Beyond the modular film school : Australian film and television schools and their digital transitions

In this chapter we will describe the contemporary variety of practice-oriented training institutions in Australia. We will examine the different ways in which public and private providers are managing the challenges of digitization and convergence. We will consider the logics governing film education this mix of providers pulls into focus, and we will outline some of the challenges providers face in educating, (re)training, and preparing their graduates for life and work beyond the film school. These challenges highlight questions about the accountabilities and responsibilities of practice-oriented film education institutions. This chapter begins with an introductory section that outlines these logics and questions. It explores some of the tensions and dynamics within the spectrum of issues through which we can understand film schools. The chapter then goes on briefly to describe the multifaceted training landscape in Australia, before profiling the leading public provider, the Australian Film, Television and Radio School (AFTRS), as well as the other leading public providers the Victorian College of the Arts, and the Griffith Film School. It concludes with a short section on film education in primary and secondary schools as the education sector prepares for the implementation of a national curriculum in which ‘media arts’ has a new centrality.

Evaluation of financial incentives as a quality improvement strategy in the public hospital context : clinician attitudes, design variables, and economic costs

In 2008, a three-year pilot ‘pay for performance’ (P4P) program, known as ‘Clinical Practice Improvement Payment’ (CPIP) was introduced into Queensland Health (QHealth). QHealth is a large public health sector provider of acute, community, and public health services in Queensland, Australia. The organisation has recently embarked on a significant reform agenda including a review of existing funding arrangements (Duckett et al., 2008). Partly in response to this reform agenda, a casemix funding model has been implemented to reconnect health care funding with outcomes. CPIP was conceptualised as a performance-based scheme that rewarded quality with financial incentives. This is the first time such a scheme has been implemented into the public health sector in Australia with a focus on rewarding quality, and it is unique in that it has a large state-wide focus and includes 15 Districts. CPIP initially targeted five acute and community clinical areas including Mental Health, Discharge Medication, Emergency Department, Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease, and Stroke. The CPIP scheme was designed around key concepts including the identification of clinical indicators that met the set criteria of: high disease burden, a well defined single diagnostic group or intervention, significant variations in clinical outcomes and/or practices, a good evidence, and clinician control and support (Ward, Daniels, Walker & Duckett, 2007). This evaluative research targeted Phase One of implementation of the CPIP scheme from January 2008 to March 2009. A formative evaluation utilising a mixed methodology and complementarity analysis was undertaken. The research involved three research questions and aimed to determine the knowledge, understanding, and attitudes of clinicians; identify improvements to the design, administration, and monitoring of CPIP; and determine the financial and economic costs of the scheme. Three key studies were undertaken to ascertain responses to the key research questions. Firstly, a survey of clinicians was undertaken to examine levels of knowledge and understanding and their attitudes to the scheme. Secondly, the study sought to apply Statistical Process Control (SPC) to the process indicators to assess if this enhanced the scheme and a third study examined a simple economic cost analysis. The CPIP Survey of clinicians elicited 192 clinician respondents. Over 70% of these respondents were supportive of the continuation of the CPIP scheme. This finding was also supported by the results of a quantitative altitude survey that identified positive attitudes in 6 of the 7 domains-including impact, awareness and understanding and clinical relevance, all being scored positive across the combined respondent group. SPC as a trending tool may play an important role in the early identification of indicator weakness for the CPIP scheme. This evaluative research study supports a previously identified need in the literature for a phased introduction of Pay for Performance (P4P) type programs. It further highlights the value of undertaking a formal risk assessment of clinician, management, and systemic levels of literacy and competency with measurement and monitoring of quality prior to a phased implementation. This phasing can then be guided by a P4P Design Variable Matrix which provides a selection of program design options such as indicator target and payment mechanisms. It became evident that a clear process is required to standardise how clinical indicators evolve over time and direct movement towards more rigorous ‘pay for performance’ targets and the development of an optimal funding model. Use of this matrix will enable the scheme to mature and build the literacy and competency of clinicians and the organisation as implementation progresses. Furthermore, the research identified that CPIP created a spotlight on clinical indicators and incentive payments of over five million from a potential ten million was secured across the five clinical areas in the first 15 months of the scheme. This indicates that quality was rewarded in the new QHealth funding model, and despite issues being identified with the payment mechanism, funding was distributed. The economic model used identified a relative low cost of reporting (under $8,000) as opposed to funds secured of over $300,000 for mental health as an example. Movement to a full cost effectiveness study of CPIP is supported. Overall the introduction of the CPIP scheme into QHealth has been a positive and effective strategy for engaging clinicians in quality and has been the catalyst for the identification and monitoring of valuable clinical process indicators. This research has highlighted that clinicians are supportive of the scheme in general; however, there are some significant risks that include the functioning of the CPIP payment mechanism. Given clinician support for the use of a pay–for-performance methodology in QHealth, the CPIP scheme has the potential to be a powerful addition to a multi-faceted suite of quality improvement initiatives within QHealth.

