Designing and Testing a Pedagogical Model for

Simulation-based Learning Environments:Preliminary Findings and Perspectives for Future Research

2008–2010

March 2, 2010SiME Seminar Series

Heli Ruokamo Tuulikki Keskitalo

MediPeda III

Project`s backgroundENVI – Virtual Centre of Wellness Campus– Unique environment, which utilizes 3D technology and

simulations– New possibilities, but also challenges for teachers,

learners, designers, and researchers– Video 1, Video 2, Video 3

We need more research that possibilities of ENVI and other similar environments could be used in a pedagogically appropriate way

Figure 1. ENVI Virtual Centre of Wellness Campus.Rovaniemi University of Applied Sciences©2009.

MediPeda IIIMultidisciplinary research and development project (2008-2010)

Aims:– Research and develop pedagogical model, user-centered design

methods as well as value creation model for virtual and simulation-based learning environments of healthcare

Content:– Developing a pedagogical model (Tuulikki Keskitalo & Heli

Ruokamo)– Long-term research of students` learning experiences in virtual

and simulation-based learning environments (Paula Yliniemi)– Developing a user-centered design methods (Pia Yliräisänen-

Seppänen & Eija Timonen)– Developing a value creation model (Jussi Haukkamaa)– Comparative research in three different simulation-centers

(Tuulikki Keskitalo & Heli Ruokamo)

MediPeda IIIResearch Partners:

University of Lapland– Faculty of Education, Centre

for Media Pedagogy (Coord.)

International Research Partners:Stanford University, School of Medicine (Palo Alto, California, USA)

Development of Education:Rovaniemi University of Applied SciencesArcada University of Applied SciencesStanford University, California

Financiers:Rovaniemi University of Applied SciencesCity of RovaniemiHospital District of LaplandMedieco Corp. Nordic Simulators Corp.Heat-IT Corp.TekesEuropean Regional Development Fund

Developing a Pedagogical Model

(Keskitalo, Ruokamo, & Väisänen, accepted)

Goal and Theoretical BackgroundAim of this research was to develop a pedagogical model to support facilitating, training and learning processes in VR and simulation-based learning environments

A pedagogical model can be used to shape curriculums or long term courses of studies, to design instructional materials, and to guide instruction in the classroom and other settings (Joyce & Weil, 1980, p. 1)

Generally, this research builds on the socio-constructivist and socio-cultural perspectives on learning (Lave & Wenger, 1991; Vygotsky, 1978)- Learning is related to all actions that take into account a

person as a whole (body, mind and spirit) and the role of cultural tools and artefacts (technology and language)

- Learning is also seen as active, life wide, life long collaborative knowledge co-creation process

Pedagogical Model

Pedagogical model is built on - the facilitating-training-learning (FTL) -processes (cf.

Teaching-, studying- and learning (TSL) -process, Kansanen, Tirri, Meri, Krokfors, Husu & Jyrhämä, 2000; Uljens, 1997) and

- the characteristics of meaningful learning (Hakkarainen, 2007; Jonassen, 1995; Jonassen et al., 1999; Nevgi & Tirri 2003; Ruokamo & Pohjolainen 1999; Vahtivuori-Hänninen et al., 2004)

Facilitating Training Learning

Facilitating describes teacher`s activity

Facilitators promote students` meaningful learning (e.g. Jonassen, 1995):– choose the resources and scenario based on

students’characteristics, characteristics of meaningful learning and competencies

– facilitate and guide students` meaningful learning process

Facilitating

In training, students` meaningful learning should be promoted:– Experiential and experimental

• Students can use their own experiences as a starting point for learning (Kolb, 1984), but they also have an opportunity to gain valuable experiences before entering real healthcare practice (Cleave-Hogg & Morgan, 2002).

– Emotional• Emotions are always intertwined with learning (Engeström, 1982). • Emotions affect motivation, but they also affect how we act in the

simulation setting and what we remember later on (Damasio, 2001).

Training

The Characteristics of Meaningful Learning

…the Characteristics of Meaningful Learning

– Socio-constructive and collaborative• Training collaboratively means that students provide support

and modelling as well as construct their own knowledge while solving the healthcare cases together with other students (Jonassen, 1995; Lave & Wenger, 1991).

• Learning is also seen as being tool-dependent (Vygotsky, 1978).

– Active and responsible• Students should engage in finding, evaluating, and

constructing knowledge (Jonassen, 1995), while also being responsible for planning, executing, and evaluating their own learning.

• Consequently, instruction involves supporting these processes.

