4.1 Article

The Leicester Model of Interprofessional Education: Developing, delivering and learning from student voices for 10 years

期刊

JOURNAL OF INTERPROFESSIONAL CARE
卷 23, 期 6, 页码 557-573

出版社

TAYLOR & FRANCIS INC
DOI: 10.3109/13561820903051451

关键词

Interprofessional practice-based education; patient-centred model of learning; evaluation; disadvantage; community

向作者/读者索取更多资源

There are few sustained interprofessional learning opportunities in practice which engage the whole cohort of health and social care students across a region, the Leicester Model of Interprofessional Education is such an example. Since 1995 the Leicester Model has evolved to enable health and social care students to learn about the complexities of delivering multi-agency care in a range of health and social care settings. The learning environment is situated at the front line of service delivery. The education model takes students through a cycle of learning and applies a problem-solving, experiential learning approach which promotes deep learning. Follow-up data indicates that deep learning is achieved. This paper describes the original setting and presents the evaluation outcomes of the Leicester Model's Health in the Community'' course, which is delivered in city-centre communities, where inequalities in health are greatest. It traces a ten-year trajectory of interprofessional student group evaluations which helped shape this learning experience. Year-on-year positive student outcomes indicate the potential of the model to motivate and prepare future professionals for team working. Its sustainability has been achieved through ensuring the integration of education research in the development process, engagement of practitioners who value the student contributions to team working, placing patients central to the learning experience and establishing working partnerships between Higher Education Institutions, local health and social care organizations and the voluntary sector.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.1
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据