Embed Size (px)
Citation preview
A
OsDCRmakCts©
K
B
rthtidUa2t
fu
Eo
0d
Physiotherapy 93 (2007) 273–282
Mapping placement educators’ conceptions of teaching�
Clare Kell ∗, Linda JonesDepartment of Physiotherapy, Cardiff University, Ty Dewi Sant, Heath Park, Cardiff CF14 4XN, UK
bstract
bjectives This study sought to better understand the complexities of the placement learning environment and its possible influence ontudents’ learning development. Specifically, the study maps placement educators’ perceived conceptions of teaching and teaching in practice.esign and participants All placement educators across Wales (n = 266) were invited to complete a demographic questionnaire, the Lecturers’onception of Teaching and Learning questionnaire, and the Trainer Type Inventory via an anonymous postal route.esults Responses from 141 placement educators enabled the respondents’ inventory scores to be mapped across clinical disciplines,otivation for engaging with placement education and role perception. The results suggest that within a highly motivating and pastoral-care
ware environment, undergraduate physiotherapy students are experiencing placement education that is predominantly underpinned by anowledge transmission conception of teaching.onclusion These are changing times for placement education development and it is important for those involved in education to work
ogether, within the placement and academic learning environments, to articulate and contribute to a common learning goal for undergraduatetudents.
2007 Chartered Society of Physiotherapy. Published by Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
eywords: Placement education; Approaches to teaching; Lifelong learning
srcHetp[pg
pfi
ackground
The healthcare environment is complex and changingapidly. Graduates need a sound academic knowledge baseogether with clinical skills and professional attributes thatelp them to continue as lifelong learners and contributorso their profession and society [1]. Commitment and abil-ty to engage with both personal and professional growth areesired outcomes [2] from undergraduate programmes. In theK, physiotherapy undergraduates learn in both the academic
nd placement environments to the ratio of approximately:1. Placement education is a large and core component ofhe undergraduate learning experience.
The role of placement educators has evolved over the past
ew decades. In the 1980s as physiotherapy moved to a grad-ate profession, clinicians were expected to move from a� This study formed the substance of an oral presentation to the Britishducational Research Association annual conference, University of Glam-rgan, 14th–17th September 2005.∗ Corresponding author. Tel.: +44 2920 742267; fax: +44 2920 742267.
E-mail address: [email protected] (C. Kell).
eawegtNw
031-9406/$ – see front matter © 2007 Chartered Society of Physiotherapy. Publisoi:10.1016/j.physio.2006.11.011
upervisory role to one of teaching within the clinical envi-onment. In the 1990s the profession was faced with thehallenge of preparing students to enter an evolving Nationalealth Service (NHS) with the commitment and skills to
ngage with lifelong learning in addition to the clinical andhinking skills of their initial training. The complex role oflacement educator emerged to address some of these needs3]. It is recognised that this valuable contribution affordshysiotherapy students a unique experience that cannot beained within the academic setting [4].
The Chartered Society of Physiotherapy clearly informshysiotherapists of their responsibility to contribute to theuture physiotherapy profession by participating in the train-ng of undergraduate physiotherapy students [5]. Placementducators, supported by physiotherapy managers, deliverpproximately one-third of each undergraduate programmeithin the clinical environment. Bennett [6] observes, how-
ver, that there does not appear to be a systematic process to
uide and encourage clinicians to become placement educa-ors. It is anticipated that Agenda for Change, the emergingHS pay structure, and the Knowledge and Skills Frame-ork have the potential to provide a systematic approach tohed by Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
2 iothera
uet
clbdcIuoouorolcptredgi‘a
olma
C
aod
•••
•
•
oaakw(e
iaiat
F
74 C. Kell, L. Jones / Phys
nderpin placement education [7]. There is reliance, how-ver, on placement educators’ individual motivation to fulfilhe stated professional role.
Within the university-based curriculum, academics areharged, by the Chartered Society of Physiotherapy curricu-um framework document of 2002 [8], to develop courses thatalance the immediate post-qualification needs of the stu-ent with nurturing the skills and attributes required for theirareer-long development and practice as physiotherapists [5].n response to this challenge one academic department hasndertaken various small-scale studies to explore the impactf gross curriculum design and delivery on different aspectsf the students’ perceived learning profiles (readiness tondertake self-directed learning, preference for learning inne environment over another and academic beliefs). Theesults [9,10] have been used to inform curriculum devel-pment in an attempt to prepare students for their lifelongearning and professional development needs. One majorurriculum development has been the introduction of overt,rogressive experiential learning opportunities. Based uponhe work of Kolb [11], the programme team developed cur-icular activities that helped students move ‘around’ thexperiential learning cycle (Fig. 1): to move from the depen-ence upon fact and skills-based certainty to the more abstracteneralisation of approaches necessary for the reality of clin-cal practice [12]. Abstraction has long been identified as ahigher order’ learning ability [13] essential to independentnd continuing development.
