COLLABORATIVE LEARNING. Collaborative Learning Why introduce (or re-introduce) this model?? – May be an effective way to supervise (some students may

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-

Interpersonal; 41

Res

pnds

2 f

dbk

38D

iver

sity

; 42

Eth

ics;

1 C

olla

b c

supe

r;36

Wor

kbeh

39,

saf

ety

2S

teps

3,R

esp;

37

Tim

emng

40; L

egib

le 3

4

Cli

ent c

ente

red

inte

rv 2

2 O

ccup

n ba

sed

inte

r 23

Sel

ects

rel

occ

u; 2

1P

rodu

ces

wor

k; 3

1C

lear

doc

umen

tati

on; 3

3O

rg g

oals

30;

ver

bl 3

2 D

ocum

ents

intr

v; 2

6C

olla

bora

tes

clnt

; 7L

angu

age

refl

ects

35

Doc

umen

ts e

val r

slts

17

OT

beli

efs

4 O

btai

n in

f 12

R

ole

of O

T; 6

Rat

iona

le T

x 18

, A

dmin

iste

r as

ses

13

Art

ic r

atin

al e

val;

8A

rtic

val

ue o

cc 5

Mod

ifie

s ap

proa

ch 2

4U

nder

st f

inan

ces;

29

Col

labo

rate

s O

TA 2

8O

cc p

rof

10, A

djst

ass

14

Est

Pla

n 16

, Ass

ess

ftr

11U

pdat

es; 2

5, E

vide

nce

19

Inte

rpre

ts e

val r

eslt

s; 1

5 S

elec

ts r

el a

sses

met

hd; 9

Ass

igns

res

p O

TA; 2

7

HARD

24

Rasch Ordering of Items OTAEasier

2- - - - - - - - - -

1- - - - - - - - - -

0- - - - - - - - - -

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

-2-

Cultural competence; 25

Ethics; 1

Interpersonal skills;24

Responds to Feedback;21

Safety; 2 and 3

Work Behaviors; 22

Therapeutic Use Self;16

Written Communication;19

Verbal Communication; 18

Self-responsibility; 20

IImplements intervntn; 14

OT/OTA Roles 5DataGather

Selects Intervention;13

Activity Analysis; 15

Evidence BasedPractic 6

Plans Intervention; 12

Reports; 10

OT Philosophy; 4

Administer Assessmnts;8

Establishes Goals; 11

Modifies Intrven Plan;17

Interprets Assessment;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?

Documents

COLLABORATIVE LEARNING. Collaborative Learning Why introduce (or re-introduce) this model?? – May be an effective way to supervise (some students may