Innovation
We developed a core theory module in year 2 of the undergraduate nursing programme regarding A Holistic Approach to Long Term Conditions (HALTC). This was a new module developed as part of the newly validated Nursing Programme. As a new core module it was important it was evaluated.
Evaluation was timetabled at strategic points throughout the module:
• Week 4: An introductory open question asking “How are you finding the module” was asked using Text wall
• Week 8: Text wall was used to illicit any issues with the module
• Week 12: A final module evaluation (based on the university module evaluation form) was undertaken using Turning point. Paper based comment forms were also given to gain qualitative data.
Technology was used to optimise student engagement. Following each session student comments were collated and summarised. A forum was set up on the VLE platform where the summary was posted together with module team responses and a rationale as appropriate.
What prompted innovation?
- As a new programme a new module evaluation was deemed crucial
- Evaluation is important for ongoing quality
- Student evaluation informed future module development
What makes innovation different?
- The use of technology to gather student views, such as Text wall, Turning point and a VLE platform.
- Strategic timing of attaining student feedback, week, 4, 8 and 12, because normally evaluation is attained at the end of the module occurrence.
- A variety of methods used to collate student views including technology, (see above) and qualitative paper based questionnaires.
- Prompt feedback on student questions, rationales for decisions is provided throughout the module.
Changes in practice
- Students feel confident their voice is heard by viewing a summary of issues raised together with answers on the VLE.
- Module leaders can respond to issues raised throughout the module as evaluation is an on-going process and not left until the end of the module.
- Student comment: Although the students were asked to evaluate HALTC module many comments related to how confusing it was with all 2nd year theory modules.
- Module team Action: On investigation it was clear there was no standard format for timetables which led to some confusion. All 2nd year module leaders agreed to use the same format and to colour code timetables to help with this. Some students with dyslexia commented on how helpful this was.
- This method encouraged and enabled student engagement. Usually evaluation is undertaken at the end of the module occurrence and student response is low.
- The students can see the value in feedback/evaluation.
- Student comment: Templates were used in tutorials to help build towards the final assignment. A group activity involved collating all the information to provide a master template which was uploaded on the VLE. This caused some conflict for some students as not all students participated and “took others work”
- Module team Action: The team decided to keep the templates as they were well evaluated in regards to building towards the final assignment however they were used for discussion in class and kept for individual use only. The team discussed an alternative group activity. It was agreed the groups would provide a master template. At this stage of the programme an understanding of evidenced based literature and referencing technique was an issue therefore the Master template was changed to provide 2 key references. Lecturers gave feedback on the referencing technique and the quality of the sources etc. The team have seen a marked difference in their referencing techniques.
Impact
- Student evaluations and positive comments from the external examiner.
- We had 200 out of 380 (53%) final student evaluations and comments received compared to 15-20% when online only evaluations used.
Dissemination
This new approach was presented at the School of Nursing Action Day to share good practice and we are planning to showcase this through the Edinburgh Napier University Learning, Teaching and Assessment resource bank.