Using Discussion Boards as a Teaching & Learning strategy Experiences gained teaching final year nursing students in Ireland Sile A Creedon, PhD student, MSc (Res), BNS, RNT, RGN, RM, Dip (Teachers) IT. Lecturer, Co-ordinator Year 4 BSc

Overview Genesis for module Modular objectives Interaction / Engagement Survey

Genesis / background Own background in nursing informatics Health system ICT framework: HSE 2003 National Health Information Strategy 2004 Nurses are the largest group of healthcare workers

Modular descriptor NU4025: Health Informatics for Nurses Optional (N=99) Two pedagogical approaches: web-based and classroom based.

Module objectives To examine implications for health delivery arising from telemedicine, ehealth To examine the status of information technology within the Irish Healthcare sector To explore and evaluate models of patient information data management systems

Interaction (engagement) …‘interaction is a reciprocal exchange of information which enhances knowledge development….goal is to increase understanding or mastery of defined goals’ Thurmond (2003) Learner / content Learner / student Learner / lecturer Learner / medium VLE : BlackboardBlackboard

Course operationalisation Three week cycle Week 1 – attend for lectures (web tools, ppt, reading). Discussion thread provided Week 2 – Submit to Discussion board. Clear guidelines – date, time, word limit, no ‘lurking’ Feedback from lecturer. Week 3 – Peer review to discussion board. Feedback from lecturer. Week 2: Online Week 3: Online Week 1 : Physical attendance

Discussion boards Strengths: All information is shared equally between student and lecturer Permanent record Convenient place for students to work as groups and learn from each other Students have the opportunity to reflect before posting Limitations Less convenient than Lurking Lecturer may have difficulty in determining ‘original’ thought

Factors that influence success Value: need to meet learning outcomes Baskin 2001 Challenge: thread needs to be stimulating Non-threatening: small electronic groups Northover 2002 Feedback: need to know they are on the right track Chou, Liu 2005, Leng et al 2006 Encouragement: lecturer must provide a positive learning environment and be able to manage groups. (Pallof, Pratt 2001) Authentic: thread has to be realistic, meaningful and build knowledge in a contextualised relevant way. (Herrington, Oliver 2000, McLoughlin, Luca 2001)

Learner / content interaction ….’students examining the course content and from participating in class activities’ ….(Moore and Kearsley 1999) Variables: Clarity of course design Web tools Consistent (ppt, hyperlinked reading) Time concerns, requirements realistically identified approx 200 hits to Blackboard per week Medium used for module delivery Web based / modified lectures (Swan 2001, Sole & Lindquist 2001, Faux, Black –Hughes 2000))

Learner – learner interaction contd. Divided into groups of 5 – electronically secure Facilities for file transfer, , chat and discussion board. Submit reflections (discussion boards) Review peer submissions Submit peer review Very explicit expectations, submission dates and times. Protected time

Learner – lecturer interaction Most significant predictor of learning (Leong, Ho, Saromines 2002, Jiang and Ting, 1999). Differed to traditional: , discussion boards Provided timely feedback on each submission. Considerable time required

Learner interface interaction Course required interaction between internet, web-tools and blackboard. Varying degrees of literacy Blackboard: user friendly Use of two pedagogical mediums: web based and lecture-theatre based

Evidence of student learning Summative assessment: Design a nursing information system for the ward / unit you are most familiar with. Content Engagement with literature – relevant citations Creative, logical, original thinking Mastery of the subject Contextualised within national / international HC system Marked: 2 lecturers / 1 ext examiner Results: majority second or first class hons.

Major findings from survey (n=89) Engaged with content that they did not even know existed (51%) Read more for this module than any other (45%) Peer review was ‘excellent’ and made them more critical of their own work (80%) Computer skills had improved (even though this was not a learning outcome) 45%

What they said (Markclass) Student / content ‘I have learned such a lot about IT in the health services in Ireland. Thank you!’ This was a fabulous module, the content is really relevant. I would recommend that this should be a core module. Excellent content, very relevant to nursing, I really learnt a lot This module really got me thinking about the way we manage patient records today…allowed me see how changes could be made within my own discipline Very motivating for us as future staff nurses in relation to using ICT to manage patient data

What they said…. It was such a help getting feedback after each discussion…. I really learned from this course Excellent to be able to review my peers’ work…this is critical learning This was such a different approach to teaching – wonderful….knowing how you were doing made such a difference, Fantastic….guidance from sile really helped me…best experience in the four years….

Conclusion / Recommendations Genesis: National developments, Nurses are the largest group in healthcare delivery Engagement Evidence of student learning Recommendations Replication of course design Comparison with traditional methodologies Instrument development (valid / reliable)