– Reflective and critical• Reflectivity means that learners articulate what they have learned

and reflect on the processes and decisions that were entailed by the process (Jonassen, 1995).

• In higher education, learners should also critically evaluate the FTL process as well as the acquired information and the learning environment.

– Competence-based and contextual• Facilitators should structure the training with specific learning

objectives in mind, based on the competencies students will need to handle real-life situations (Fanning & Gaba, 2007).

• These competencies are usually embedded into a scenario whose aim is to transfer the learned skills into real-life settings, since learning is typically contextual (Jonassen, 1995).

…the Characteristics of Meaningful Learning

…The Characteristics of Meaningful Learning

– Goal-oriented and self-directed• Characteristics indicate that students are encouraged to set

their own goals for learning, which they try to attain by planning, realizing and evaluating their own learning (Brockett & Hiemstra, 1991).

– Individual• Learning is also individually different (De Corte, 1995);

therefore, facilitators should provide time and effort to get to know each student and his or her level of competency properly in order to provide an individual learning experience, guidance and feedback.

The students have reached the learning goals and the new learning goals have been set.

At best, training has been meaningful for students.

Learning

Facilitating

Choosingthe scenariobasedon students̀ cha-ractertics, characteristicsof meaningful learningand competencies

Choosingthe resources:•Context•Equipment•Material•Methods•Otherresourcese.g. social and technicalsupport

Facilitateand guidestu-dents̀ meaningful learningbyaskingquestions, sug-gesting, givinghints, insuring,inspriring, givingfeedback etc.

Training

ExperientialExperimentalEmotionalSocio-constructiveCollaborativeActiveResponsibleReflectiveCriticalCompetence-basedContextualGoal-orientedSelf-directedIndividual

Learning

Competenciesset for theHealthcarepersonnel

VR and Simulation-basedLearningEnvironment(context)

Facilitating

Choosingthe scenariobasedon students̀ cha-ractertics, characteristicsof meaningful learningand competencies

Choosingthe resources:•Context•Equipment•Material•Methods•Otherresourcese.g. social and technicalsupport

Facilitateand guidestu-dents̀ meaningful learningbyaskingquestions, sug-gesting, givinghints, insuring,inspriring, givingfeedback etc.

Training

ExperientialExperimentalEmotionalSocio-constructiveCollaborativeActiveResponsibleReflectiveCriticalCompetence-basedContextualGoal-orientedSelf-directedIndividual

Learning

Competenciesset for theHealthcarepersonnel

VR and Simulation-basedLearningEnvironment(context)

Figure 2. The preliminary pedagogical model.

Research Question

From facilitators` and students` perspective, what are the most important characteristics of meaningful learning that are realized during the simulation-based learning?

www.risteilijat.fi

Methods

Designing a pedagogical model is conducted using design-based research method (DBR) (Brown, 1992; Design-based Research Collective, 2003)

1. Cycle of the pedagogical model design:1. Designingof the pedagogical model based on theoriesand resultsof previous researches.

2. The enactment of the pedagogical model and data collection at the ArcadaUniversity of AppliedSciences 6.4.–20.5.2009.

3. Analysis of Data.

4. Redesigningof the pedagogical model basedon data collection and analysis.

1. Cycle of the pedagogical model design:1. Designingof the pedagogical model based on theoriesand resultsof previous researches.

2. The enactment of the pedagogical model and data collection at the ArcadaUniversity of AppliedSciences 6.4.–20.5.2009.

3. Analysis of Data.

4. Redesigningof the pedagogical model basedon data collection and analysis.

Figure 3. Arcada Patient Safety and Learning Centre. Arcada University of Applied Sciences©2009.

Data Collection:- Altogether 14 second year paramedic students and four

teachers participated in the course titled The Treatment of Critically Ill Patient

- Students had 11 scenarios (7–26 min) at the Arcada Medical Simulation Centre as well as lectures and self-studying

- During the training sessions students worked in teams on scenarios related to the topic areas

- The structure of the course followed the Learning through Simulations model (Introduction, Simulator Briefing, Scenarios, Debriefing) (Joyce et al., 2002; cf. Dieckmann, Gaba & Rall, 2007)

- Data collected using pre- and post questionnaires, interviews, learning diaries, video-recordings

Data Analysis:- Qualitative content analysis of facilitators and students`

interviews, open questions of the pre- and post questionnaires, learning diaries and video recordings

Results

The characteristics that were strongly supported were experiential, experimental, socio-constructive, collaborative, active, responsible, reflective, competence-based, contextual and self-directed.

“…we have to be active, that we can have most of it…” (student 13.)