But curriculum development will not be successful with-
ut recognition of the impact of individual teachers on studentearning development [14]. Central to curriculum develop-ent is the need to identify and discuss staff conceptions ofnd approaches to their teaching role.
sat[
ig. 1. Kolb’s experiential and adult learning cycles. Adapted from Wheeler and M
py 93 (2007) 273–282
onceptions of teaching
Conceptions of teaching refer to the specific meaning staffttach to teaching, i.e. how they view the role and purposef the teacher [15]. Kember [16] identified the following fiveifferent conceptions of teaching:
teaching as imparting information;teaching as transmitting structured knowledge;teaching as an interaction between the teacher and thestudent;teaching as facilitating understanding on the part of thestudents;teaching as bringing about conceptual change and intel-lectual development in the student.
Gow and Kember [17] have grouped these five conceptionsf teaching into two broad conceptions that appear to havedistinguishable impact on student learning development
nd attendant outcomes: learning facilitation and transmittingnowledge. These conceptions of teaching are hierarchical,ith teaching based on a more student-focussed perspective
learning facilitation) being aligned with the ethos of ‘higher’ducation [12].
Kember and Gow [18] suggest that an individual’s teach-ng in practice is a balance between their own role beliefsnd those of their department/teaching environment. Teach-ng strategies therefore depend upon the balance of individualutonomy and departmental pressures experienced [19]. Thiseaching in practice is known as an approach to teaching: the
trategy the teacher adopts to deliver the teaching. While thepproach to teaching may be influenced by the teaching con-ext, it is underpinned by the teacher’s conceptions of teaching20].arshall [26].
iothera
ieiaeti[iritmat
qatawc(ipa
T
usasnle
AtteWad[
cApwtmo
M
O
pcsaiNW
rqri
••
•
••
T
(L
Trrsoswa
w[the original questionnaire had been developed using lec-turers from a mixture of disciplines that included HealthSciences and Rehabilitation Sciences. Text adjustments toalign questionnaire items with the placement-learning con-
Table 1Concepts of teaching with related subscales [17] listed below
Learning facilitation Knowledge transmission
Problem solving Training for specific jobs
C. Kell, L. Jones / Phys
Van Driel et al. [21] suggest that a conception of teachingnfluences the teacher’s whole approach to the educationalnvironment, affecting all aspects of their learning contactncluding their views about assessment procedures and theirbility/desire to motivate and support their students as learn-rs. Two teachers with differing conceptions of teaching caneach the same syllabus but have completely different learn-ng outcomes from the students [22]. According to Entwistle23], teachers with a learning facilitation conception of teach-ng use varied methods of teaching and assessment, acceptingesponsibility for motivating students and facilitating learn-ng development. By contrast, teachers whose conception ofeaching is of knowledge transmission see assessment as a
eans of testing factual knowledge attainment and learningchievement as being the sole responsibility of the studentshemselves.
Teachers’ conceptions of teaching have important conse-uences on both their students’ learning development andttainment. Teachers with a knowledge transmission concep-ion of teaching tend to adopt teacher-focussed approachesnd develop more surface (rote) learning characteristicsithin their students. By contrast, teachers seeking con-
eptual change in their learners develop students with deepabstraction and understanding-seeking) learning character-stics [22]. The skills and attributes to engage with ongoingersonal and professional development are developed withinlearning facilitation environment.
he focus of this study
Our local discussions and studies have shown thatndergraduate programme curriculum change can influencetudent development of lifelong learning skills and attributesnd we now have a fair understanding of our influence on thetudents’ learning experience and development. We recog-ise, however, that we know very little about the possibleearning development influences of the placement learningnvironment.
Cardiff University Physiotherapy programmes have anll Wales remit and offer placement education across
he whole of Wales. A total of 266 placement educa-ors across all four Welsh regions contribute to placementducation for the BSc (Hons) Physiotherapy programmes.ithin the clinical environment, placement education occurs
longside the clinician’s primary role of meeting theemands of providing efficient and effective patient care24].
This paper presents the results of an initial mapping exer-ise to better understand the placement learning environment.s the first step in a 3-year project, this study sought to maplacement educators’ conceptions of teaching. The results
ill in part inform subsequent investigation, but also be usedo stimulate discussion within the placement educator com-unity about learning and the educator’s possible influence
ver it.
