collaborative learning

COLLABORATIVE LEARNING

Collaborative Learning

• Why introduce (or re-introduce) this model??– May be an effective way to supervise (some

students may learn better this way)– May be efficiencies for facilities (once up front

planning is done)– Definitely will be more students

• Abilene Christian University, other new programs • TTUHSC increasing enrollment


• Tends to link 2 or 3 students to one supervisor– This is where efficiencies may come into play– Uses “additional” students as a major resource

• Focus is on how to teach/learn– Encourages self-directed learning– Uses teamwork as a motivator for learning– Students ask a lot of question of each other


• Planning is different for facilities– Planning at facilities must take into account more

small group facilitation– Students must be held accountable for teamwork

with each other (sort of, but not exactly on the FWPE)

– Still needs to individually provide suggestions advice and scoring (assessment of skills/behaviors)


• Planning is different for schools– Must prepare students for collaborative learning

in addition to 1:1 learning situations– Must work with facilities to ensure group

processing is occurring– Must ensure that the FW is individualized so that

one student does “carry” the other/s.


• Fear of Managing more than 1 person• Time constraints to be prepared and develop

resources• Concerns about pairing students• Worries about increased workloads• Difficulties meeting the needs of different types of

learners• Confusion about what Collaborative learning even

is…

UTMB EXPERIENCE

The Student Response

• Students participated in a survey questionnaire through Survey Monkey to answer a series of questions on the 2 supervisory models

• A Likert scale of 1 – 5 was used, with 1 – strongly disagree and 5 – strongly agree

Conclusion

• Although the students felt comfortable with both supervisory models and they perceived both models were effective in their learning, they preferred the one-on-one supervision for their Level II fieldwork rotations

ENTRY LEVEL PRACTICE

19

ACOTE: Minimum Standards and Outcomes

OT – Be a generalist – Achieve entry-level competence– Articulate, apply, and justify

occupation interventions– Supervise and collaborate with

the OTA– Keep current with best practice– Uphold the ethics, values, and

attitudes of the profession– Be an effective consumer of

research and knowledge

OTA– Be a generalist– Achieve entry-level

competence – Work under the supervision of

and in cooperation with the OT– Articulate, apply, and justify

interventions related to occupation

– Keep current with best practice

– Uphold the ethics, values, and attitudes of the profession

20

Goal of Level II Fieldwork Education for the OT and OTA Student

• Develop competent, entry-level generalists• Include an in-depth experience in delivering

occupational therapy services• Be designed to promote reasoning, enable

ethical practice, and develop professionalism

Competence

• Competence is mentioned by ACOTE and AOTA as a goal of Education and Fieldwork

• So, what is competence??• Do students need to be competent in every

skill or behavior?– Yes for ethics and safety. No for all other skills.

22

Primary Purpose of the FWPEs

• Measures entry-level competence– Designed to differentiate the competent student

from the incompetent student – Not designed to differentiate levels above entry-

level competence

23

RASCH Ordering of Items OT

- - 2- - - - - - - - - - 1- - - - - - - - - - 0- - - - - - - - - --1

- - - - - - - - - --2

-

Inte

rper

sona

l; 4

1R

espn

ds 2

fdbk

38

Div

ersi

ty; 4

2Et

hics

; 1 C

olla

b c

supe

r;36

Wor

kbeh

39,

safe

ty 2

Step

s 3,R

esp;

37

Tim

emng

40; L

egib

le 3

4 C

lient

cen

tere

d in

terv

22

Occ

upn

base

d in

ter 2

3 Se

lect

s re

l occ

u; 2

1Pr

oduc

es w

ork;

31

Cle

ar d

ocum

enta

tion;

33

Org

goa

ls 3

0; v

erbl

32

Doc

umen

ts in

trv; 2

6C

olla

bora

tes

clnt

; 7La

ngua

ge re

flect

s 35

D

ocum

ents

eva

l rsl

ts 1

7O

Tbel

iefs

4 O

btai

n in

f 12

Rol

e of

OT;

6R

atio

nale

Tx

18,

Adm

inis

ter a

sses

13

Arti

c ra

tinal

eva

l; 8

Arti

c va

lue

occ

5M

odifi

es a

ppro

ach

24U

nder

st fi

nanc

es; 2

9C

olla

bora

tes

OTA

28

Occ

pro

f 10,

Adj

st a

ss 1

4Es

t Pla

n 16

, Ass

ess

ftr 1

1U

pdat

es; 2

5, E

vide

nce

19

Inte

rpre

ts e

val r

eslts

; 15

Sele

cts r

el a

sses

met

hd; 9

Ass

igns

resp

OTA

; 27

HARD

24

Rasch Ordering of Items OTAEasier

2- - - - - - - - - - 1- - - - - - - - - - 0- - - - - - - - - -

-1- - - - - - - - - -

-2-

Cultur

al com

petenc

e; 25

Et

hics

; 1

In

terp

erso

nal sk

ills;2

4 Resp

onds t

o Feed

back;2

1

Safe

ty; 2

and 3

Wo

rk B

ehavio

rs; 22

Therap

eutic

Use Se

lf;16

Wr

itte

n Comm

unicat

ion;19

Ve

rbal

Commu

nicati

on; 18

Se

lf-r

espons

ibilit

y; 20

IIm

plem

ents i

ntervn

tn; 14

OT

/OTA Rol

es 5Da

taGath

er

Sele

cts

Interv

ention

;13

Activi

ty Ana

lysis;

