Nurses Learning About Research: facetoface - PowerPoint PPT Presentation

1 / 36
About This Presentation
Title:

Nurses Learning About Research: facetoface

Description:

Masters-level course to introduce research methods to Nursing ... presentations with/without streamed audio, streamed video interviews, files for downloading ... – PowerPoint PPT presentation

Number of Views:30
Avg rating:3.0/5.0
Slides: 37
Provided by: theunivers63
Category:

less

Transcript and Presenter's Notes

Title: Nurses Learning About Research: facetoface


1
Nurses Learning About Researchface-to-face
online interaction
  • Andy Hall Malcolm Campbell
  • School of Nursing, Midwifery Social Work

2
Nurses learning about Research
  • Online Research Methods course
  • Core module and six optional half-modules
  • Qualitative data collection and results
  • False firsts
  • Quantitative data collection and results
  • Students characteristics and choices
  • Access and assignment marks
  • Factors predicting performance
  • Conclusions

3
Research Methods for Nurses
  • Masters-level course to introduce research
    methods to Nursing and related students
  • Practical course based on examples of real
    qualitative and quantitative research
  • presentations by researchers, discussion of
    relevant research papers
  • Online via WebCT since September 2002
  • suitable content non-clinical

4
Research Methods for Nurses
  • Postgraduate students from a number of research
    pathways
  • MSc level part of Clinical Nursing, Nursing
    Studies, Collaboration on Psychosocial Education
    (COPE) initiative
  • MPhil/PhD
  • stand-alone
  • mixture of skills and experience

5
Researching Nurses researching
  • Evaluation of learning in research methods by
    nurses and related professionals
  • funded by General Nursing Council Trust
  • project team Peter Callery, Malcolm Campbell,
    Will Gibson, Andy Hall and Dave Richards
  • Qualitative and quantitative research
  • recording of face-to-face seminars, interviews
    with staff and students, diaries
  • collection of course access data, student
    assignment marks and student evaluations

6
Research Methods modules
  • Core module (15 credits)
  • mandatory for students in usual pathways
  • Optional half-modules (7.5 credits)
  • Action Research, Historical Research,
    Intervention Studies, Statistics for Data
    Analysis, Survey Research, Systematic Reviews
    (most students take two options)
  • Each module assessed by assignment

7
Online nature of modules
  • All modules delivered online
  • course materials accessed via WebCT
  • HTML pages, presentations with/without streamed
    audio, streamed video interviews, files for
    downloading
  • modules differ in level of online interactivity
  • Students contact with tutor
  • face-to-face seminar or online discussions
  • Structured on a weekly basis

8
Core module in WebCT
9
Interaction with module tutors
  • Students offered choice of method for weekly
    discussions for each module
  • one-hour face-to-face seminar with tutor(s) on
    Monday afternoon
  • online discussions available too
  • online asynchronous discussions with tutor(s)
    during the week, round-up nominally on Monday
    afternoon
  • no face-to-face contact with tutor(s) after
    initial meeting

10
Interaction by module tutors
  • For Core module, students divided into
    face-to-face groups and online groups
  • each led by qualitative and quantitative tutor
  • For some optional modules, numbers too small for
    face-to-face online groups
  • tutors decided on method offered (sometimes
    blended)

11
Qualitative Data
  • Qualitative Interviews
  • 44 interviews with staff and students
  • Qualitative Observational Analysis
  • online discussion board postings contributed by
    the students over the two years were downloaded
    and analysed
  • 10 of the face-to-face seminars from core methods
    and 26 of the face-to-face mini-module seminars
    were recorded using audio recording equipment and
    analysed.

12
Topic shifting in seminars
  • Conversation Analysists and discussion
    participants alike are able to recognise topic
    negotiation as an activity in progress
  • Interpretive process and relies on the
    identification of markers which indicate the
    start and end of speech topics

13
Topic shifting in seminars
  • Face-to-face seminars involve the coming together
    of students who undertake interactional activity
    other than the act of talking about the subject
    matter of the seminar

14
False-firsts
  • Face-to-face seminars often involve false-first
    topic discussion (Sacks 2000) in which
    participants orientate towards talking about
    preliminary issues before moving towards the
    business at hand of the tutorial

15
False-firsts in f2f seminars
  • 1 (S1) Right. (.) Oh Kay (.) Whos chair
    today?
  • 2 Pause (5.5)
  • 3 (T) You were and I took over last week dint I
  • 3 (S) I
    knowhahahahahahahahaha
  • 4 (T)
    (Laughin) Sorry hahahahn 5 hnhnhnhn
  • 6 Pause (2.5)
  • 7 (T) Ill let you av another go
    hnhnhnhahahahahahahahaha
  • 8 (S2)
    oh chears hmhm
  • 9 Pause (1.5)
  • 10 (S2) Well Ill start then
  • 11 (T) Go on.