IFPM
py 93 (2007) 273–282 275
ethods
verview
This study sought to map the conceptions of teaching oflacement educators in Wales and explore how these con-eptions of teaching translated into teaching in practice. Thetudy used an anonymous postal survey approach to accessll the placement educators in the study area (n = 266). Eth-cal approval to undertake the study was received from theHS Research and Ethics Committee (MREC) and all elevenelsh Trust Research and Development Committees.As the first attempt to map the placement learning expe-
ience, respondents were asked to complete a demographicuestionnaire in addition to two teaching-specific invento-ies. The demographic questionnaire requested the followingnformation:
health board within which placement-learning is offered;placement opportunities offered to students (e.g. hospital-based musculoskeletal);number of years acting as a placement educator for CardiffUniversity;process of becoming involved as a placement educator;description of their main role within the placement educa-tor provision.
eaching-specific measuring tools
a) The Lecturers’ Conceptions of Teaching andearning questionnaire
Developed in 1993, the Lecturers’ Conceptions ofeaching and Learning questionnaire (CTLQ) [17] asksespondents to consider their agreement with 50 statementsepresenting nine subscales of conceptions of teaching. Sub-cale scores are then grouped into the two broad conceptionsf teaching: learning facilitation and knowledge transmis-ion, as summarised in Table 1. All responses are summedithin their subscale, with higher scores indicating greater
greement and alignment with that concept.The Gow and Kember CTLQ is a validated [17] inventory
idely used and respected amongst education researchers25]. The CTLQ was relevant for the current study because
nteractive teaching Use of mediaacilitative teaching Imparting informationastoral interest Knowledge of subjectotivate students
276 C. Kell, L. Jones / Physiothera
Table 2Relationship between trainer type and learning style most effectively trained
Most receptive learning style [11] Trainer type [26]
Concrete experiencer ListenerRAA
t2
(
IiKai
cttftsTteecf[
uwiTpcrd
ct
D
sd
uitt
R
S
fTg
D
aceitpilr
TD
D
D
M
M
ICTS
A
eflective observer Directorbstract conceptualiser Interpreterctive experimenter Coach
ext were agreed with D. Kember (personal communication,004).
b) The Trainer Type InventoryWheeler and Marshall [26] developed the Trainer Type
nventory (TTI) to help trainers identify their preferred train-ng methods. The inventory was developed to align witholb’s experiential learning cycle describing four trainingpproaches that relate to the four learning styles, as outlinedn Table 2.
The TTI contains 12 sets of four words or phrases thatorrespond to one of the four training types (Listener, Direc-or, Interpreter, Coach). For each set respondents are askedo rank the four choices giving the highest score to their pre-erred option. Summing category scores profiles the teacher’srainer preferences across the four subscales, with the highercore indicating greater preference for teaching in that style.he maximum score for each trainer type is 48. A very high
ype score may indicate that the teacher is using this approachxclusively or excessively. Wheeler and Marshall profileach of the trainer types in detail (Table 3) and these relatelosely to the stages of the experiential learning cycle thatorms part of the academic departmental teaching philosophy27].
While details of formal validity and reliability studiessing this inventory are unavailable, its authors report itsidespread use in in-service training programmes as a start-
ng point for departmental discussion and development. TheTI was selected for this study in order to explore the
lacement educators’ teaching in practice, i.e. how theironceptions of teaching are translated into the practice expe-ienced by their visiting students [25]. The TTI was alsoirectly relevant to the experiential learning (Kolb-focussed)ttet
able 3escription of trainer types and their relevance to student learning
escriptor Trainer type
Listener Director
ominant learning style(Kolb)
Concrete experiencer Reflective ob
eans of evaluation Immediate personal feedback Discipline bacriteria
eans of learning Free expression of personal needs New ways of
nstructional techniques Real-life applications Lecturesontact with learners Self-directed; autonomous Little participransfer of learning People Imagesensory perception Touching Seeing and h
dapted from Wheeler and Marshall [26].
py 93 (2007) 273–282
urriculum development discussions and changes that hadaken place within the academic department.
ata analysis
While the individual items of the inventories are ordinalcale data, summated scale scores were treated as intervalata [28,29].
Inventory scores were mapped across demographic datasing cross tabulation and Chi-squared analysis. Homogene-ty of variance was calculated for all profiles using Levene’sest before subjecting the data to ANOVA calculations usinghe SPSS for Windows (2003) package.
esults
tudy sample
Completed teaching inventory batteries were receivedrom 141 (53%) placement educators. As illustrated inable 4, not all of these respondents completed the demo-raphic questions.
emographic data summary
Postal responses were returned from all four Welsh regionsnd from 15 different clinical disciplines across both primaryare and hospital settings. Respondents identified three differ-nt motivations for undertaking the placement education role:nternal motivation (the drive to be involved was initiated byhemselves), external motivation (an unsolicited part of thehysiotherapy role) and mixed motives, where an externalnitiator had triggered the placement educator role but hadater been replaced by an internally motivated interest andole development agenda.
