A pedagogic evaluation comparing face to face and online formats of a multi-professional offender personality disorder (OPD) higher education training programme

IF 0.6 Q4 CRIMINOLOGY & PENOLOGY Journal of Forensic Practice Pub Date : 2023-09-27 DOI:10.1108/jfp-02-2023-0004
Gary Lamph, Alison Elliott, Sue Wheatcroft, Gillian Rayner, Kathryn Gardner, Michael Haslam, Emma Jones, Mick McKeown, Jane Gibbon, Nicola Graham-Kevan, Karen Wright
{"title":"A pedagogic evaluation comparing face to face and online formats of a multi-professional offender personality disorder (OPD) higher education training programme","authors":"Gary Lamph, Alison Elliott, Sue Wheatcroft, Gillian Rayner, Kathryn Gardner, Michael Haslam, Emma Jones, Mick McKeown, Jane Gibbon, Nicola Graham-Kevan, Karen Wright","doi":"10.1108/jfp-02-2023-0004","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Purpose The aim of this paper is to provide an overview of a novel offender personality disorder (OPD) higher education programme and the research evaluation results collected over a three-year period. Data from Phase 1 was collected from a face-to-face mode of delivery, and Phase 2 data collected from the same programme was from an online mode of delivery because of the COVID-19 pandemic. Design/methodology/approach In Phase 1, three modules were developed and delivered in a fully face-to-face format before the pandemic in 2019–2020 ( n = 52 student participants). In 2020–2021 ( n = 66 student participants), training was adapted into a fully online mode of delivery in Phase 2. This mixed-methods study evaluated participant confidence and compassion. Pre-, post- and six-month follow-up questionnaires were completed. Qualitative interviews were conducted across both phases to gain in-depth feedback on this programme (Phase 1: N = 7 students, Phase 2: N = 2 students, N = 5 leaders). Data from Phase 1 (face-to-face) and Phase 2 (online) are synthesised for comparison. Findings In Phase 1 ( N = 52), confidence in working with people with personality disorder or associated difficulties improved significantly, while compassion did not change. In Phase 2 ( N = 66), these results were replicated, with statistically significant improvements in confidence reported. Compassion, however, was reduced in Phase 2 at the six-month follow-up. Results have been integrated and have assisted in shaping the future of modules to meet the learning needs of students. Research limitations/implications Further research into the impact of different modes of delivery is important for the future of education in a post-pandemic digitalised society. Comparisons of blended learning approaches were not covered but would be beneficial to explore and evaluate in the future. Practical implications This comparison provided informed learning for consideration in the development of non-related educational programmes and, hence, was of use to other educational providers. Originality/value This paper provides a comparison of a student-evaluated training programme, thus providing insights into the impact of delivering a relational-focused training programme in both face-to-face and online distance learning delivery modes. From this pedagogic research evaluation, the authors were able to derive unique insights into the outcomes of this programme.","PeriodicalId":44049,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Forensic Practice","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.6000,"publicationDate":"2023-09-27","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Forensic Practice","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1108/jfp-02-2023-0004","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"CRIMINOLOGY & PENOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Purpose The aim of this paper is to provide an overview of a novel offender personality disorder (OPD) higher education programme and the research evaluation results collected over a three-year period. Data from Phase 1 was collected from a face-to-face mode of delivery, and Phase 2 data collected from the same programme was from an online mode of delivery because of the COVID-19 pandemic. Design/methodology/approach In Phase 1, three modules were developed and delivered in a fully face-to-face format before the pandemic in 2019–2020 ( n = 52 student participants). In 2020–2021 ( n = 66 student participants), training was adapted into a fully online mode of delivery in Phase 2. This mixed-methods study evaluated participant confidence and compassion. Pre-, post- and six-month follow-up questionnaires were completed. Qualitative interviews were conducted across both phases to gain in-depth feedback on this programme (Phase 1: N = 7 students, Phase 2: N = 2 students, N = 5 leaders). Data from Phase 1 (face-to-face) and Phase 2 (online) are synthesised for comparison. Findings In Phase 1 ( N = 52), confidence in working with people with personality disorder or associated difficulties improved significantly, while compassion did not change. In Phase 2 ( N = 66), these results were replicated, with statistically significant improvements in confidence reported. Compassion, however, was reduced in Phase 2 at the six-month follow-up. Results have been integrated and have assisted in shaping the future of modules to meet the learning needs of students. Research limitations/implications Further research into the impact of different modes of delivery is important for the future of education in a post-pandemic digitalised society. Comparisons of blended learning approaches were not covered but would be beneficial to explore and evaluate in the future. Practical implications This comparison provided informed learning for consideration in the development of non-related educational programmes and, hence, was of use to other educational providers. Originality/value This paper provides a comparison of a student-evaluated training programme, thus providing insights into the impact of delivering a relational-focused training programme in both face-to-face and online distance learning delivery modes. From this pedagogic research evaluation, the authors were able to derive unique insights into the outcomes of this programme.
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
一个多专业罪犯人格障碍(OPD)高等教育培训项目面对面与在线教学模式的比较研究
摘要目的对我国新型罪犯人格障碍高等教育项目进行综述,并对三年来的研究评价结果进行综述。由于2019冠状病毒病(COVID-19)大流行,第一阶段的数据采用面对面交付方式收集,同一规划的第二阶段数据采用在线交付方式收集。设计/方法/方法第一阶段,在2019-2020年大流行之前,以完全面对面的形式开发和交付了三个模块(n = 52名学生参与者)。在2020-2021年(n = 66名学生参与者),培训在第二阶段被调整为完全在线的交付模式。这项混合方法的研究评估了参与者的信心和同情心。研究人员完成了六个月前、六个月后和六个月后的随访问卷。在这两个阶段进行了定性访谈,以获得对该计划的深入反馈(第一阶段:N = 7名学生,第二阶段:N = 2名学生,N = 5名领导者)。综合第一阶段(面对面)和第二阶段(在线)的数据进行比较。在第一阶段(N = 52),与患有人格障碍或相关困难的人一起工作的信心显著提高,而同情心没有改变。在第2期(N = 66),这些结果被重复,有统计学意义的信心改善。然而,在6个月的随访中,第二阶段的同情心有所减少。结果已被整合,并有助于塑造模块的未来,以满足学生的学习需求。研究局限/影响进一步研究不同教学模式的影响对大流行后数字化社会的教育未来非常重要。混合学习方法的比较没有被涵盖,但将有利于未来的探索和评估。这种比较为制定不相关的教育方案提供了参考,因此对其他教育提供者也有帮助。本文提供了一个学生评估培训计划的比较,从而提供了在面对面和在线远程学习交付模式下提供以关系为中心的培训计划的影响的见解。从这一教学研究评估中,作者能够对该计划的成果得出独特的见解。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
Journal of Forensic Practice
Journal of Forensic Practice CRIMINOLOGY & PENOLOGY-
CiteScore
1.10
自引率
0.00%
发文量
30
期刊最新文献
Two studies evaluating the Stoicism programme at a foreign national prison A preliminary exploration of using the power threat meaning framework with individuals currently serving IPP sentences in custody Enough is enough: treatment dropout predictors of adolescents with harmful sexual behaviors in a New Zealand community sample Are indeterminate sentenced prisoners prepared for open prison? Practical implications/applications of an exploratory study in an English open prison Exploring the impact of custodial parkrun in an English women’s prison: HMPPS psychologists and partners delivering a best practice evaluation
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1