Transcript Coordinators Day - Coventry University

Coordinators Day
November 2013
Placement Team
• Teresa Rushton (Team Coordinator)
• Vicky Nolan (Module leader level 3)
• Karen Scorer (Module leader level 2)
• Michelle Kerslake (Module leader level 1)
• Kate Jackson (Contemporary Placements)
• Jenny Parlett (South central link tutor)
Update Level 3 Placements
• Level 3 placement – 23rd September
2013 – 13th December 2013
• 169 students placed & out on
placement
Update Level 2 Placements
• Level 2 placement 18th February 2013 – 26th April
2013
• 188 assessed
• 4 fails
• 6 deferrals
• Level 2 (17th February 2014 – 25th April 2014)
• Offers coming in! Thank you! Please keep them
coming...
• 175 students to be placed...100 offers to date
Update Level 2 Placements
1%
Number of Students
1% 3%
2% 1%
90-100
6%
12%
20%
80-89
70-79
60-69
50-59
25%
29%
40-49
30-39
20-29
< 20
Deferred
Update Level 1 Placements
• 180 students placed
• Range of marks achieved
DF
<
20%
20 29
30 39
40 49
50 59
60 69
70 79
80 89
90 100
5
1
1
2
7
24
52
52
28
8
Level 1 Placement Results
1%
Number of Students
1% 3%
4% 1%
4%
13%
90-100
80-89
15%
70-79
60-69
50-59
29%
29%
40-49
30-39
20-29
< 20
Deferred
Percentage of students within
each range
Summer Placements
•
•
•
•
•
•
28 student placements
Levels 1, 2 and 3
Range of marks 25% - 95%
23 students passed
4 students failed
1 student deferred
Contemporary Placements
• 32 students currently on Level 3 Contemporary
Placements
• 13 Long arm supervisors in practice (6 for the first time)
• 7 University Tutors doing long arm supervision (2 for the
first time)
• Training for mentors and long arm supervisors at the
University and some outreach too
• Range of organisations – hostels, homeless settings,
charities, mainstream schools, specialist schools,
supported accommodation, young people projects, etc
Contemporary Placements:
New initiatives
• New placements in 3 areas this year:
• 2 Local Police forces (Occupational Health) (2
students)
• 1 Mainstream school 11-18 years mixed (2
students)
• 1 specialist school 2-18 years mixed (2
students)
Placement Evaluation / Feedback
• Faculty placement evaluation
• Multi- faceted
– Local information – process, resources, support etc
– Organisational data
• Information from a wide range of students will be
able to be gathered and reported to a variety of
people
– Educators / Coordinators
– Practice facilitators
– Trust education leads
Educator Feedback
• PE evaluation sent to all educators following
level 1 placements
• 43 responses (24%)
• Some really useful feedback received
regarding the format and structure
– 1 question difficult to understand and so will be
reworded
– A further response column was requested - Don’t
know / NA
Educator Feedback
• Identified
– 7 respondents did not feel that university studies had prepared
the student for placement
– 1 respondent felt that the student had not had learning
opportunities relevant to stage of training
– 2 respondents felt that there had not been opportunities for
autonomous working
– 1 respondent did not negotiate the LA in first 2 weeks
– 4 respondents did not have access to library facilities
– 6 respondents did not have access to journals
– 2 respondents were unable to facilitate opportunities for
students to work with other health professionals
– 5 respondents were unable to facilitate opportunities for
students to work with other students
Educator Feedback
• Identified
– 1 respondent did not feel the midway visit was helpful
– 2 respondents did not feel the midway visit was timely
– 1 respondent did not feel that information from the
university was accessible
– 3 respondents were not aware of the programme content
– 8 respondents did not have access to university policies
– 3 respondents were unaware of who to contact if an issue
arose during the placement
– 15 respondents did not feel they received feedback from
the university
– 3 respondents did not feel that the university acted upon
feedback given
Educator Feedback
• I am not aware of what information is given to students prior to
placement
• I feel students require better knowledge of A&P
• I have had a number of students who did not know what clinical reasoning
was and yet this is one of the assessment criteria
• I feel more guidance should be given to the learning agreement for first
year students prior to placement
• We are all practicing therapists and have a job to do as well as being a PPE.
The assessment process and formulating the learning agreement take too
long
• No additional time / reduced workload granted when undertaking role of
PE
• 6 weeks passes very quickly
• I do feel the student handbook is difficult to follow and illogical in places
• PE & student handbooks proved to be a valid tool in terms of keeping to
placement schedules and giving guidance re expectations of student
/PE/University
Educator Feedback
• I was fortunate to get an excellent student who worked extremely