Respondents also articulated four different ways in which
hey were engaging with the placement educator role at theime of this study: coordination/management and teaching,ducating, assessing only and educating and assessing. Aotal of 48 (34%) respondents share the placement educa-Interpreter Coach
server Abstract conceptualiser Active experimenter
sed; external Objective criteria Learner’s own judgment
seeing things Memorisation: knowingterms and rules
Discussion with peers
Case studies Activities, problemsation Opportunity to think alone Active participation
Symbols Actionsearing Perceiving Motor skills
C. Kell, L. Jones / Physiotherapy 93 (2007) 273–282 277
Table 4Summary data from demographic questionnaire
Questions Response, n (%)
Time as a placement educator for Cardiff UniversityLess than 4 years 50 (36%)4 to 10 years 65 (46%)11 or more years 23 (16%)Missing data 3 (2%)
Motivation for undertaking placement educator roleInternal 50 (36%)External 53 (38%)Mixed 20 (14%)Missing data 18 (12%)
Role descriptionCoordinator and teaching 20 (14%)Clinical educator 52 (37%)Assessing only 14 (10%)Educating and assessing 38 (27%)
tpq
E
imdunboW
Table 5Cross tabulation data profiling placement educators by the demographicvariable: time as a placement educator
Time (years) as a placement educator
1 to 3 (n = 45) 4 to 10 (n = 44) 11+ (n = 15)
Perceived role as a placement educatorCoordinator 24 16 13Educator 42 57 53Assessor 18 11 7Educator + assessor 16 16 27Total 100 100 100
Perceived motivation for roleInternal 51 35 29External 33 44 62
A
fwrpmts
(m
rp
TC
T
P
P
A
Educator, assessor and coordinator 12 (9%)Missing data 5 (3%)
ion with at least one other physiotherapy colleague. Table 4resents a summary of the responses to the demographicuestionnaire.
xploring the demographic data
In order to better understand the complexity of issuesnteracting in the role of the placement educator and to
ap the placement education experience across Wales, theemographic factors were used to profile the respondentssing cross tabulation, although Chi-squared analysis was
ot possible for all variable subgroups due to small set num-ers [30]. Tables 5 and 6 present the percentage frequenciesf emerging subgroups within the responding population.here the variable ‘speciality’ is used this refers to onlyctmt
able 6ross tabulation data profiling placement educators by the demographic variable: s
Speciality
Respiratory (n = 14) Neurology (n =
ime (years) in placement educator role1 to 3 43 314 to 10 50 5611+ 7 13Total 100 100
erceived roleCoordinator 29 27Educator 43 33Assessor 14 7Educator + assessor 14 33Total 100 100
erceived motivation for roleInternal 22 31External 57 44Mixture 21 25Total 100 100
ll scores are given as percentages.
Mixture 16 21 9Total 100 100 100
ll scores are given as percentages.
our of the 15 different clinical disciplines from which dataere received. In order for data to be meaningful, only the
eturns from the following specialities were used: cardiores-iratory (n = 14); neurology (n = 16); paediatrics (n = 28);usculoskeletal (n = 45). For all other tabulations data reflect
he whole sample from which complete demographic dataets were returned.
a) Length of time as a placement educator andotivation for undertaking the role
Cross tabulation analysis demonstrates that, within theespondent population, 24% of the most recently ‘acquired’lacement educators are taking on the placement education
o-ordinator’s role. The results would also suggest that it ishis same group of staff who demonstrate the greatest internalotivation for engaging with the placement educator role. Aotal of 44% of placement educators who have been in the
peciality
16) Paediatrics (n = 28) Musculoskeletal (n = 45)
43 3340 5317 14
100 100
25 3043 5711 421 9
100 100
25 4757 4018 13
100 100
2 iotherapy 93 (2007) 273–282
rf
(s
rq(Wsaernmt
E
tttNidpata
(
T
Table 7Mean placement educator scores from the Conceptions of Teaching andLearning questionnaire
Mean score ± standard deviation
Problem solving (40) 32.63 ± 2.66Interactive teaching (40) 29.45 ± 3.47Facilitative teaching (30) 23.39 ± 1.81Pastoral interest (20) 18.37 ± 1.77Motivate students (20) 18.26 ± 2.35Training for specific jobs (25) 21.39 ± 2.73Use of media (20) 11.89 ± 3.74Imparting information (25) 19.53 ± 3.32Knowledge of subject (25) 20.82 ± 2.82
M
cesisp
vptrtpa(
(
Fd
78 C. Kell, L. Jones / Phys
ole for between 4 and 10 years describe external motivationor getting involved.