Emotional, Critical, goal-oriented and individual characteristics were not fully realized.

“…they do not arouse so much emotions…” (student 14.)

1. INTRODUCTIONPresentation of a course topic as well asother important concepts.

Explanation of how course is organised (pedagogical models and methods).

2. SIMULATOR BRIEFINGIntroduction of a scenario, case, problem etc.Introduction of goals, roles, rules, procedures, and decisions. Setting the individual goals. Participants familiarise themselves with the environment, the case and their roles.

4. DEBRIEFINGComprehensive evaluation, reflection and critical analysis of the FTL process, the knowledge and the learning environment.Providing individual guidance and feedback.

3. SCENARIOSParticipating in simulations.

Practising of skills and knowledge.

Training

ExperientialExperimentalEMOTIONALSocio-constructiveCollaborativeActiveResponsibleReflectiveCRITICALCompetence-basedContextualGOAL-ORIENTEDSelf-directedINDIVIDUAL

Competenciesset for thehealthcarepersonnel

FacilitatingChoosing the resources and scenario based on students` characteristics, characteristics of meaning learning and competencies.Facilitate and guide students` meaningful learning.

Learning

VR and simulation-based learning environment (context)

Figure 4. Redesigned pedagogical model.

Future Development of Pedagogical Model

Testing the pedagogical model is conducted applying design-based research method (DBR) (Brown, 1992; Design-based Research Collective, 2003)2. Cycle of the pedagogical model design:

1. Designing of the pedagogical model based on theoriesand results of previous researches.

2. Testing the redesigned pedagogical model and data collection at the Stanford University, School of Medicine 2009–2010.

3. Analysis of Data.

4. Redesigning of the pedagogical model basedon data collection and analysis.

Data Collection at Stanford University

Data Collection- Started February 18, 2010 and ends March 12, 2010- Pre- and post questionnaires for students dealing with

expectations and experiences of meaningful learning - Group interviews of students - Group interviews of facilitators- Video recordings of simulation sessions- Participant observations during the session and field

notes

Participants - At the moment 11 students and 4 facilitators

Courses- ACRM 2 (VA), Surg 313a (GC), IMPES (VA)

and Anes 306a

Data Analysis

Qualitative content analysis of facilitators and students` group interviews

Quantitative analysis of the pre- and post questionnaires

Qualitative content analysis of video recordings

Analysis is supported by field notes

Future research

The redesigned model is developed further on the basis of the results from Stanford University

Facilitators will be trained in Finland on the basis of the results

New project funding will be applied– The 3. cycle of DBR will be carried out at the Rovaniemi

University of Applied Sciences 2011– Additional value of VR will be tested– The final model will be presented

Conclusion

This study provides us with a learning theoretical approach to realize VR and simulation-based learning

It develops a new pedagogical model for VR and simulation-based learning environments

It gives more information about the use of the pedagogical model and the VR and simulation-based learning environments from facilitators, students and researchers perspectives

Publications

Keskitalo, T. (accepted). Teachers` Conceptions and Their Approaches to Teaching in

Virtual Reality and Simulation-based Learning Environments. Teachers and Teaching: Theory and

Practise.Keskitalo, T., Ruokamo, H., & Väisänen, O. (Accepted). How Does the Facilitating,Training and Learning Support Characteristics of Meaningful Learning in Simulation-

basedLearning Environment from Facilitators and Students Perspectives? ED-Media (WorldConference on Educational Multimedia, Hypermedia and Telecommunications) 2010.Yliräisänen, P., & Timonen, E., (Accepted). Development of an Immersive LearningEnvironment Based on User Experiences. ED-Media (World Conference on EducationalMultimedia, Hypermedia and Telecommunications) 2010. Keskitalo, T., & Ruokamo, H. (2009). Designing a Pedagogical Model for Virtual

Realityand Simulation-based Learning Environments of Healthcare. Manuscript submitted for

publication.Yliniemi, P. (2009). Nursing and Health Care Students’ Experiences of Training inSimulation-based Learning Environment - “ENVI”. In T. Bastiaens et al. (Eds.),

Proceedings ofWorld Conference on E-Learning in Corporate, Government, Healthcare, and Higher

Education 2009 (pp.3275-3279). Chesapeake, VA: AACE.

Thank you!

Centre for Media Pedagogy (CMP)www.ulapland.fi/CMP

MediPedaIIIwww.ulapland.fi/MediPeda

P.O.Box 122, FI-96101 Rovaniemi, FINLANDTel. + 358 16 341 341

Email: Firstname.Lastname@ulapland.fi