Lessons Learned From Co-Designing Educational Programs for Student and Practicing Healthcare Professionals in Nursing Homes: A Participatory Qualitative Study

I. Muller-Schoof, Marjolein E. A. Verbiest, M. Snoeren, K. Luijkx
{"title":"Lessons Learned From Co-Designing Educational Programs for Student and Practicing Healthcare Professionals in Nursing Homes: A Participatory Qualitative Study","authors":"I. Muller-Schoof, Marjolein E. A. Verbiest, M. Snoeren, K. Luijkx","doi":"10.35844/001c.57529","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Our aim was to examine the co-design process of two educational programs based on scientific research, to investigate which factors influenced the co-design processes and which lessons we learned. Participatory qualitative research on multiple cases was conducted with representatives of the university, healthcare education (university of applied science), secondary vocational education and training and nursing home care practice. Data were analyzed using a critical creative hermeneutic analysis. Three themes influenced the co-design processes: (1) facilitation of the processes, (2) team members’ attributes and (3) diverse interests and structures. Participants’ diversity slowed down and deepened the collaboration. The positive climate and personal attributes enabled the processes. The complexity of the co-design processes, conflicting interests and making use of the full potential of the diversity were challenging aspects. These challenges can be overcome by organizing and facilitating co-design processes skillfully.","PeriodicalId":73887,"journal":{"name":"Journal of participatory research methods","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2023-02-02","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"3","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of participatory research methods","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.35844/001c.57529","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 3

Abstract

Our aim was to examine the co-design process of two educational programs based on scientific research, to investigate which factors influenced the co-design processes and which lessons we learned. Participatory qualitative research on multiple cases was conducted with representatives of the university, healthcare education (university of applied science), secondary vocational education and training and nursing home care practice. Data were analyzed using a critical creative hermeneutic analysis. Three themes influenced the co-design processes: (1) facilitation of the processes, (2) team members’ attributes and (3) diverse interests and structures. Participants’ diversity slowed down and deepened the collaboration. The positive climate and personal attributes enabled the processes. The complexity of the co-design processes, conflicting interests and making use of the full potential of the diversity were challenging aspects. These challenges can be overcome by organizing and facilitating co-design processes skillfully.
共同设计护理之家学生与执业医护人员教育计划的经验教训:一项参与性质的研究
我们的目的是在科学研究的基础上检查两个教育项目的协同设计过程,调查哪些因素影响了协同设计过程,以及我们吸取了哪些教训。以大学、卫生保健教育(应用科学大学)、中等职业教育培训和养老院护理实践的代表进行多例参与性质的研究。数据分析使用批判性创造性解释学分析。三个主题影响协同设计过程:(1)过程的便利性;(2)团队成员的属性;(3)不同的兴趣和结构。参与者的多样性减缓了合作,加深了合作。积极的氛围和个人属性使这一过程成为可能。共同设计过程的复杂性、利益冲突和充分利用多样性的潜力都是具有挑战性的方面。这些挑战可以通过巧妙地组织和促进协同设计过程来克服。
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 求助全文
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
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
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
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 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信