b) Exploring placement education across four clinicalpecialities
As stated previously, the data in Table 6 relate only to thoseesponses received from the specialities whose response fre-uencies were sufficiently high to enable cross tabulationrespiratory, neurology, paediatrics and musculoskeletal).
ithin this narrow population, similar profiles exist acrosspecialities regarding the perceived role and length of times a placement educator. Regarding perceived motivation forngaging in the role, however, 57% of both the respondingespiratory and paediatric placement educators were exter-ally motivated to take on the role. In contrast 47% of theusculoskeletal respondents perceive their engagement with
he placement educator role as internally motivated.
xploring the teaching data
In order to map and better understand placement educationeaching in practice across Wales, it was important to explorehe results from the two teaching inventories as a whole andhen against the demographic variables (Table 7 and Fig. 2).on-significant Levene results were achieved for all teach-
ng inventory variables when mapped across the followingemographic variables: motivation for engaging with thelacement educator role; time in the placement educator role;nd placement site (primary care- or hospital-based). Statis-ical differences in inventory scores were therefore exploredcross each factor using ANOVA [30].
a) Conceptions of teaching and learningTable 7 presents the whole group scores for the CTLQ.
he results would suggest that the placement educators’
owE
ig. 2. Mean group scores for each Trainer Type Inventory variable (maximum scoreiffer ‘around’ the cycle.
aximum score for each question is shown in parentheses.
onceptions of teaching may be predominantly knowl-dge transmission-focussed and place emphasis on trainingtudents for specific jobs, imparting information and valu-ng subject knowledge. Placement educators do, however,trongly engage with motivating students’ learning and sup-orting their pastoral care.
When mapping these scores across the demographicariables neither perceived motivation for engaging in thelacement educator role nor the placement site affected inven-ory scores. Significant differences were, however, foundegarding the variable ‘Time as a placement educator’, suchhat educators who had been in the role for 11 or more yearserceived a greater use of media in their teaching (P = 0.023),nd a trend towards a greater role as facilitators of learningP = 0.099).
b) Trainer type
Fig. 2 maps group Trainer Type Inventory mean scoresnto a diagram of Kolb’s learning cycle. Placement educatorsould seem to be more comfortable teaching using the Activexperimentation: Coach approach. Scores ‘around’ the ele-
= 48). Variables mapped onto Kolb’s learning cycle to illustrate how scores
iothera
mtC
tgar
S
•
•
•
•
D
comgeeoAstr
R
(
oawagap
Cmorbfoii
ettdaccte
aafr
mop
(
ttsapcctcauocttwiclt
C. Kell, L. Jones / Phys
ents of the cycle reduce at subsequent positions clockwisehereafter, such that the lowest score was for the Abstractonceptualisation: Interpreter dimension.
There were no significant differences across any ofhe TTI dimensions related to demographic variables, sug-esting that the teaching in practice is consistent acrossll placement education provision offered by the studyespondents.
ummary
Key findings emerging:
placement educators supporting the placement educationof the Cardiff University physiotherapy students describedifferent motivations for engaging in the role. Motivationmay be linked to role and speciality;CTLQ scores were consistent across all demographic vari-ables with the exception of ‘Time as a placement educator’such that educators with 11 years or more experience mayconceive teaching as learning facilitation;TTI scores were similar across all demographic variables,with Active Experimentation: Coach the dominant trainertype;taken together these findings suggest that placement educa-tors may not be offering students the opportunity to developthe high level learning and abstraction skills needed forlifelong professional practice.
iscussion
The study results have provided an insight into the per-eived conceptions and approaches to teaching of a samplef placement educators. The results suggest that within highlyotivating and pastoral-care aware environments, under-
raduate physiotherapy students are experiencing placementducation that is predominately underpinned by a knowl-dge transmission conception of teaching. The conceptionf teaching has the tendency to be translated into Concrete:ctive Experimenter teaching in practice. The discus-
ion will use both discipline-specific and generic sourceso explore the rationale and implications of the studyesults.
ationale: curriculum-generated
a) Block approach to placement educationPlacement education is a core and essential component
f the undergraduate physiotherapy curriculum. Experiencesnd learning gained while on placement cannot be reproducedithin the academic environment [4]. Placement educators
re, however, faced with the complex task of mapping under-raduate education into their existing role profiles – anctivity compounded by the regular (in the case of the Cardiffrogrammes, 4 weeks) rotations of new students. Within the
adus
py 93 (2007) 273–282 279
ardiff University curriculum, students rotate onto place-ents with labels clearly identifying the focus of the learning
pportunities they are to receive on that placement e.g. neu-omuscular, respiratory etc. Placement educators may thene put into the uncomfortable position of ‘subject’ expertsocussing the 4-week placement about a very narrow scopef their real practice. This refocussing of their role may havemportant consequences on educators’ conceptions of teach-ng.
