南南学习交流的优缺点:对专家观点的定性分析。

Gates Open Research Pub Date : 2024-03-27 eCollection Date: 2023-01-01 DOI:10.12688/gatesopenres.14699.2
Isotta Triulzi, Rita Kabra, Komal Preet Allagh, James Kiarie
{"title":"南南学习交流的优缺点:对专家观点的定性分析。","authors":"Isotta Triulzi, Rita Kabra, Komal Preet Allagh, James Kiarie","doi":"10.12688/gatesopenres.14699.2","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>South-South learning exchange (SSLE) refers to an interactive learning process where peers exchange knowledge and experience to work towards a beneficial change. Despite organizations having recently increased the opportunity to run SSLEs, the SSLE support mechanisms and processes are not well documented in the scientific literature. This study explored experts' perspectives on SSLEs, strengths, weaknesses and mechanisms leading to sustainable outcomes.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>We conducted a qualitative study using semi-structured interviews on experiences of participants and organizers of SSLEs. Data were collected between 1st September 2021 to 26th November 2021. All data were digitally recorded, transcribed verbatim, and analysed. In the analysis, we adopted an inductive approach derived from thematic analysis.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Sixteen experts, who have participated in or facilitated one or more SSLE, were interviewed. The experts' accounts demonstrated an appreciation of participants' empowerment, positive peer-to-peer \"mind change\" and convincing and powerful hands-on learning of this approach as strengths in the implementation of the SSLE. Being resource heavy, participant and donor reluctance and absence of a validated methodology emerged as main weaknesses of the South-South learning approach, which could impair the effectiveness of this scheme.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>The strengths of SSLEs are anchored in the theories of experiential and social learning, highlighting SSLE's potential to create an environment that enhances knowledge exchange. the study highlights the challenges SSLE initiatives face. In particular, these include limited commitment and funds, limited evidence of impact, disparate approaches, and the absence of standardized guidelines and evaluation practices.</p>","PeriodicalId":12593,"journal":{"name":"Gates Open Research","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-03-27","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11259588/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Strengths and weaknesses of the South-South Learning Exchange: a qualitative analysis of experts' perspectives.\",\"authors\":\"Isotta Triulzi, Rita Kabra, Komal Preet Allagh, James Kiarie\",\"doi\":\"10.12688/gatesopenres.14699.2\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Background: </strong>South-South learning exchange (SSLE) refers to an interactive learning process where peers exchange knowledge and experience to work towards a beneficial change. Despite organizations having recently increased the opportunity to run SSLEs, the SSLE support mechanisms and processes are not well documented in the scientific literature. This study explored experts' perspectives on SSLEs, strengths, weaknesses and mechanisms leading to sustainable outcomes.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>We conducted a qualitative study using semi-structured interviews on experiences of participants and organizers of SSLEs. Data were collected between 1st September 2021 to 26th November 2021. All data were digitally recorded, transcribed verbatim, and analysed. In the analysis, we adopted an inductive approach derived from thematic analysis.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Sixteen experts, who have participated in or facilitated one or more SSLE, were interviewed. The experts' accounts demonstrated an appreciation of participants' empowerment, positive peer-to-peer \\\"mind change\\\" and convincing and powerful hands-on learning of this approach as strengths in the implementation of the SSLE. Being resource heavy, participant and donor reluctance and absence of a validated methodology emerged as main weaknesses of the South-South learning approach, which could impair the effectiveness of this scheme.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>The strengths of SSLEs are anchored in the theories of experiential and social learning, highlighting SSLE's potential to create an environment that enhances knowledge exchange. the study highlights the challenges SSLE initiatives face. In particular, these include limited commitment and funds, limited evidence of impact, disparate approaches, and the absence of standardized guidelines and evaluation practices.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":12593,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Gates Open Research\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-03-27\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11259588/pdf/\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Gates Open Research\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.12688/gatesopenres.14699.2\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"2023/1/1 0:00:00\",\"PubModel\":\"eCollection\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Gates Open Research","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.12688/gatesopenres.14699.2","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2023/1/1 0:00:00","PubModel":"eCollection","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