15

Evid

ence B

asedPr

actic

6

Plans

Interv

ention

; 12

Repo

rts; 1

0

OT P

hiloso

phy; 4

Ad

mini

ster A

ssessm

nts;8

Esta

blishe

s Goal

s; 11

Mo

difi

es I

ntrven

Plan;

17Inte

rprets

Asses

sment;

9

Harder

Defining Competence...

• Kane (1994): working model definition– “To identify the knowledge, skills, and judgments

that are used in practice and that make a difference in practice, in the sense that the practitioner’s level of mastery of knowledge, skills, and judgment has a substantial impact on the effectiveness of the practitioner’s performance” (p.148)

– Kane reference found in Salvatori, 1996

ACOTE: Entry-Level Competency Definition

• Entry-level: Being prepared to begin generalist practice as an occupational therapy practitioner with less than 1 year experience

• Competency: Having the requisite abilities/qualities and capacity to function in a professional environment

Site Specific Objectives

• These were/are intended to be a way to supplement the FWPE and to allow better more specific measurement of competence for each FW site.

Site Specific Objectives

• Common difficulties with Site Specific Objectives– People don’t take the time to do them.– Using templates can help, but…– What if a student doesn’t meet all of them?– How do you measure the objectives? Do you need

many different types of measurement?– Are objectives actually entry level?– Is it fair to have one site with 3 extra objectives and

another with 35 extra objectives?

Measuring Competence

• So, how can you measure/evaluate that the student is at entry-level mastery?– Level of independence?

– Frequency/Timeliness of performance?

– Quality of performance?

SITUATIONAL LEADERSHIP MODEL

Situational Leadership Model

• One way to determine competence may be to use the Situational Leadership Model

• Allows you to work with students in an intentional way.

• Allows you to be able to judge student competence by identifying your supervisory behaviors.

• We often do this instinctively, but the model can put words and a usable framework to our instincts.

Situational Leadership Supervision Styles for Your Students

4 Supervisory Approaches to Consider– Directing (low competence)– Coaching (low to moderate competence)– Supporting (moderate to high competence

with consistency)• if you are supporting, then your student is probably at

entry level competence

– Delegating (high competence consistently)

Supervision Styles for Your Students

Directing (Foundational Level)– Sets goals and clarifies expectations– Tells and shows an individual what to do,

when and how to do it– Closely supervises, monitors, and evaluates

performance


Coaching (2nd level)– Assists with task organization and delivery– Uses competencies to reinforce learning tasks

more fully– Encourages during task performance– Supports what student knows, teaches parts not

known– Explains why desired performance is important – Inquires about student awareness of weaknesses

and follows with suggested action steps to remedy


Supporting (3rd level)– Engages in more two-way communication– Listens and provides support and

encouragement– Expect accurate assessment of skills and

behaviors– Involves the student in decision making– Encourages and facilitates self-reliant

problem solving


Delegating– Accepts self-

direction– Asks for input when

needed and to improve

Examples

• Skills/Behavior Checklist• Specific objectives

Evidence for the use of Situational Leadership Model

TTUHSC FW I Experience

• Instructor taught with Situational Leadership guiding her interactions with 20 FW I students

• Learning occurred over the summer semester

TTUHSC FW I Experience

• Students participated in pre-test and the post-test rating of perceived competence in 2 skills

• Students participated in pre-test and post-test evaluation on their knowledge of a treatment planning template

• Students participated in pre-test and post-test treatment planning sessions

Statistically Significant Change Noted (Alpha=.05)

2.05

3.55

SLM Competence ScoresFor Treatment Planning

(using a 1-4 scale)Pre Post


2.2

3.33

SLM Competence ScoresFor Goal Attainment Scaling

(Using a 1-4 scale)

Pre Post


1.175

2.75

SLM Pre-PostCategory Identification

(up to 6 categories)

Pre Post


4.6

6

SLM Pre-PostCategory Descriptions

(up to 6 categories)Pre Post

Other Thoughts About FW and Competence

• What problems occur with FW II:1 students that prompt the decision to accept only FW II:2 students?

• What skills/behaviors do FW II:2 students demonstrate that make them more prepared?

• What skills/competence do students need on a FW II to immediately meet your needs to take a student regardless of rotation?

collaborative learning

Documents