In a study exploring the relationships between teach-rs’ awareness of their disciplines and how they teachhem, Prosser et al. [12] concluded that where staff viewedheir specialty as integrated and part of a much broaderiscipline they tended to create more integrated, holisticnd learning facilitation-focussed learning opportunities. Byontrast staff with a more atomistic view of their spe-ialty may restrict the experience of teaching and learningo a more teacher-focussed knowledge transmission-basedxperience.
Prosser et al. [12] argue that staff who show little or nowareness of how their subject relates to the field as a wholere ‘most unlikely to be able to constitute an object of studyor their students which shows or helps them understand theseelationships’.
Is the academic department itself therefore driving a place-ent learning experience that is seemingly counter to its
wn beliefs and behaviours by the formulaic approach to thelacement education formula it has adopted?
b) Emphasis on problem-solvingNorton et al. [25] draw on this issue in their studies,
rying to understand the links between teachers’ concep-ions of teaching and teaching in practice. Using inventoriesimilar to the ones used in this study, Norton et al. [25]cknowledge the influence that the teaching environmentlays on teaching in practice. In their study individual staffhanged their teaching in practice dependent upon their per-eived needs of the students they were facilitating. It couldherefore be suggested that in an environment pressured byase-load and regular student rotation, placement educatorscquire a more fact-based approach to teaching undergrad-ates than they would adopt when supporting the learningf postgraduates or peers. Also of direct relevance to thisurrent study, Norton et al. [25] describe teachers whoseeaching in practice is at a disjunction with their concep-ions of teaching. This observation was particularly apparentithin the ‘problem-solving’ component of the learning facil-
tation conception of teaching variable. In their study teachersommonly talked about problem-solving as a feature ofearning facilitation but used the approach for knowledgeransmission.
Problem-solving is widely used within the undergradu-
te curriculum, purportedly to facilitate the acquisition ofeep thinking and abstraction skills. Without a coexistingnderstanding of the teachers’ interpretation of problem-olving it may well be that, again, undergraduate programmes
2 iothera
huel
(
thtifatwm(b
sidcpcp
R
aTmstoksfar
osCaoctml
bimc
R
aiapppio[hicp
C
lsttatoag[fttc[slactg
drdseddtrt
80 C. Kell, L. Jones / Phys
ave been promoting teaching approaches that are beingsed (inadvertently) within the complex placement learningnvironment to augment more superficial, fact-based studentearning.
c) Influence of placement education assessmentIf we accept Boud’s well quoted and explored asser-
ion that ‘assessment methods and requirements probablyave greater influence on how and what students learnhan any other single factor’ [31], then the possiblenfluence of the placement assessment process and pro-orma cannot be overlooked. With placement assessmentccounting for 20% of the final degree classification,he academic department has built upon years of carefulork to create a criterion-referenced approach to assess-ent. Placement assessment proforma are highly structured
to aid reliability) and framed about key professionalehaviours.
Placement educators are of course aware of their role intudent assessment and the consequent degree-classificationmplications. The study results are challenging the academicepartment to reconsider the ‘message’ about placement edu-ation that is being led through the assessment proforma. Theroforma may, for example, be focussing placement edu-ators’ attention on an atomistic approach to professionalractice.
ationale: profession-generated
The study results suggest that placement educators favourn Active Experimentation: Coaching approach to teaching.his suggests that within the 4-week placements, educatorsay be adopting an apprenticeship model to education. In
uch a model, discipline-specific knowledge and skills areransferred to students, who then have opportunities to repeatbserved behaviours [32]. This model is dominated by anowledge transmission conception of teaching. Cross [33]uggests that this perspective of undergraduate education willocus on the product model of quality, securing student suit-bility for roles in the short term and the ability to completeequired, set tasks.
In order to address the continuing professional devel-pment requirements in today’s NHS it is important thattudents acquire higher-level thinking and abstraction skills.ross [33] suggests that these skills support long-term abilitynd development and focus on the preferred process modelf quality. Placement educators with a learning facilitationonception of teaching and an Abstract Conceptualisationeaching in practice approach will promote student develop-
ent of the higher level of skills required to create lifelongearners [18,26].
