magazinelogo

The Educational Review, USA

ISSN Print: 2575-7938 Downloads: 1059505 Total View: 9409811
Frequency: monthly ISSN Online: 2575-7946 CODEN: TERUBB
Email: edu@hillpublisher.com
ArticleOpen Access http://dx.doi.org/10.26855/er.2023.04.009

Co-creating in International Environments—A Clinical Reasoning Course for Physiotherapy Students

G. Gonzalez-Caminal1,3,*, M. Kangasperko2,3

1Research Group on Transformative Innovation and Simulation, Faculty of Health Sciences at Manresa, University of Vic – University of Central Catalonia, Manresa, Spain.

2Faculty of Health Welfare, Satakunta University of Applied Sciences, Pori, Finland.

3European Network of Physiotherapy in Higher Education, Utrecht, Netherlands.

*Corresponding author: G. Gonzalez-Caminal

Published: May 29,2023

Abstract

International cooperation and collaborative teaching-learning between universities should and will be the future considering the process of globalization. This cooperation and collaboration is challenging our educational methods and it is essential to be innovative in creating new teaching-learning paths based on new technologies. This paper describes a strategic course designed in international cooperation to improve clinical reasoning at different levels. The novice levels endure the idea that a person follows a set of given rules, without any discretionary judgment or analytical situation. When the person starts organizing principles to quickly access the rules relevant to the specific task at hand, she/he is on the competent level. This is when active and analytical decision-making begins. During four academic years the purposed course has been developed and implemented in a cycle of improvement by physiotherapy students (1st to 4th year bachelor’s degree) and teachers from 11 nationalities using ad hoc questionnaires and group discussion. A total of 94 people were involved in the process. In planning and implementing the course, teachers must consider selecting the proper activity based on his/her experience level, his/her different curricula and different years of studies. Feedback from questionnaires and group discussions shows that instructions and teachers’ feedback must be clearly given in an online course, especially when people from different countries work together. Collaborative teaching-learning approaches with international peers are good and effective ways of giving and receiving feedback in a foreign language. Also, the multicultural approach allows mutual understanding, respecting, and coping with differences. Working in an international group with people you don’t know personally prepares you to work in a globalized society.

Keywords

Higher education, clinical reasoning, physiotherapy, blended learning, interna-tionalization

References

Akhilesh, K.B. (2017). Co-Creation and Learning. In: Co-Creation and Learning. SpringerBriefs in Business. Springer, New Delhi.

Ausubel, D.P. (1968). Educational Psychology. A cognitive view. Holt, Rinehart and Wilson. New York.

Bergmark, U., and Westman, S. (2016). Co-creating curriculum in higher education: promoting democratic values and a multidimensional view on learning, International Journal for Academic Development, 21(1):28-40.

Bovill, C., Cook-Sather, A., and Felten, P. (2011). Students as co-creators of teaching approaches, course design, and curricula: Implications for academic developers. International Journal for Academic Development, 16:133-145.

Cook‐Sather, A. and Alter, Z. (2011). What is and what can be: How a liminal position can change learning and teaching in higher education. Anthropology & Education Quarterly, 42(1): 37-53.

Díaz-Menendez, M., and E. Gummesson. (2012). Value Co-Creation and University Teaching Quality: Consequences for the European Higher Education Area (EHEA). Journal of Service Management, 23(4):571-592.

Dunne, E., and Zandstra, R. (2011). Students as change agents: New ways of engaging with learning and teaching in higher education. England: ESCalate/Higher Education Academy Publication.

Dziuban. C.D., Hartman, J.L., Moskal. (2004). Blended Learning. Educause Center for Applied Research, 7:1-12.

Gnaur D., and Larsen-Nielsen I.M. (2017). Designing Learning for Co-Creation. In: Chemi T., Krogh L. (eds) Co-Creation in Higher Education. Creative Education Book Series. Sense Publishers, Rotterdam.

