Assessing Effective Interprofessional Teamwork

Professor Keith Stevenson,

School of Health and Life SciencesGlasgow Caledonian University

Scotland UK

Acknowledgement to Staff

• 2011-12 2012-13• Chris Seenan Chris Seenan Nicky Andrew• Wendy Smith Seb Chastin Ima Jackson• Gordon Morlan Gill Constable Pauline Hamiltion• Seb Chastin Debbie Taylor Tom McAlear• Catriona Khamisha Pei Ling Choo Liz Hastie• Stephen Plunkett Ben Stansfield Lesley Price• Anna Iveson Morag Campbell Ron Johansen• Ben Stansfield John Carruthers John

Smith(EdTech)• Gordon Burrow Trevor Grant• Louise Boyle Maureen McKane

Definition

Interprofessional Education takes place on those “occasions where two or more professions learn with, from and about each other to improve collaboration and the quality of care”

(Centre for the Advancement of Interprofessional Education [CAIPE], (2002).

Statutory RequirementRCN (2007) on IPE“ Effective collaboration in professional practice is necessary to

underpin a patient-centred flexible health and social care service with staff working across social boundaries, in flatter non-hierarchical structures”.

Standards for Pre Reg. Nursing Education (NMC 2010)R5.7 Programme providers must ensure that students have the

opportunity to learn with, and from, other health and social care professionals. (NMC 2010 p75)

So...

• How are health professionals supposed to work together if they don’t learn together?

• The GCU School of Health IPE framework was devised to address that issue

IPE Framework U/G 2010/11

Level 1 Foundations of Health and Soc Care Practice 20 Credits Level 1 Psych and Soc for Health and Social Care 20 Credits--------------------------------------------------------------Level 2 Research Methods (On Line) 20 Credits----------------------------------------------------------------Level 3 Investigating Effective Practice (On Line) 20 Credits--------------------------------------------------------------Level 4 Organisations Policy and Prof Practice 20 CreditsLevel 4 Honours Project 40 Credits--------------------------------------------------------------

IPE L1 delivered to 10 Professional Disciplines (800 students per year cohort)

IPEFramework

Nurse (BN)Nurse (BAHNS)

Dental nurses

Orthoptics

Physiotherapy

Occupational Therapy

Social Work Podiatry

Ambulanceand

Paramedic

Operting Dept Practice

Radiotherapy and Diag Imag

Orthotics +Prosthetics

and SP+L Therapy

IPE Competencies

• problem-solving,• decision-making, • respect, • communication, • shared knowledge and skills, • patient/client -centred practice, • working collaboratively as a team.

Measuring IPE Competence

Learning outcome :Knows the principles of carrying out research in Health and Social CareAssessment: MCQ

Learning Outcome:Working Effectively in online Groups

How do we reward working effectively in an online group?

WebPA

• WebPA is an award winning online peer assessment tool developed over 15 years by University of Hull and Loughborough University

• More information can be found at: http://www.webpa.ac.uk

Group Assessment with Peer Assessment (PA):

• Normally, students all receive the same grade, regardless of input

• With PA, group grade is proportionally shared between group members

The PA GridsEach group member rates each other group member on 4 criteria:

1. Contribution to discussion 0-1-2-3-42. Constructive input 0-1-2-3-43. Input to organising the group 0-1-2-3-44. Overall contribution to task 0-1-2-3-4

WebPA then combines the rankings and produces a weighted factor for each student which reflects their degree of input to the task

  Qu. 1         Qu. 2         Qu. 3         Qu.4        

Group Member No. 1 2 3 4 5 1 2 3 4 5 1 2 3 4 5 1 2 3 4 5

1 4 1 0 4 3 4 1 1 3 4 4 1 3 4 4 4 3 1 4 42 3 3 3 4 3 3 3 3 4 3 3 3 3 4 3 3 3 3 4 33                                        4 4 2 1 4 3 3 1 1 4 4 4 1 2 4 4 3 2 2 4 25 1 2 1 2 4 1 2 1 2 4 1 2 1 2 4 1 2 1 2 4

Number in Group 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5MF Calc 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4Factor 1.25 1.25 1.25 1.25 1.25 1.25 1.25 1.25 1.25 1.25 1.25 1.25 1.25 1.25 1.25 1.25 1.25 1.25 1.25 1.25Normalised 1 2 3 4 5 1 2 3 4 5 1 2 3 4 5 1 2 3 4 5