The results of this study would suggest that there may
e a need to help placement educators understand and putnto practice teaching approaches that would help studentsove through the four stages of Kolb’s experiential learningycle.
cswm
py 93 (2007) 273–282
ationale: influence of past academic experience
Vaughn and Baker [34] suggest that, when teaching staffre busy, poorly motivated or inexperienced, they offer teach-ng/learning experiences that reflect their personal experiencend/or comfort zone of practice. Pre-1992, there was alethora, in the UK, of didactically taught, syllabus-boundrogrammes. With the advent of lifelong learning, continuingrofessional development, evidence-based practice and othernitiatives there has been a dramatic change in the provisionf learner-centred undergraduate and postgraduate courses35]. With the majority of the practising clinician populationaving experienced a teacher-centred approach to teaching,t is likely that this is the approach with which they are mostomfortable while they are still relatively ‘new’ to the task oflacement education.
onsequence and opportunities
With educational experiences, knowledge of the presentearning context, perception of assessment demands etc.haping individual learner’s conceptions of learning and thusheir underlying motivation for engaging with it [36,37],he 1000 hours contact with professional practice will have
powerful learning effect on the undergraduate popula-ion. Whatever the rationale for the study results, the effectn student learning will be the same: teachers who holdparticular conception of teaching will ascribe an analo-
ous conception of learning in their students [25,38]. Pillay36] suggests that, if learners’ perceive learning as primarilyocussed upon acquiring units of information and jumpinghe hoops (e.g. eight blocks of 4-week placement education)o get through the degree programme, they will carry this per-eption through into graduate practice. By contrast, Devlin35] found that workplace experience that emphasised under-tanding, self-development and lifelong learning supportedearner development to an abstract level. If the physiother-py profession wants to help develop undergraduates into theritically thinking, reflective and progressive professionals ofhe future then we need to work together towards an agreedoal.
The results of this study have started the process ofeveloping our understanding of the placement learning envi-onment. While further parts of the project will exploreifferent aspects of placement education, the results pre-ented here will inform the creation of local placementducator networks, where colleagues will be encouraged toiscuss and explore their conceptions of teaching and atten-ant teaching in practice. Higgs and McAllister [39] suggesthat developing reflective practitioners and lifelong learnersequires an integrated approach to curriculum design, studenteaching and learning support across academic and placement
ontexts. Placement educators need placement managementtrategies and support before undertaking this role, togetherith continuing professional development opportunities toaximise personal development within the role. The provi-
iothera
sfamesfe
mcf
C
tbadm[
EptuAA
C
R
[
[
[
[
[
[
[
[
[
[
[
[
[
[
[
[
[
[
[[
[
[
[
[
[
C. Kell, L. Jones / Phys
ion of appropriate development and support opportunitiesor placement educators would enable the implementation ofshared learning and teaching philosophy in both environ-ents. Dialogue and reflective practice are key elements to
ffect conceptual change where that may be needed [25] andhould be supported with opportunities to experience learningacilitation methods – methods that educators may not havexperienced when they were undergraduates themselves.
While developing these networks the academic depart-ent will reflect upon the possible consequences of its
urriculum framework and listen to the concerns and ideasor change from within the profession.
onclusion
This paper has presented the results of a study trying to bet-er understand elements of the placement learning experiencey mapping placement educators’ conceptions of teachingnd teaching in practice. The results add to a small, buteveloping, knowledge about the factors that influence place-ent education provision on student learning development
39].
thical approval: Ethical approval was granted for a largeroject (of which this article forms a part): An investiga-ion into the effect of the placement learning environment onndergraduate learning development. Ref. No. 04/WSE02/3.pproval dated from 17th May 2004. Project to run untilpril 2007.
onflict of interest: None.
eferences
[1] National Committee of Inquiry into Higher Education. Higher edu-cation in the learning society (the Dearing Report). London: HMSO;1997.
[2] Strohschein J, Hagler P, May L. Assessing the need for change inclinical education practices. Phys Ther 2002;82:160–72.
[3] Cross V. From clinical supervisor to clinical educator: too much to ask?Physiotherapy 1994;80:609–11.
[4] Baldry Currens JA, Bithell CP. Clinical education: listening to differentperspectives. Physiotherapy 2000;86:645–54.
[5] Chartered Society of Physiotherapy. Validation procedures for qual-ifying programmes in physiotherapy, 2nd ed. London: CSP/CPSM;2002.
[6] Bennett R. Clinical education-perceived abilities/qualities of clin-ical educators and team supervision of students. Physiotherapy2003;89:432–40.
[7] Department of Health. The National Health Service Knowledge andSkills Framework and Development Review guidance: working draft.London: Department of Health; 2003.
[8] Chartered Society of Physiotherapy. Curriculum framework for qual-
ifying programmes in physiotherapy, 2nd ed. London: CSP/CPSM;2002.[9] Kell C, van Deursen R. The fight against professional obsoles-cence should begin in the undergraduate curriculum. Med Teach2000;22:160–3.
