1. Small Group Discovering Public Health Dr Rebecca Tooher University of Adelaide

2. Co-authors Dr Tanya Wittwer Dr Shona Crabb Dr Cathy Chittleborough Ms Adriana Milazzo Course coordinators or teachers in first year public health University of Adelaide2

3. Strategic Plan University of Adelaide3

4. From the Beacon… In a true research university, the study of existing knowledge is secondary to the making of new knowledge An approach which recaptures the union of teaching and research… …return research to undergraduate teaching, so that every student in every program comes to experience the scholarship of discovery as the highlight of their learning experience University of Adelaide4

5. From the Beacon… In a true research university, the study of existing knowledge is secondary to the making of new knowledge An approach which recaptures the union of teaching and research… …return research to undergraduate teaching, so that every student in every program comes to experience the scholarship of discovery as the highlight of their learning experience University of Adelaide5

6. From the Beacon… A small group of students, meeting to work at the discovery of new knowledge under expert guidance, … the centrepiece of the university experience. … the centrality of small-group learning, in which students address the scholarship of discovery with other students and a mentor … scholarship of discovery involves personalised learning which happens best face-to-face University of Adelaide6

7. From the Beacon… A small group of students, meeting to work at the discovery of new knowledge under expert guidance, … the centrepiece of the university experience. … the centrality of small-group learning, in which students address the scholarship of discovery with other students and a mentor … scholarship of discovery involves personalised learning which happens best face-to-face University of Adelaide7

8. Small Group Discovery Experience Capturing the ‘scholarship of discovery’ in the context of small group learning Positive interaction between researchers and ‘small’ groups of students Learning is based on discovery guided by mentoring rather than the transmission of information Reciprocity: academics can learn from students as students are learning from them A mini ‘aha’ moment of research University of Adelaide8

9. So what does an SGDE look like? How many people make up a ‘small group’? What kind of staff member is appropriate to be part of an SGDE? What should the topic of the discovery be? For how long, or how frequently, should the small group meet? Every student, in every year, of every program will have an SGDE The format will vary – Different disciplines – Different student/course numbers – Different levels of undergraduate – Different assessable products University of Adelaide9

10. SGDE in Public Health 1B Public Health 1B is a compulsory course for Bachelor of Health Science students Current enrolment is around 400 As part of their contact time, they have a weekly practical class – Up to 75 students in a class Since 2011, students have participated in a group project – Groups formed within practical classes – Projects involving online wiki pages, and a group presentation – Focussed on a (basic) health intervention cycle We are using this as the basis of our SGDE University of Adelaide10

11. SGDE in Public Health 1B Students sign up to groups (approximately 8 per group) Groups are focussed around a National Health Priority Area – Arthritis & musculoskeletal conditions – Asthma – Cancer control – Cardiovascular health – Diabetes mellitus – Injury prevention & control – Mental health – Obesity – (We are not using Dementia) University of Adelaide11

12. Objectives of the SGDE To develop an awareness of, and basic skills in, the process of health intervention planning To develop ability to work constructively in a team To investigate a specific National Health Priority Area To creatively address a real life problem Overall, worth 15% of Public Health 1B mark Focussed around 3 tasks, carried out across the semester University of Adelaide12

13. Tasks in the group project Relevant to the National Health Priority Area the group is working on: 1.Choose a target group for a hypothetical public health intervention on the basis of existing data or other relevant factors 2.Design an intervention to reduce the impact of the condition on the target group 3.Design an evaluation plan for the (hypothetical) intervention University of Adelaide13

14. Outputs required from groups A group presentation to the practical class for one of the tasks (5%) A one page summary for each of the tasks (10%) An individual reflection on the project and group process – Due at end of semester – Used to consolidate learning and verify group members’ participation Notes of meetings – Who is present (and apologies) – Decisions made – Those responsible for implementing the decisions University of Adelaide14

