Malou Stoffels, Louti A Broeksma, Margot Barry, Stephanie M E van der Burgt, Hester E M Daelmans, Saskia M Peerdeman, Rashmi A Kusurkar
{"title":"Bridging School and Practice? Barriers to the Integration of 'Boundary Objects' for Learning and Assessment in Clinical Nursing Education.","authors":"Malou Stoffels, Louti A Broeksma, Margot Barry, Stephanie M E van der Burgt, Hester E M Daelmans, Saskia M Peerdeman, Rashmi A Kusurkar","doi":"10.5334/pme.1103","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Introduction: </strong>In clinical health professions education, portfolios, assignments and assessment standards are used to enhance learning. When these tools fulfill a bridging function between school and practice, they can be considered 'boundary objects'. In the clinical setting, these tools may be experienced as time-consuming and lacking value. This study aimed to investigate the barriers to the integration of boundary objects for learning and assessment from a Cultural-Historical Activity Theory (CHAT) perspective in clinical nursing education.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>Nineteen interviews and five observations were conducted with team leads, clinical educators, supervisors, students, and teachers to obtain insight into intentions and use of boundary objects for learning and assessment. Boundary objects (assessment standards, assignments, feedback/reflection/patient care/development plan templates) were collected. The data collection and thematic analysis were guided by CHAT.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Barriers to the integration of boundary objects included: a) conflicting requirements in clinical competency monitoring and assessment, b) different application of analytical skills, and c) incomplete integration of boundary objects for self-regulated learning into supervision practice. These barriers were amplified by the simultaneous use of boundary objects for learning and assessment. Underlying contradictions included different objectives between school and practice, and tensions between the distribution of labor in the clinical setting and school's rules.</p><p><strong>Discussion: </strong>School and practice have both convergent and divergent priorities around students' clinical learning. Boundary objects can promote continuity in learning and increase students' understanding of clinical practice. However, effective integration requires for flexible rules that allow for collaborative learning around patient care.</p>","PeriodicalId":48532,"journal":{"name":"Perspectives on Medical Education","volume":"13 1","pages":"392-405"},"PeriodicalIF":4.8000,"publicationDate":"2024-07-08","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11243767/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Perspectives on Medical Education","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.5334/pme.1103","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2024/1/1 0:00:00","PubModel":"eCollection","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"EDUCATION, SCIENTIFIC DISCIPLINES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
Introduction: In clinical health professions education, portfolios, assignments and assessment standards are used to enhance learning. When these tools fulfill a bridging function between school and practice, they can be considered 'boundary objects'. In the clinical setting, these tools may be experienced as time-consuming and lacking value. This study aimed to investigate the barriers to the integration of boundary objects for learning and assessment from a Cultural-Historical Activity Theory (CHAT) perspective in clinical nursing education.
Methods: Nineteen interviews and five observations were conducted with team leads, clinical educators, supervisors, students, and teachers to obtain insight into intentions and use of boundary objects for learning and assessment. Boundary objects (assessment standards, assignments, feedback/reflection/patient care/development plan templates) were collected. The data collection and thematic analysis were guided by CHAT.
Results: Barriers to the integration of boundary objects included: a) conflicting requirements in clinical competency monitoring and assessment, b) different application of analytical skills, and c) incomplete integration of boundary objects for self-regulated learning into supervision practice. These barriers were amplified by the simultaneous use of boundary objects for learning and assessment. Underlying contradictions included different objectives between school and practice, and tensions between the distribution of labor in the clinical setting and school's rules.
Discussion: School and practice have both convergent and divergent priorities around students' clinical learning. Boundary objects can promote continuity in learning and increase students' understanding of clinical practice. However, effective integration requires for flexible rules that allow for collaborative learning around patient care.
期刊介绍：
Perspectives on Medical Education mission is support and enrich collaborative scholarship between education researchers and clinical educators, and to advance new knowledge regarding clinical education practices.
Official journal of the The Netherlands Association of Medical Education (NVMO).
