Facilitating interprofessional affective learning in health professional students through digital client documentation: a comparison of simulation modes.

Digital Interprofessional Learning Client Documentation (D-IPL Client Docs) is an initiative designed to develop student interprofessional communication skills through electronic record writing and a virtual simulation (VS) or live virtual simulation (LVS) case conference. The aims of the study were to (a) identify whether D-IPL Client Docs supports student learning in the affective domain and (b) compare the learning outcomes for students participating in the VS versus the LVS case conference. Data were drawn from 83 Bachelor of Social Work students who had participated with other health professional students in the D-IPL Client Docs activities. The reflective journals submitted by this cohort of social work students were analyzed qualitatively and quantitatively using the Griffith University Affective Learning Scale. Qualitative analyses revealed that the activities enabled students in both groups to learn about themselves, their roles, and the roles of others, and the benefits of interprofessional collaboration in optimizing client outcomes. Quantitatively, the VS mode appeared to be more effective in supporting students to develop higher order affective learning; however, the effect size was small. Future studies should involve a larger sample size and include students from various professions to ascertain the transferability of findings.

Development and validation of the Griffith University Affective Learning Scale (GUALS): A tool for assessing affective learning in health professional students' reflective journals.

This article was migrated. The article was marked as recommended. Background Assessment of health students' attainment of cognitive and psychomotor learning outcomes is achieved through the application of well-established methods. However, for learning in the affective domain, which, in the health professions, is closely associated with the development of 'professionalism', assessment remains challenging as there is a dearth of validated, reliable and practical tools available. The aim of this study was to develop and test the reliability of an instrument assess for evidence of affective learning in the reflective journals of health professional students who have participated in emotionally-impactive learning experiences. Method Based on the findings of our earlier published work on the assessment of affective learning ( Rogers, Mey & Chan, 2017), we developed a practical tool known as the Griffith University Affective Learning Scale (GUALS). We trained a pool of learning facilitators in the assessment of affective learning and the use of the instrument. Two facilitators, in parallel, independently graded each of the daily journals of 26 medical students undertaking a week-long immersive simulation activity. Assessors were asked to rate the highest level of affective learning evident in each journal. Statistical analysis explored score distribution, means and inter-rater differences. Results One hundred and twenty-five journal entries (five from each of 25 students - one selected student had missing journals and was thus excluded from the analysis) were rated by a total of seven trained facilitators. Scores were normally distributed, with a mean of 4.23 (SD = 1.10) on a seven-point scale. Inter-rater absolute score concordance was seen for 45.6% of the journals, with a mean inter-rater difference of 0.56 points, maximum difference of 2.00 points and intraclass correlation coefficient of 0.86 (95% Cl: 0.80 - 0.90). Conclusions GUALS, when utilised by trained assessors, appears to be a reliable tool to assess for evidence of affective learning in medical students' journals related to emotionally-impactive simulated clinical experiences. Further research should explore its utilisation in relation to other learning experiences such as real clinical setting encounters, as well as with students from other health professions and in other settings where the assessment of affective learning is important.

Development of a phenomenologically derived method to assess affective learning in student journals following impactive educational experiences.

BACKGROUND: Assessment of affective learning (AL) is difficult but important, particularly for health professional students, where it is intimately linked to the development of professional values. This study originally aimed to determine whether an emotionally impactive, extended, multimethod, interprofessional simulation experience enhanced the AL of senior medical students, compared to conventional seminars and workshops alone. This necessitated the development of a method to assess for the presence and quality of AL. METHODS: We developed a "double hermeneutic" method, derived from Smith's Interpretative Phenomenological Analysis, to identify examples of AL, according to Krathwohl's hierarchy ("receiving," "responding," "valuing," "organization," "characterization"), in the journals of students from each arm of a randomized educational trial. Three assessors rated the highest level of AL seen in each journal and then we compared ratings from the two study arms. RESULTS: A total of 135 journals were available for assessment (81 Intervention, 54 Control). The method proved to be effective in identifying and characterizing examples of uniprofessional and interprofessional AL. The median level identified in Intervention journals ("valuing") was significantly higher than Control journals ("responding," p < 0.0001). CONCLUSIONS: The method described provides a means to assess affective learning among health professional students. An extended, immersive simulation experience appears to enhance affective learning.