15. The role of academic mentors Each group of students assigned a ‘mentor’ – Currently 28 SPH staff The mentor is crucial in the SGDE experience – Guiding students in their ‘scholarship of discovery’ – Sharing their own experience of research – Mentoring students in relation to the process, rather than imparting content knowledge Mentors do not need to be experts in the specific National Health Priority Area their groups are researching University of Adelaide15

16. The role of academic mentors Each mentor: – Works with 2 groups of students – Meets with each group 3 times across the semester, for 20-25 minutes each time, in the context of a practical class The practical facilitator is at the class to answer questions, where required Mentors and groups meet 2 weeks before each task in the project is due Some mentors attend the practical when their groups are presenting University of Adelaide16

17. The role of academic mentors Mentors should not assist with groups’ project outputs – No reading drafts, etc Mentors should: – Listen to the group’s ideas – Ask them to justify project directions – Push groups to find and question evidence – Challenge assumptions – Model research processes – Be respectful, enthusiastic – Provide real-life examples – Remember that they are first year students – Inspire University of Adelaide17

18. 2013 SGDE trial The Group Project ran as outlined but without mentors for most of the class (as previously) 10 groups had mentors (volunteers from SPH) Groups and mentors met up to 3 times across the semester – Outside of class time (which raised challenges) We checked mentored groups’ marks against non- mentored groups We asked mentors for feedback at the end of semester We used students’ individual reflections as feedback (we asked an additional specific question of mentored students) University of Adelaide18

19. 2013 SGDE trial – mentors’ feedback Mentors and students generally reported the experience to be positive Some mentors reported having to assist with group dynamics Three meetings seemed about right (though not all groups met this often) Scheduling was a major issue Good to have meetings aligned with tasks Students could use more guidance on timelines University of Adelaide19

20. 2013 SGDE trial – students’ feedback Students reported having a mentor helped to make the task more real They appreciated respect, enthusiasm, guidance without force, insight, and creativity from their mentors Some students saw having to meet a mentor outside class time as an imposition Some said they would have liked more time with mentors Some students felt their mentor was unprepared and didn’t know enough about their tasks One reported feeling intimidated and hesitant around their mentor University of Adelaide20

21. 2013 SGDE trial – students’ feedback “Having a mentor was the most efficient way of getting a real public health aspect on our intervention, and to what was, and what wasn’t working. She gave us a lot of great hints and tips, however at the same time not telling us WHAT to do, which was good. It allowed us to follow our own path, but at the same time being influenced and supported by a mentor who knew what they were going on about” “Our mentor assisted us in deciding our intervention. He allowed us to think outside the box…” University of Adelaide21

22. 2013 SGDE trial – students’ feedback “The mentor treated me and my team mates with respect – respected our opinion, our independence, and our vision of what we wanted to get and plan for our group discovery project. The mentor was really great in that she allowed the discovery project task to grow with the group by offering appropriate opportunities and challenges at each stage. The mentor has been extremely helpful to have because she recognized our limitations and public health knowledge” University of Adelaide22

23. 2013 student feedback on project generally Cooperation: different ways of thinking and learning contributing to a larger whole and benefiting from the larger whole Shared responsibility: efficient, fun Friendship Learning and honing interpersonal skills, time management skills Steep learning curves, learning to listen, learning to persuade Challenges of dealing with disengaged students and uneven group efforts University of Adelaide23

24. On the basis of the trial in 2014 we are: Having mentor meetings in class time More class time for groups to work on projects (even without the mentors) Increased clarity for students and mentors Providing feedback from last year University of Adelaide24

25. Beyond 2014… Across the university SGDE will be provided to every student in second year as well as first year SGDE is now occurring in a range of classes across the year levels (not just that required by the Strategic Plan) We have lots of ideas about ways to do SGDE in our classes Faculty is developing an interdisciplinary SGDE activity focused on translational health sciences – We wait to see how that fits with our already more interactive teaching style in population health University of Adelaide25