The Teach-ABI Professional Development Module for Educators About Pediatric Acquired Brain Injury: Mixed Method Usability Study
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
BACKGROUND: Acquired brain injury (ABI) is a leading cause of death and disability in children and can lead to lasting cognitive, physical, and psychosocial outcomes that affect school performance. Students with an ABI experience challenges returning to school due in part to lack of educator support and ABI awareness. A lack of knowledge and training contribute to educators feeling unprepared to support students with ABI. Teach-ABI, an online professional development module, was created to enhance educators' ABI knowledge and awareness to best support students. Using a case-based approach, Teach-ABI explains what an ABI is, identifies challenges for students with ABI in the classroom, discusses the importance of an individualized approach to supporting students with ABI, and describes how to support a student with an ABI in the classroom. OBJECTIVE: This study aims to assess the usability of and satisfaction with Teach-ABI by elementary school educators. The following questions were explored: (1) Can elementary school teachers use and navigate Teach-ABI?, (2) Are the content and features of Teach-ABI satisfactory?, and (3) What modifications are needed to improve Teach-ABI? METHODS: Elementary school educators currently employed or in training to be employed in Ontario elementary schools were recruited. Using Zoom, individual online meetings with a research team member were held, where educators actively reviewed Teach-ABI. Module usability was evaluated through qualitative analysis of think-aloud data and semistructured interviews, direct observation, user success rate during task completion, and the System Usability Scale (SUS) scores. The usability benchmark selected was 70% of participants performing more than half of module tasks independently. RESULTS: A total of 8 female educators participated in the study. Educators were classroom (n=7) and preservice (n=1) teachers from public (n=7) and private (n=1) school boards. In terms of task performance, more than 85% of participants (ie, 7/8) independently completed 10 out of 11 tasks and 100% of participants independently completed 7 out of 11 tasks, demonstrating achievement of the module usability goal. The average overall SUS score was 86.25, suggesting a high satisfaction level with the perceived usability of Teach-ABI. Overall, participants found Teach-ABI content valuable, useful, and aligned with the realities of their profession. Participants appreciated the visual design, organization, and varying use of education strategies within Teach-ABI. Opportunities for enhancement included broadening content case examples of students with ABI and enhancing the accessibility of the content. CONCLUSIONS: Validated usability measures combined with qualitative methodology revealed educators' high level of satisfaction with the design, content, and navigation of Teach-ABI. Educators engaged with the module as active participants in knowledge construction, as they reflected, questioned, and connected content to their experiences and knowledge. This study established strong usability and satisfaction with Teach-ABI and demonstrated the importance of usability testing in building online professional development modules.
Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.
Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier
Prédiction distillée sur la base complète
Imitation des enseignantsNi prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Apprise à partir de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Gemma. Le mode candidate est l'union des têtes enseignantes seuillées; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont ni des étiquettes humaines ni des étiquettes directes de modèles de pointe.
Scores Codex et Gemma par catégorie
| Catégorie | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Métarecherche | 0,005 | 0,002 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,001 | 0,000 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,000 | 0,001 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,001 | 0,000 |
| Communication savante | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Science ouverte | 0,001 | 0,000 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
Scores machine (provisoires)
Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.
Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découleClassification
machine, non validéePrédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule tête enseignante, pas un consensus.
Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».