hard and made the most of the opportunities available to her
• I always feel supported by the placement team and the team I work
with, who see OT’s as part of their responsibility as well
• The placement team are contactable and are supportive and
understanding of the challenges sometimes inherent in providing
placement experiences. I feel confident that the placement team
would provide any support that I needed and they are also
respectful of my decisions
• Placement coordinator within the Trust provides local support. I feel
having a local coordinator increases the quality of the placement
experience (students have planned peer supervision sessions
throughout the placement)
• I have enjoyed the experience of having a student and required
little contact with the uni throughout the placement
Educator Feedback
• Support from visiting tutor highly valued even if I am not supporting a
struggling student but just for reassurance that I am providing the correct
learning material to the student
• I did not find the midway tutor visit helpful as there were no issues to
discuss
• Feedback from the university would have enhanced improvement and
make learning environment more conducive
• I find that communication between the university and the PPE is only good
when there is a concern
• My student appeared unprepared in regards to the placement milestones
she should be achieving
• The content of the university course in preparing students for placement is
detailed in the handbook. Whether the students are appropriately
prepared for placement in terms of communication skills is something I
have a few concerns about as communication underpins everything we
do. I am aware that communication skills are being directly addressed in
the new course content and therefore anticipate in seeing some
improvements in this area with future students on the revalidated
programme.
Level 1 Placement Evaluation Strengths
• Great support
• Excellent induction
• Greater opportunities working with 2
educators
• Placement handbook very helpful
• Constructive feedback
Level 1 Placement Evaluation Enhancements
• Greater detail required for presentation
marking guidance
• Too much detail in clinical conditions
workbook
• 2 educators – some inconsistency in feedback
• Time of issuing placement handbook
Sample of student feedback from level
1 placements
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
I had an excellent PE and also support from the other OT’s and peer learning
sessions
All staff support was first class – OT ethos was clearly evidenced
Support groups were excellent
PE was brilliant – very knowledgeable and up to date
Would have appreciated more feedback
Greater introduction to SOAP notes
Greater support for the case study
Constructive and motivational supervision helped me to develop my skills
effectively
Inconsistent supervision
Worry of the presentation stopped me focussing 100%
Challenging but learnt a lot
I was encouraged to critique and analyse my practice, using evidence base
Found the workload stressful but found strategies to manage this
Placement Connect
• Went live on the 30th September
• Specific resources which will be available include
–
–
–
–
–
CBOA tutorial
Students with additional support requirements
International placements
Contemporary placements – mentor / long arm supervisor
Handbook information including copies of assessment,
marking criteria etc
• Any other ideas???
• All faculty policies are available for download from the
generic web pages
• http://placementconnect.celecoventry.co.uk/
Workshops
• Coventry BSc Occupational Therapy Programme
Update
• Models of supervision
• Facilitating student learning within the practice
placement setting
• Occupational Therapy Models of Practice
• Supporting the failing student
• Supporting the student with addition support
requirements within the practice placement setting
• Each of the workshops last between 1.5 - 2 hours in
duration
25 Year Celebrations
• Alumni Events
– Saturday March 29th 2014
• Practice Educator Conference
– June / July 2014
ECQ
•
•
•
•
2012 – 13 cycle is underway
Self assessment documents from Trusts submitted to HEWM
University has received copies of many of these documents
Issues highlighted:
– Placement evaluation
– Placement audit
• Good practice highlighted
– Moderation of assessments
– CPD events / coordinators days
• University self assessment document returned on the 31st October
2013
• Awaiting decision to identify which programmes will be formally
reviewed and for which it will be a table top exercise
• If selected for formally review, will occur between Jan – March 2014
and HEWM will want to liaise with coordinators and educators to
triangulate information and evidence
2013 Curriculum Update
BSc (Hons) Occupational Therapy
Course Structure: Position of Modules
Full Time Programme 2013
Year
Session A
Session B
1
University Based Studies:

