The purpose of this case study is to
investigate the instructor’s academic
doctorate degrees (Ph.D., EdD, Dsc, ScD,
DPT) in relationship to their teaching
strategies, and how senior (final year
health care students) learn.
Describing senior year students from
various health care discipline’s (Interdisciplinary)
perspectives on being prepared to meet
the core competencies established by the
Interprofessional Education Collaborative (IPEC)
Methods and/or Description of Project
A Qualitative Case Study consisting of open ended questions and focus groups of 5 to 8 students' from various interdiscplinary health care majors answering the following research questions.
Q1. How does the instructor's academic degree (PhD, EdD, DSc, ScD, DPT) match the methods, styles, strategies or techniques of each department's teaching philosophies?
Q2. How does the instructor's academic degree (PhD, EdD, DSc, ScD, DPT) relate to students' learning styles?
Q3. What are students' perspectives on their preparation for Interprofessional Education (IPE) and workplace readiness?
Q4. From the student's perspective how do the curricula, and academic doctorate degree(s) have an impact on the students' being prepared to meet the Interprofessional Education Collaborative (IPEC) Core Competencies?
The study is in the beginning stages. The approach, method, and design slected are to investigate, explore, and describe the types of academic degree(s) (PhD, EdD, DSc, ScD, DPT) determining which degree is advantageous to the institution, health science departments, and students as core faculty members in health care discipline programs participating in an Interdisciplinary, Interprofessional Education (IPE), Collaborative Practice and Simulation Education.
The significance of the study is based on the Institute of Medicine (IOM) issue enhancing Interprofessioal Education. "All healh care professionals should be educated to deliver patient-centered care as members of the interdisciplinary team emphasizing evidence-based practice, quality improvement approaches, and informatics" (Swisher, Woodward, Quillen, & Monroe, 2010, p. 12).
Conclusions/Relevance to the conference theme: Through the Looking Glass: Transforming Physical Therapy Education
Physical therapy education (PT, PTA) may be at a disadvantaged. Competencies developed by other health care professions such as medicine, dentistry, pharmacy, nursing, and public health, the physical therapist education lags behind in curriculum development, and teaching strategies meeting the IPE and IPEC core competencies (Wise, et al., 2015). The physical therapist scope of practice spans a wide broader range of conditions (Kearns, Ponichetera, Rucker, & Ford, 2014). The problem is most physical therapist educators' are novices in pedagogical matters, and a few have been exposed to the substantial body of theory and knowledge that exists in education, and focus their curriculum on what students learn rather than how they learn (Weddle, & Ough-Sellheim, 2009). Students' may even fail to see the relevance creating a problem with contextual application making it a challenge. Furthermore, skills, and competencies that are needed for students to engage in collaborative learning are often not taught explicity (Sennan, et al,. 2016).
Kearns, M., Ponicheteria, N., Rucker, T., & Ford, G. (2014). Physical Therapists as Practitioners of Choice: Consumer Knowledge of Practitioner Skills and Training. Journal of Physical Therapy Education, 28(1), 64–72.
Seenan, C., Shanmugam, S., & Stewart, J. (2016). Group peer teaching: A strategy for building confidence in communication and teamwork skills in physical therapy students. Journal of Physical Therapy Education, 30(3), 40–49.
Swisher, L., Woodward, L., Quillen, W., & Monroe, A. (2010). Centralized and Decentralized Organizational Models of Interprofessional Education for Physical Therapist and Medical Students. Journal of Physical Therapy Education, 24(1), 12–18.
Weddle, M., & Sellheim, O. (2009). An Integrative Curriculum Model Preparing Physical Therapist for Vision 2020 Practice. Journal of Physical Therapy Education, 23(1), 12–18.
Wise, H., Frost, J., Resnik, C., Davis, B., & Iglarsh, A. (2015). Interprofessional Education: An Exploration in Physical Therapist Education. Journal of Physical Therapy Education, 29(2), 72–83.
Upon satisfactory of this education session, the participant will be able to:
1. Define, explain, and apply key terms such as IPE, IPEC, Collaborative Peer Learning-Teaching into their curricula, and teaching strategies.
2. Identify students' learning styles and apply a teaching strategy that meets all learning styles.
3. Create a curriculum that promotes clinical thinking and reasoning teaching strategies in the classroom and clinic.
4. Assess students skills, and competency levels, weakness, and strengths promoting a student-centered learning environment
5. Evaluate, apply, and create students benchmarks, achivements, goals, and readiness for the workplace
The 90-minute presentation will begin briefly explaining the Interdisciplinary, IPE purpose, the challenges, and how to overcome the barriers. The lecture will discuss the importance of establishing an IPE curriculum including faculty development, student involvement, teaching-learning, and student learning strategies, and curriculum design. The last 45 minutes will be interactive leading into questions and answers.
First 45 minutes: Lower order of learning
1. Define, explain, and apply the key terms IPE, IPEC, IOM, Collaborative Peer Learning (15 minutes)
2. A brief review of student learning styles, and how the educator can identify, assess, and promote a teaching strategy that meets all learning styles (15 minutes)
3. Incorporate the learning styles creating a course curriculum that will promote clinical thinking and reasoning in the classroom and clinic: Meeting the challenges (15 minutes)
Last 45 Minutes: Higher order of learning
4. Interactive discussion assessing student's and faculty skills, competency levels, weakness, and strength while promoting a teacher-centered, and student-centered collaborative peer teaching-learning environment
5. Evaluate, apply, create student and faculty benchmarks, achievements, goals for the workplace