Students’ perceptions of interprofessional learning through facilitated online learning modules
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Asynchronous e-learning is an appealing option for interprofessional education (IPE) as it addresses the geographic and timetabling barriers often encountered when organizing activities across educational programs. AIM: This study examined the extent to which pre-licensure students were able to learn with, from, and about each other through completion of innovative online IPE learning modules. METHODS: Seventy-seven students completed e-learning modules developed through a consortium of educational institutions. Evaluation was primarily qualitative through focus groups, interviews, analyses on off-line discussions and an online feedback form. RESULTS: Qualitative analyses of the discussion fora revealed that students were able to solve problems collaboratively, clarify their professional roles, and provide information from their professional perspective. Focus groups and interviews reinforced that students recognized the importance of working together and implicate clinical education as an important venue to reinforce learning about collaborative practice. Analyses of the online feedback form suggest the need for clear processes related to group assignments and deadlines. CONCLUSION: Students learned about each other's role, solved problems together and had positive perceptions of the online modules as a venue for interprofessional learning. Results are encouraging to those interested in using e-learning in IPE as part of an overall curriculum.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.005 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.068 | 0.001 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".