2020
DOI: 10.1080/13561820.2020.1783217
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

How interprofessional teams of students mobilized collaborative practice competencies and the patient partnership approach in a hybrid IPE course

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
3
1
1

Citation Types

0
19
0
2

Year Published

2020
2020
2024
2024

Publication Types

Select...
7
1
1

Relationship

1
8

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 15 publications
(21 citation statements)
references
References 40 publications
0
19
0
2
Order By: Relevance
“…In this study, despite participants reporting feeling a high level of support, they still predominantly showed preference for face-to-face or blended study modes for A&P over online. In addition, Raynault et al 21 showed that students preferred a blended study mode to be able to learn with, from, and about each other; this was reflected in the findings reported in the current study where participants commented that they were able to understand the course content when actively in class asking questions and engaging with their peers directly. Venkatesh et al 22 support this same role of effective communication between students in active learning sessions.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 50%
“…In this study, despite participants reporting feeling a high level of support, they still predominantly showed preference for face-to-face or blended study modes for A&P over online. In addition, Raynault et al 21 showed that students preferred a blended study mode to be able to learn with, from, and about each other; this was reflected in the findings reported in the current study where participants commented that they were able to understand the course content when actively in class asking questions and engaging with their peers directly. Venkatesh et al 22 support this same role of effective communication between students in active learning sessions.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 50%
“…Additionally, non-supportive administrative processes, including siloed resources and tenure and promotion criteria that do not reward IPE pose challenges to sustainability. At the micro-level, lack of faculty development in IPE and inclusion of patients as facilitators of IPE [35], limited student engagement, and learning contexts not grounded in adult learning theories stifle innovation and threaten program quality [36].…”
Section: Something Must Be Exchanged Among and Between Learners From ...mentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Additionally, non-supportive administrative processes, including siloed resources and tenure and promotion criteria that do not reward IPE pose challenges to sustainability. At the micro-level, lack of faculty development in IPE and inclusion of patients as facilitators of IPE [40], limited student engagement, and learning contexts not grounded in adult learning theories sti e innovation and threaten program quality [41].…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%