Evaluating the quality of learning in Computer Supported Co-operative Learning

Can learning quality be maintained in the face of increasing class size by the use of Computer Supported Co-operative Learning (CSCL) technologies? In particular, can Computer-Mediated Communication promote critical thinking in addition to surface information transfer? We compared face-to-face seminars with asynchronous computer conferencing in the same Information Management class. From Garrison's theory of critical thinking and Henri's critical reasoning skills, we developed two ways of evaluating critical thinking: a student questionnaire and a content analysis technique. We found evidence for critical thinking in both situations, with some subtle differences in learning style. This paper provides an overview of this work.

An experiment in group learning technology: evaluating critical thinking in face-to-face and computer-supported seminars

Can learning quality be maintained in the face of increasing class size by the use of Computer Supported Co-operative Learning (CSCL) technologies? In particular, can Computer-Mediated Communication promote critical thinking in addition to surface information transfer? We compared face-to-face seminars with asynchronous computer conferencing in the same Information Management class. From Garrison's theory of critical thinking and Henri's critical reasoning skills, we developed two ways of evaluating critical thinking: a student questionnaire and a content analysis technique. We found evidence for critical thinking in both situations, with some subtle differences in learning style. This paper provides an overview of this work.

Mind mapping: A tool to facilitate learning; why not give it a try?

Schools of nursing continuously strive to facilitate learning through student engagement and teaching strategies that encourage active learning. This paper reports on the successful use of mind mapping, an underutilised and underdeveloped strategy, to enhance teaching and learning in undergraduate nurse education (Spencer et al., 2013). Mind mapping or concept mapping has been defined in the literature as a visual representation of one’s thoughts and ideas (Abel and Freeze, 2006). It is characterised by colour, images and text in a graphical, nonlinear style. Mind maps promote the linking of concepts and capitalise on the brain’s natural aptitude for visual recognition to enhance learning and memory recall (Buzan, 2006). Traditional teaching strategies depend on linear processes, which in comparison lack engagement, associations and creativity (Spencer et al., 2013). Mind mapping was introduced to nursing students undertaking modules in ‘Dimensions of Care’ and ‘Care Delivery’ on year two of the nursing degree programme in Queen’s University Belfast. The aim of introducing mind mapping was to help students make the critical link between the pathophysiology of conditions studied and the provision of informed, safe and effective patient care, which had challenged previous student cohorts. Initially maps were instructor-made as described by Boley (2008), as a template for note taking during class and as a study aid. However, students rapidly embraced the strategy and started creating their own mind maps. Meaningful learning occurs when students engage with concepts and organise them independently in a way significant to them (Buzan, 2006). Students reported high levels of satisfaction to this teaching approach. This paper will present examples of the mind maps produced and explore how mind mapping can be further utilised within the undergraduate nursing curriculum.

"Should I prioritize medical problem solving or attentive listening?": the dilemmas and challenges that medical students experience when learning to conduct consultations

Objective: Communication skills can be trained alongside clinical reasoning, history taking or clinical examination skills. This is advocated as a solution to the low transfer of communication skills. Still, students have to integrate the knowledge/skills acquired during different curriculum parts in patient consultations at some point. How do medical students experience these integrated consultations within a simulated environment and in real practice when dealing with responsibility?

Methods: Six focus groups were conducted with (pre-)/clerkship students.

Results: Students were motivated to practice integrated consultations with simulated patients and felt like 'real physicians'. However, their focus on medical problem solving drew attention away from improving their communication skills. Responsibility for real patients triggered students' identity development. This identity formation guided the development of an own consultation style, a process that was hampered by conflicting demands of role models.

Conclusion: Practicing complete consultations results in the dilemma of prioritizing medical problem solving above attention for patient communication. Integrated consultation training advances this dilemma to the pre-clerkship period. During clerkships this dilemma is heightened because real patients trigger empathy and responsibility, which invites students to define their role as doctor.

Practice Implications: When training integrated consultations, educators should pay attention to students' learning priorities and support the development of students' professional identity.

Is Our Students Learning - QuestionMark: Extending E-Assessment Systems for Adapative Marking and Feedback

Our key contribution is a flexible, automated marking system that adds desirable functionality to existing E-Assessment systems. In our approach, any given E-Assessment system is relegated to a data-collection mechanism, whereas marking and the generation and distribution of personalised per-student feedback is handled separately by our own system. This allows content-rich Microsoft Word feedback documents to be generated and distributed to every student simultaneously according to a per-assessment schedule.

The feedback is adaptive in that it corresponds to the answers given by the student and provides guidance on where they may have gone wrong. It is not limited to simple multiple choice which are the most prescriptive question type offered by most E-Assessment Systems and as such most straightforward to mark consistently and provide individual per-alternative feedback strings. It is also better equipped to handle the use of mathematical symbols and images within the feedback documents which is more flexible than existing E-Assessment systems, which can only handle simple text strings.

As well as MCQs the system reliably and robustly handles Multiple Response, Text Matching and Numeric style questions in a more flexible manner than Questionmark: Perception and other E-Assessment Systems. It can also reliably handle multi-part questions where the response to an earlier question influences the answer to a later one and can adjust both scoring and feedback appropriately.

New question formats can be added at any time provided a corresponding marking method conforming to certain templates can also be programmed. Indeed, any question type for which a programmatic method of marking can be devised may be supported by our system. Furthermore, since the student’s response to each is question is marked programmatically, our system can be set to allow for minor deviations from the correct answer, and if appropriate award partial marks.