficial because deficiencies in these areas generate the most common incidents in healthcare today. The conclusion is that peer learning can be applied as a precepting method in the postgraduate nursing education in critical care. Further research of peer learning in postgraduate nursing educations is needed and also how the patient and family members experience the students' reasoning, are of great interest.

Introduction The purpose of this study was to enhance the prac experience of undergraduate nursing students and registered nursing staff. An innovative model of clinical education, the Clinical Education Unit (CEU) model was developed, implemented and evaluated. Background to the study Clinical education is a vital component of the undergraduate nursing curriculum. 'Real world' practice provides students with the opportunity to develop the knowledge, attitudes and skills needed to function effectively as a registered nurse. Despite the commitment of universities to produce competent graduates, there has continued debate regarding the preparedness of new graduates for practice as registered nurses. This has focussed continued attention on the adequacy of students' clinical education and, in particular, on the models used for clinical facilitation/supervision. There is little published evidence that clearly demonstrates the effectiveness of any of the current models of clinical education or that any particular model is better than any other in achieving quality outcomes (Wellard, Williams and Bethune 2000; Clare, White, Edwards and Van Loon 2002). Hence, as recommended in the recent National Review of Nurse Education (2002), ongoing evaluation of nursing curricula and teaching practice, including clinical education, is clearly warranted. Methods The study utilised action research methodology to examine the effects of the Clinical Education Unit (CEU) on the quality of clinical prac as experienced by undergraduate nursing students and registered nurses working with the students in wards where they were placed for their practicums. It was undertaken in two iterations or phases: Phase 1 - Development, implementation and initial evaluation of an innovative model of clinical education (the CEU model) and Phase 2 - Refinement and re-evaluation of the CEU model of clinical education. Using focus group discussions and survey questionnaires, qualitative and quantitative data were collected from undergraduate nursing students and clinical nursing staff in conjunction with each iteration of the study. Results Phase 1 results indicated that the CEU model was evaluated more positively by students and registered nurses than were the non-CEU models that were used for comparison. This result was demonstrated in the comments of students and registered nurses with regard to the respective models of clinical education and supported by their ratings of the quality of clinical experience through the QPE-Phase questionnaires. A similar trend was found in the results from Phase 2. The CEU-2 model was again evaluated more positively by students and registered nurses than were the non-CEU models that were used for comparison. Conclusion In summary, the results of this study indicate that the CEU model had a positive impact on the prac experience of students and registered nurses. In both phases of the study, students and registered nurses in wards where the CEU model was being used evaluated the prac experience more positively than did students and registered nurses in wards where non-CEU models were being used. Two key factors were found to be important in achieving this outcome: the collaborative nature of the CEU model and nursing staff ownership of students' clinical education. These factors provided an operating framework which enabled the development of positive learning environments in the wards where students were placed for prac. Equally important were arrangements for the supervision of students' practice which involved local clinical facilitation and the explicit inclusion of other nursing staff in the ward. Further, continued support from the university to allow the clinical facilitators to take a supernumary role when facilitating students, to provide staff development for clinical education and to support staff on a day-to-day basis during the prac was also important, if not essential. It is proposed that these factors, acting synergistically, promoted enhanced access to learning opportunities for students and improved learning outcomes for students and staff. The study makes an important contribution to nursing education by providing evidence that can inform future developments in the area of undergraduate clinical education. It has potential benefits for nursing education not only in the local context, but within the international arena as well.

The purpose of this phenomenological study was to describe how professional educators make sense of their role in helping novice practitioners make meaning from authentic clinical practice. Simultaneously studying a clinical educator from teacher and graduate medical education, and subsequently setting their stories side by side, speaks to the interest both professions have in learning from the other. Both clinical educators were Board certified in their respective area of practice. In-depth phenomenological interviewing was used as the study’s methodology, and the professional formation construct served as the study’s conceptual framework. Data corroborate findings in the literature that there is a lack of consensus about what the clinical educator role entails. Participants showed alignment with the professional formation conceptual framework and demonstrated that the clinical educator role is multifaceted, complex, and made up of more than discrete functions. Their capacity to support professional formation comes from their ownership of a special mix of cognitive and behavioral processes, professional knowledge, and personal attributes. Given both professions’ interest in and ongoing efforts to improve clinical education, the study can help both continue their work toward understanding the clinical educator role and ensuring that people selected for the role are chosen through thoughtful methods and provided with clinical-educator-specific professional development throughout the professional lifespan.

Clinical education is a key element of graduate school training in the field of speech-language pathology. Graduate students are required to obtain 375 supervised clinical practice hours in order to earn their provisional license and begin their career. Supervision of clinical hours is most often provided by experienced speech-language pathologists with minimal, if any, training in effective supervision practices. Within the field of speech-language pathology, Anderson’s Continuum of Supervision (Anderson, 1988) is the most widely accepted model and provides a structure and sequence for supervisors to follow in order to facilitate the clinical development of their student clinician. Anderson’s model suggests that the collaborative supervision style should be used to transition student clinicians from directive supervision (where they are reliant on the supervisor for direction) to self-supervision, which represents independence. Despite this, and because of a lack of evidenced-based methods and a lack of training opportunities, many supervisors have difficulty implementing the collaborative supervision style. This study examines the effectiveness of an external tool, the Clinician’s Hierarchy for Advancing Treatment (CHAT) (Duthie, 2008), in helping supervisors to implement the collaborative supervision style. This is an exploratory quantitative, quasi-experimental non-equivalent groups study. Students and supervisors were surveyed about their perceptions of the supervisory process following their participation in a semester-long clinical practicum in a university speech-language pathology clinic. Prior to working with a second cohort of students, the supervisor group was trained on the CHAT. This method features a chart which objectively defines levels of client performance and corresponding levels of clinical supports needed for the client to advance in treatment. Supervisors were trained to use this tool to guide student clinicians in the clinical decision-making processes. Implementation of the CHAT occurred across the following semester in the same university clinic with a new group of student clinicians. Supervisors and students were again surveyed at the end of the semester on their experience of the supervisory process to determine if the perception of collaborative supervision had increased with the implementation of the CHAT. The Supervisory Relationship Measure (Pearce et al., 2013) and the Supervisory Relationship Questionnaire (Palomo et al., 2010) were used to survey the student clinicians and supervisors, respectively. Independent-samples, one-tailed t-tests were conducted to determine if there was a significant increase in the perception of collaborative supervision. These analyses were conducted using the Safe Base Subscale score from the surveys, of which items focus on the interactions and relationship between the supervisor and the student clinician as they relate to collaboration. Analysis resulted in insufficient evidence to suggest an increase in the perception of collaborative supervision from the first semester (without CHAT) to the second semester when CHAT was implemented. Additional analyses were also conducted on items that were considered particularly salient to collaborative supervision. Results of item-level analyses were marginally significant for two items from the supervisor surveys, both of which queried the supervisor’s perception of the student’s level of openness and honesty in supervisory conferences. These findings suggest that using an external tool such as the CHAT, may result in student clinicians being more open and honest about their experience of the clinical process in the supervisory conference. It is argued that the objectivity of the external tool prompts more objective conversation between the supervisor and student clinician. The increase in objective conversation, in turn, decreases the judgment and evaluation that students often associate with supervision, thereby creating a safer environment in which to voice their honest reflections.