背景:南南学习交流(SSLE)指的是一种互动学习过程,在这一过程中,同伴们交流知识和经验,努力实现有益的改变。尽管各组织最近增加了开展南南学习交流的机会,但科学文献中对南南学习交流的支持机制和过程却没有很好的记载。本研究探讨了专家们对 SSLE 的看法、优势、劣势以及可持续成果的实现机制:我们采用半结构化访谈的方式,对 SSLE 的参与者和组织者的经验进行了定性研究。数据收集时间为 2021 年 9 月 1 日至 2021 年 11 月 26 日。所有数据都进行了数字录音、逐字记录和分析。在分析过程中,我们采用了主题分析法中的归纳法:16 位专家接受了访谈,他们参与或推动了一次或多次 SSLE。专家们的叙述表明,在 SSLE 的实施过程中,参与者的赋权、同伴间积极的 "思想转变 "以及令人信服和有力的实践学习是其优势所在。南南学习方法的主要缺点是资源繁重、参与者和捐助者不情愿以及缺乏经过验证的方 法,这可能会损害该计划的有效性:结论:南南学习方法的优势在于经验学习和社会学习理论,突出了南南学习方法在创造 一个促进知识交流的环境方面的潜力。特别是,这些挑战包括承诺和资金有限、影响证据有限、方法各异以及缺乏标准化准则和评估实践。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
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
Strengths and weaknesses of the South-South Learning Exchange: a qualitative analysis of experts' perspectives.

Background: South-South learning exchange (SSLE) refers to an interactive learning process where peers exchange knowledge and experience to work towards a beneficial change. Despite organizations having recently increased the opportunity to run SSLEs, the SSLE support mechanisms and processes are not well documented in the scientific literature. This study explored experts' perspectives on SSLEs, strengths, weaknesses and mechanisms leading to sustainable outcomes.

Methods: We conducted a qualitative study using semi-structured interviews on experiences of participants and organizers of SSLEs. Data were collected between 1st September 2021 to 26th November 2021. All data were digitally recorded, transcribed verbatim, and analysed. In the analysis, we adopted an inductive approach derived from thematic analysis.

Results: Sixteen experts, who have participated in or facilitated one or more SSLE, were interviewed. The experts' accounts demonstrated an appreciation of participants' empowerment, positive peer-to-peer "mind change" and convincing and powerful hands-on learning of this approach as strengths in the implementation of the SSLE. Being resource heavy, participant and donor reluctance and absence of a validated methodology emerged as main weaknesses of the South-South learning approach, which could impair the effectiveness of this scheme.

Conclusions: The strengths of SSLEs are anchored in the theories of experiential and social learning, highlighting SSLE's potential to create an environment that enhances knowledge exchange. the study highlights the challenges SSLE initiatives face. In particular, these include limited commitment and funds, limited evidence of impact, disparate approaches, and the absence of standardized guidelines and evaluation practices.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Gates Open Research
Gates Open Research Immunology and Microbiology-Immunology and Microbiology (miscellaneous)
CiteScore
3.60
自引率
0.00%
发文量
90
期刊最新文献
Knowledge and uptake of contraceptive and other sexual reproductive health services among in-school adolescents in three South African townships: Baseline findings from the Girls Achieve Power (GAP Year) Trial. Vaccine decision-making among pregnant women: a protocol for a cross-sectional mixed-method study in Brazil, Ghana, Kenya and Pakistan. Simulated data for census-scale entity resolution research without privacy restrictions: a large-scale dataset generated by individual-based modeling. Stories of women's marriage and fertility experiences: Qualitative research on urban and rural cases in Bali, Indonesia. Health care-seeking behavior for childhood illnesses in western Kenya: Qualitative findings from the Child Health and Mortality Prevention Surveillance (CHAMPS) Study.
×
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