1 0.33 0.08 0.00 0.33 0.25 0.31 0.08 0.08 0.23 0.31 0.25 0.06 0.19 0.25 0.25 0.25 0.19 0.06 0.25 0.252 0.19 0.19 0.19 0.25 0.19 0.19 0.19 0.19 0.25 0.19 0.19 0.19 0.19 0.25 0.19 0.19 0.19 0.19 0.25 0.193 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.004 0.29 0.14 0.07 0.29 0.21 0.23 0.08 0.08 0.31 0.31 0.27 0.07 0.13 0.27 0.27 0.23 0.15 0.15 0.31 0.155 0.10 0.20 0.10 0.20 0.40 0.10 0.20 0.10 0.20 0.40 0.10 0.20 0.10 0.20 0.40 0.10 0.20 0.10 0.20 0.40

Total 0.91 0.61 0.36 1.07 1.05 0.83 0.54 0.44 0.99 1.20 0.80 0.52 0.61 0.97 1.10 0.77 0.73 0.50 1.01 0.99PA Total 1.13 0.77 0.45 1.34 1.31 1.03 0.68 0.55 1.24 1.50 1.01 0.65 0.76 1.21 1.38 0.96 0.91 0.63 1.26 1.24

Group Member No. 1 2 3 4 5                              

PA Factor 1.03 0.75 0.60 1.26 1.36                              Group Grade 60 60 60 60 60                              

Group Member No. 1 2 3 4 5                              

PA Adjusted Grade 62 45 36 76 82                              

10% 6 5 4 8 8                              10% Deduction?     1                                  

Final (%) 62 45 32 76 82                              

Evaluation:

• Module Feedback Questionnaire: – 98 completed (approx. 30% response)– Two questions related to PA

13%

44%16%

15%

14%

The online peer assessment process made sure those that did not contribute to group presentations were penalised

Strongly Agree Agree Neither Agree nor DisagreeDisagree Strongly Disagree

10%

42%

10%

28%

9%

The peer assessment process benefited those that worked effectively and communicated effectively in preparing answers to the group tasks

Strongly Agree Agree Neither Agree nor DisagreeDisagree Strongly Disagree

What did students say?

• “I found the peer assessment very beneficial as it was necessary when there were people in the group that weren't very active about getting work done”

• “felt that the peer assessment was good in that it penalised the group members who did not contribute”

• “the peer assessment was obviously put in place to give credit to those who deserve it and take it away from those who don't deserve it”

What do staff say?

• In 35 years of teaching in HE I have never seen such a shift in student behaviour as brought about by Web PA

• Much more engagement than last year • Marking and providing feedback in 3 days was

stressful• Marking and getting group task feedback back

to students was time-consuming

Research Methods 20012-13

• 776 students registered to the course• 19 staff online tutor support• 1 tutor per 40 students (approx)• 40 students divided (8 x 5 Interprof Task Groups)• 5 x Bi-Weekly Interprofessional Tasks• 5 opportunities to be group Lead• Timetabled opportunity to meet in task groups

Weds 9-12

Importance of Feedback

• Tasks organised by groups and submitted 5.00pm Sunday

• Peer Assessment open Sunday- Tuesday 5.00pm

• Task marked and returned by Thursday 5.00pm

• Engagement with process (98% of students submitted Peer Assessments Task 1)

Value of Process

• Students are encouraged to engage• Students who do not engage are identified at

week 2• Students are contacted and encouraged to

engage in task 2• Students who do not engage are identified at

week 4.

Opportunity to Improve

• 13 students penalised <30% Task 1• 7 students penalised <30% Task 2• 7 students penalised <30% Task 3• 4 students penalised <30% Task 4

From a total of 776 students nearly 99% have been encouraged to engage and to achieve.

This has been addressed through continuous electronic feedback and monitoring and discussion.

And finally for the cat lovers...

Teams can sometimes help traditional enemies work together for a common goal .

Contact Details

Professor Keith StevensonHead of Interprofessional EducationSchool of Health and Life SciencesGlasgow Caledonian University

E mail: keith.stevenson@gcu.ac.uk

Tel: 0141 331 8833Mob: 0758 358 2799