16
False-firsts in f2f seminars
  • face-to-face seminar dialogue is characterised by
    a high frequency of movement between topics
  • talk is often segmented into structural sections
    in which particular kinds of things can be
    discussed.

17
False-firsts in f2f seminars
  • Seminars can be viewed as being organised to
    accommodate the peculiarities of the spoken
    discourse
  • questions arise as to the ways in which online
    seminars operate in terms of the construction of
    topicality for both subsidiary and topic relevant
    issues

18
False-firsts on-line?
  • By looking at the preliminary postings within
    discussion boards we can begin to get a sense of
    the ways in which topics are constructed
  • With very few exceptions this involved an
    immediate engagement with the work with no
    preliminary remarks at all

19
False-firsts on-line?
  • All of the students preliminary postings
    entailed an engagement with the subjects
    specified for discussion

C12qual am I doing this right? I'm feeling a bit
unsure and all at sea with this at the moment -
constructive criticism most welcome! Exercise 1.2
the theoretical perspectives adopted in the
study Dr Sbaih states that the design of her
study is an ethnomethodological study, under the
general umbrella of ethnomethodological
principles ()
20
Independent Learning
  • method of usage is interesting
  • displays the potentially self-regulatory nature
    of discussion boards
  • environments in which work can be achieved
    immediately without engaging in preliminary
    discussions about other business
  • no need for negotiations from tutors to make it
    come about

21
Independent Learning
  • Viewed in this light, it would appear that the
    use of discussion boards as the primary framework
    for interaction, works towards the progressive
    decrease of the learners dependency on the
    educator
  • Tutors role in delineating discussion and
    focusing students on the matter in hand is
    reduced

22
Measuring activity outcomes
  • Online activity
  • WebCT hits (accesses of home page, tool pages or
    content pages in WebCT)
  • WebCT discussion messages read/posted
  • web server hits and visits from server log
  • Not measuring other activities of students
  • eg on Nursing web server or other sites
  • Outcome assignment mark (/100)

23
Data collection
  • Student details and assignment marks collated in
    Excel file
  • Online activity within WebCT via student
    tracking, pasted into Excel
  • Web server access via WebStats server log
    reporting, pasted into Excel
  • Data merged and analysed in SPSS

24
Students - characteristics
25
Students - choices
26
Retention
  • Little difference in retention rates for online
    students and face-to-face students
  • student submissions aggregated over all modules

27
Online access Core module
  • Online students had more accesses
  • Face-to-face students caught up in 2nd year
  • Messages read/posted
  • median (min-max)

28
Assignment marks Core module
  • Online students had higher marks
  • Marks slightly higher in 2nd year

29
Online access Systematic Review
  • Online students had more accesses again
  • Little difference between years
  • Messages read/posted
  • median (min-max)

30
Assignment marks Syst Review
  • No difference between online and face-to-face
    students
  • No difference between years

31
Factors predicting performance?
  • Core module
  • exploratory analyses suggested assignment mark
    significantly associated with each of
  • discussion method, (log) WebCT hits, (log)
    messages read, (log) messages posted, (log) web
    server hits, (log) web server visits
  • mark and face-to-face access differed by year
  • Systematic Reviews
  • assignment mark was not significantly associated
    with any explanatory variables

32
Factors acting together
  • Factors are inter-related and simultaneous
  • Multiple regression used to predict Core
    assignment mark from
  • year, discussion method, (log) WebCT hits, (log)
    messages posted, interactions between year each
    of the other variables, interactions between
    discussion method (log) WebCT hits, (log)
    messages posted
  • interactions between each of year, discussion
    method and (log) WebCT hits not significant

33
Multiple regression results
  • R2 0.22, Adjusted R2 0.16 regression ANOVA F
    3.80, df 7, 95 p 0.001

34
And what do they mean?
  • Predicting estimated assignment mark from
  • year
  • discussion method
  • WebCT hits
  • messages posted

35
But
  • Face-to-face and online groups self-selecting
  • Data difficult to collect, fuzzy at times
  • Considerable confounding present
  • unrecorded factors may affect mark (previous
    academic performance, ITC aptitude-availability-qu
    ality, work pressure)
  • Access data only surrogates for activity
  • Regression model only explained 16 of the
    variance in Core assignment mark
  • No individual p-values were less than 0.01
  • some evidence but not strong evidence

36
Conclusions
  • Core module assignment marks higher for
  • students in 2nd year
  • online students
  • students with more online accesses
  • students posting more messages
  • But not for Systematic Reviews
  • face-to-face seminars and online discussions were
    very similar in nature
Write a Comment
User Comments (0)
About PowerShow.com