[
py 93 (2007) 273–282 281
10] Kell C, van Deursen R. Student learning preferences reflect curricularchange. Med Teach 2002;24:32–40.
11] Kolb DA. Learning style inventory. Technical Manual. Boston: McBer;1976.
12] Prosser M, Martin E, Trigwell K, Ramsden P, Lueckenhausen G. Aca-demics’ experience of understanding of their subject matter and therelationship of this to their experiences of teaching and learning. InstrSci 2005;33:137–57.
13] Saljo R. Learning in the learner’s perspective. 1. Some common-senseassumptions (report no. 76). Goteborg: Institute of Education, Univer-sity of Goteborg; 1979.
14] Knowles M. The modern practice of adult education. New York: Asso-ciation Press; 1970.
15] Richardson J. Students’ approaches to learning and teachers’approaches to teaching in higher education. Educ Psychol 2005;25:673–80.
16] Kember D. A reconceptualisation of the research into university aca-demics’ conceptions of teaching. Learn Instr 1997;7:255–75.
17] Gow L, Kember D. Conceptions of teaching and their relationship tostudent learning. Br J Educ Psychol 1993;63:20–33.
18] Kember D, Gow L. Orientations to teaching and their effect on thequality of student learning. J Higher Educ 1994;65:58–73.
19] Trigwell K, Prosser M. Towards an understanding of individual acts ofteaching and learning. Higher Educ Res Dev 1997;16:241–52.
20] Trigwell K, Prosser M. Congruence between intention and strategyin university science teachers’ approaches to teaching. Higher Educ1996;32:77–87.
21] Van Driel JH, Verloop N, Van Werven HI, Dekkers H. Teachers’ craftknowledge and curriculum innovation in higher engineering education.Higher Educ 1997;34:105–22.
22] Trigwell K, Prosser M, Martin E, Ramsden P. University teachers’ expe-riences of change in their understanding of the subject matter they havetaught. Teaching Higher Educ 2005;10:251–64.
23] Entwistle NJ. Approaches to studying and levels of understanding. In:Smart J, editor. Higher education: handbook of theory and research, 15.New York: Agathon Press; 2000. p. 156–218.
24] Cross V. Clinician’s needs in clinical education: a report on a needsanalysis workshop. Physiotherapy 1992;78:758–61.
25] Norton L, Richardson J, Hartley J, Newstead S, Mayes J. Teachers’beliefs and intentions concerning teaching in higher education. J HigherEduc 2005;50:537–71.
26] Wheeler M, Marshall J. The Trainer Type Inventory: identifying train-ing style preferences. In: Pfeiffer J, Goodstein P, editors. The 1985annual: developing human resources. California: University Asso-ciates; 1986. p. 87–98.
27] Course Book. Cardiff: Department of Physiotherapy Education, Uni-versity of Wales College of Medicine; 2002.
28] Gardner P. Scales and statistics. Rev Educ Res 1975;45:43–57.29] Bech P. Rating scales in psychopharmacology: statistical aspects. Acta
Psychiatrica Belgica 1988;88:291–302.30] Field AP. Discovering statistics using SPSS for Windows: advanced
techniques for the beginner. London: Sage; 2000.31] Boud D. Developing student autonomy in learning. 2nd ed. London:
Kogan Page; 1988.32] Higgs J, Hunt A. Redefining the beginning practitioner. In: Higgs
J, Titchen A, editors. Practice knowledge and expertise in thehealth professions. Oxford: Butterworth Heinemann; 2001. p. 59–68.
33] Cross V. The same but different: a Delphi study of clinicians’ and aca-demics’ perceptions of physiotherapy undergraduates. Physiotherapy1999;85:28–39.
34] Vaughn L, Baker R. Teaching in the medical setting: balancing
teaching styles, learning styles and teaching methods. Med Teach2001;23:610–2.35] Devlin M. Taking responsibility for learning isn’t everything: a casefor developing tertiary students’ conceptions of learning. Teach HigherEduc 2002;7:125–38.
2 iothera
[
[
82 C. Kell, L. Jones / Phys
36] Pillay H. Understanding learner-centredness: does it consider thediverse needs of individuals? Stud Contin Educ 2002;24:93–102.
37] Garrison DR. Self-directed learning: toward a comprehensive model.Adult Educ Q 1997;48:18–33.
[
[
Available online at www.s
py 93 (2007) 273–282
38] Zhang L. Does student-teacher thinking style match/mismatch matterin students’ achievement? Educ Psychol 2006;26:395–409.
39] Higgs J, McAllister L. The lived experiences of clinical educators withimplications for their preparation, support and professional develop-ment. Learn Health Social Care 2005;4:156–71.
ciencedirect.com