Perspectives on Medical Education is a non-profit Open Access journal with no charges for authors to submit or publish an article, and the full text of all articles is freely available immediately upon publication, thanks to the sponsorship of The Netherlands Association for Medical Education.
Perspectives on Medical Education is highly visible thanks to its unrestricted online access policy.
Perspectives on Medical Education positions itself at the dynamic intersection of educational research and clinical education. While other journals in the health professional education domain orient predominantly to education researchers or to clinical educators, Perspectives positions itself at the collaborative interface between these perspectives. This unique positioning reflects the journal’s mission to support and enrich collaborative scholarship between education researchers and clinical educators, and to advance new knowledge regarding clinical education practices. Reflecting this mission, the journal both welcomes original research papers arising from scholarly collaborations among clinicians, teachers and researchers and papers providing resources to develop the community’s ability to conduct such collaborative research. The journal’s audience includes researchers and practitioners: researchers who wish to explore challenging questions of health professions education and clinical teachers who wish to both advance their practice and envision for themselves a collaborative role in scholarly educational innovation. This audience of researchers, clinicians and educators is both international and interdisciplinary.
The journal has a long history. In 1982, the journal was founded by the Dutch Association for Medical Education, as a Dutch language journal (Netherlands Journal of Medical Education). As a Dutch journal it fuelled educational research and innovation in the Netherlands. It is one of the factors for the Dutch success in medical education. In 2012, it widened its scope, transforming into an international English language journal. The journal swiftly became international in all aspects: the readers, authors, reviewers and editorial board members.
The editorial board members represent the different parental disciplines in the field of medical education, e.g. clinicians, social scientists, biomedical scientists, statisticians and linguists. Several of them are leading scholars. Three of the editors are in the top ten of most cited authors in the medical education field. Two editors were awarded the Karolinska Institute Prize for Research. Presently, Erik Driessen leads the journal as Editor in Chief.
Perspectives on Medical Education is highly visible thanks to its unrestricted online access policy. It is sponsored by theThe Netherlands Association of Medical Education and offers free manuscript submission.
Perspectives on Medical Education positions itself at the dynamic intersection of educational research and clinical education. While other journals in the health professional education domain orient predominantly to education researchers or to clinical educators, Perspectives positions itself at the collaborative interface between these perspectives. This unique positioning reflects the journal’s mission to support and enrich collaborative scholarship between education researchers and clinical educators, and to advance new knowledge regarding clinical education practices. Reflecting this mission, the journal both welcomes original research papers arising from scholarly collaborations among clinicians, teachers and researchers and papers providing resources to develop the community’s ability to conduct such collaborative research. The journal’s audience includes researchers and practitioners: researchers who wish to explore challenging questions of health professions education and clinical teachers who wish to both advance their practice and envision for themselves a collaborative role in scholarly educational innovation. This audience of researchers, clinicians and educators is both international and interdisciplinary.
The journal has a long history. In 1982, the journal was founded by the Dutch Association for Medical Education, as a Dutch language journal (Netherlands Journal of Medical Education). As a Dutch journal it fuelled educational research and innovation in the Netherlands. It is one of the factors for the Dutch success in medical education. In 2012, it widened its scope, transforming into an international English language journal. The journal swiftly became international in all aspects: the readers, authors, reviewers and editorial board members.
The editorial board members represent the different parental disciplines in the field of medical education, e.g. clinicians, social scientists, biomedical scientists, statisticians and linguists. Several of them are leading scholars. Three of the editors are in the top ten of most cited authors in the medical education field. Two editors were awarded the Karolinska Institute Prize for Research. Presently, Erik Driessen leads the journal as Editor in Chief.
Perspectives on Medical Education is highly visible thanks to its unrestricted online access policy. It is sponsored by theThe Netherlands Association of Medical Education and offers free manuscript submission.
京公网安备 11010802042870号
京ICP备2023020795号-1
分享
求助内容：
应助结果提醒方式：
扫码关注我们