The Person and Occupational Performance

*Foundations in Communication and
Professionalism

Exploring Evidence to Enhance Learning
and Practice
University Based Studies:

Occupation for Health and Well
Being

Occupational Therapy Process for
Practice

*Social Determinants of Health and
Wellbeing

Foundation Studies: Professional
Skills Development
Professional
Practice Placement
1
7 weeks
2
University Based Studies:

Occupation: Reasoning, Theory and
Process

Therapeutic Skills for OT Practice

*Evidence Informed Practice and Decision
Making
Professional Practice Placement 2
10 weeks
followed by University based de-briefing
University Based
Studies:
Contexts of
Occupational
Therapy Practice
3
Professional Practice
Placement 3
12 weeks
University Based Studies:

* Enhancing Practice through Evaluation and Research

Occupational Therapy: Employability and
Entrepreneurship

*Working Together to Lead Service Improvement
University Based
Studies:
*Advancing
Practice Option
Module
Other changes
• IPLP
• Placement 1 (6 weeks)
• Mandatory training
• Permitted 2nd attempt
of placement
presentation
• Collaborative
• Placement 1 (7 weeks)
• Non credit bearing
module – Foundations
for professional practice
• Formative assessment
of the placement
presentation within
midway assessment
Collaborative Curriculum
• Aim to produce practice ready collaborative workers
• 5 academic modules
• Level 1
– Communication and Professionalism
– Social Determinants of Health
• Level 2
– Evidence informed practice and decision making
• Level 3
– Working together to lead service improvement
– Enhancing practice through evaluation and research
• Collaborative Capability Framework – knowledge and skills
in practice
Placement changes
• Inclusion of foundations for practice placement module –
mandatory but non credit bearing
• Level 1 placement length 7 weeks
• Retained presentations at each level – however weighting
amended 10% level 1, 20% level 2, 30% level 3
• Reviewed and amended marking criteria in response to
student and educator feedback
• Formative assessment for the presentations – students will
be required to submit a detailed outline of their
presentations for the midway assessment – formal
formative feedback will be included within the mid way
report / assessment
Placements by Programme
Placement
Dates
Programme
Level 3
September – December
2013
2008 (existing) programme
Level 2
February – April 2014
2008 (existing) programme
Level 1
May – July 2014
2013 (new) programme
Level 3
September – December
2014
2008 (existing) programme
Level 2
February – April 2015
2013 (new) programme
Level 1
May – July 2015
2013 (new) programme
Level 3
September – December
2015
2013 (new) programme
Questions / Comments
101cc – Foundations in
Communication and Professionalism
Module breakdown
• 1st of 5 modules focused on Collaborative
working
• Multi-professional seminar and uni-professional
seminar
• Introduction and Team Building
• Getting to know yourself and others
• Communication skills
• Becoming a professional
• Reflective strand throughout
• Assessment and portfolio
Reflective Strand
• Labyrinth
• Kawa Model
• Models of reflection
Blended Learning (online)
• Hardeep’s Story
• HOLLIE
• Moral Values
Communicate 2 U & Service User
involvement
To actively involve service users in the education of communication skills
and compassionate and caring values.
Benefits for Students :
• Ability to recognise the impact of their own communication styles on service
users.
• Development of base line skills and the confidence to adapt their
communication
• Develop the ability to critically evaluate the environments in which they
undertake clinical placement.
Benefit to service users:
• In a role that facilitates them to be the engineers of change and to inform
future Health and social care professionals of the skills and qualities they value.
• Service users will benefit from having therapists who have a greater
understanding of their communication needs and who are able to be
ambassadors for cultural change
How will it be evaluated?
• Focus group after module to evaluate the
immediate impact of service user input upon
students
• Focus group after placement to evaluate the impact
on students once they have experienced the real
life culture of health and social care
Resulting in:
Report, Journal Article and Conference dissemination