United we stand, divided we fall: the failure of an accounting information system in a major radiology provider

This article explores the way in which a major Australian radiology organization implemented a complex accounting information system and how workers in the 72 radiology practises that had to use it resisted the change. The study reports on the issues that led to the circumvention of the system by individuals and, after only three years, complete withdrawal of the accounting information system by the parent organization. This article has implications for firms in the health care and other sectors considering implementing new accounting information systems. Organizations need to incorporate change management techniques and provide open communication to all stakeholders to minimize disruption and potential problems.

‘Show Me Your Wiki and I’ll Show you Mine’: Using Online Interactive Media to Improve Academic Writing and Research in a Public Health Under-Graduate Cohort

The number of Internet users in Australia has been steadily increasing, with over 10.9 million people currently subscribed to an internet provider (ABS, 2011). Over the past year, the most avid users of the Internet were 15 – 24 year olds, with approximately 95% accessing the internet on a regular basis (ABS, Social Trends, 2011). While the internet has been described as fundamental to higher education students, social and leisure internet tools are also increasingly being used by these students to generate and maintain their social and professional networks and interactions (Duffy & Bruns 2006). Rapid technological advancements have enabled greater and faster access to information for learning and education (Hemmi et al, 2009; Glassman and Kang, 2011). As such, we sought to integrate interactive, online social media into the assessment profile of a Public Health undergraduate cohort at the Queensland University of Technology (QUT). The aim of this exercise was to engage students to both develop and showcase their research on a range of complex, contemporary health issues within the online forum of Wikispaces (http://www.wikispaces.com/) for review and critique by their peers. We applied Bandura’s Social Learning Theory (SLT) to analyse the interactive processes from which students developed deeper and more sustained learning, and via which their overall academic writing standards were raised. This paper outlines the assessment task, and the students’ feedback on their learning outcomes in relation to the Attentional, Retentional, Motor Reproduction, and Motivational Processes outlined by Bandura in SLT. We conceptualise the findings in a theoretical model, and discuss the implications for this approach within the broader tertiary environment.

Development of an EMR implementation framework for public hospitals in Saudi Arabia

An Electronic Medical Record (EMR) is a system that has been embraced by healthcare providers worldwide. However, the implementation success of EMRs has varied widely. Studies have identified both barriers to and facilitators for implementing EMRs within healthcare organisations. In Saudi Arabia (SA), the majority of healthcare providers manage patient records manually. As public hospitals are a major provider of health services in SA and have been shown to face more EMR implementation barriers than private hospitals, there is a need for an implementation framework to guide EMR implementation in Saudi public hospitals. This doctoral project therefore aimed to develop an evidence-based EMR implementation framework for public hospitals in SA informed by those who work at the micro-implementation level and the macro-implementation level and the extant literature sensitive to the cultural, resource-related, and technological, organisational, and environmental issues of SA.