Gonzalez-Caminal, G., Kangasperko, M. (2017). International Online Course: A pilot experience of a clinical reasoning course for physiotherapy students from three countries. Proceedings of 9th International Conference on Education and New Learning Technologies IATED 2017. (pp. 374-378)

Graham, C.R. (2006). Blended Learning Systems: Definition, Current Trends, and Future Directions. In: Bonk, C.J. and Graham, C.R. (Eds). Handbook of Blended Learning: Global Perspectives, Local Designs, Pfeiffer Publishing, San Francisco.

Higgs, J., and Jones, M. A. (2018). Clinical reasoning in the health professions. Oxford: Butterworth-Heinemann.

Kandiko Howson, C., and Weller, S. (2016). Defining pedagogic expertise: Students and new lecturers as co-developers in learning and teaching. Teaching & Learning Inquiry, 4(2).

Kim, W. (2007). Towards a Definition and Methodology for Blended Learning. In blended learning (p.2). Hong Kong: The Hong Kong web society. Retrieved from

https://www.researchgate.net/profile/Fu_Lee_Wang/publication/254070961_Blended_Learning_for_Programming_Courses_A_Case_Study_of_Outcome_Based_Teaching_Learning/links/54e2be1e0cf2c3e7d2d45bbb/BlendedLearning-for-Programming-Courses-A-Case-Study-of-Outcome-Based-Teaching-Learning.pdf.

Littlejohn, A., and Pegler, C. (2014). Reusing Resources: Open for Learning. Journal of Interactive Media in Education, (1):p.Art. 2. DOI: http://doi.org/10.5334/2014-02.

Mercer-Mapstone, L., Dvorakova, S.L., Matthews, K., Abbot, S., Cheng, B., Felten, P., Knorr, K., Marquis, E., Shammas, R., and Swaim, K. (2017). A systematic literature review of students as partners in higher education. International Journal of Students as Partners, 1(1).

Okaza, A.A. (2015). Integrating Blended Learning in Higher Education. Proceeding of 5th World Conference on Learning, Teaching and Educational Leadership, WCLTA 2014 (pp. 600-603).

Prahalad, C. K. and Ramaswamy, V. (2004). Co-creation experiences: the next practice in value creation. Journal of interactive marketing, 18(3):5-14.

Scott, C.L. (2015). Education Research and Foresight, The Futures of Learning 3: What kind of pedagogies for the 21st century? [ERF Working Papers Series, No. 15]. Retrieved from http://unesdoc.unesco.org/images/0024/002431/243126e.pdf.

Sharpe, R., Benfield, G., Roberts, G., and Francis, R. (2006). The undergraduate experience of blended e-learning: A review of UK literature and practice. York: The Higher Education Academy. Retrieved from 

http://www.heacademy.ac.uk/assets/documents/research/literature_reviews/blended_elearning_full_review.pdf.

Singh, H. (2003). Building effective blended learning programs. Educational Technology, 43:51-54.

Singh, H., and Reed, C. (2001). Achieving Success with Blended Learning. Centra Software. ASTD State of the Industry Report. American Society for Training and Development.

Tong, V., Standen, A., and Sotiriou, M. (2018). Shaping higher education with students: Ways to connect research and teaching. London, England: UCL Press.

Woltering, V., Herrler, A., Spitzer, K., and Spreckelsen, C. (2009). Blended learning positively affects students’ satisfaction and the role of the tutor in the problem-based learning process: results of a mixed-method evaluation. Advances in Health Science Education, 14:725-738.

How to cite this paper

Co-creating in International Environments—A Clinical Reasoning Course for Physiotherapy Students

How to cite this paper: G. Gonzalez-Caminal, M. Kangasperko. (2023). Co-creating in International Environments—A Clinical Reasoning Course for Physiotherapy Students. The Educational Review, USA7(4), 443-448.

DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.26855/er.2023.04.009