1 / 58

EDD/581 Action Research Proposal Rachel Keller EDD 581 February 17, 2014 Susan Gertel

EDD/581 Action Research Proposal Rachel Keller EDD 581 February 17, 2014 Susan Gertel. Problem Statement. The problem is the sequence of education in medical simulation. Upon narrowing of the problem, an intervention will be implemented. Problem Description.

lilia
Download Presentation

EDD/581 Action Research Proposal Rachel Keller EDD 581 February 17, 2014 Susan Gertel

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. EDD/581 Action Research ProposalRachel KellerEDD 581February 17, 2014Susan Gertel Action Research Proposal

  2. Problem Statement • The problem is the sequence of education in medical simulation. Upon narrowing of the problem, an intervention will be implemented. Action Research Proposal

  3. Problem Description • The problem is inconsistent sequence of education. • Setting problems include • Acceptability to standardize • Student’s knowledge Action Research Proposal

  4. WRITER’S ROLE • Education Specialist • Train multi-discipline medical personal • With high fidelity simulation Action Research Proposal

  5. Purpose of the Project • The purpose of this project is to standardize the sequence of education in medical simulation. Action Research Proposal (Microsoft, 2010)

  6. Problem Documentation • Problem is inconsistent sequence of education • Pre Simulation versus Post Simulation • Influence learners • Perspective • Facilitator • Conformability • Experience Action Research Proposal

  7. Survey Action Research Proposal

  8. Survey Action Research Proposal

  9. Literature Review • Simulation in medical education • More effective • Structure is key component • Simulation before education • Better performance • Increase knowledge Action Research Proposal (Microsoft, 2010)

  10. LITERATURE REVIEW • Education before simulation • Improves learning • Simulation before education • Negative attitude Action Research Proposal (Microsoft, 2010)

  11. Literature Review Action Research Proposal

  12. Literature Review Action Research Proposal

  13. Literature Review Action Research Proposal

  14. Action Goal • The goal of the intervention is to improve knowledge of participants in implementing a standardization in the sequence of education in medical simulation. A three-prong intervention will be implemented to meet the goal, which includes standardizing the sequence of education in medical simulation, instructor training, and weekly collaboration time supported by the administration. Action Research Proposal (Microsoft, 2010)

  15. Selected Solutions • Standardizing the sequence of education • Instructor training • Weekly collaboration Action Research Proposal

  16. Calendar Plan • Study Duration • March 3, 2014 – May 2, 2014 • Instructors • Educators at the simulation center • Participants • Nurses <1 year Action Research Proposal

  17. Week 1: March 3-7, 2014 Action Research Proposal

  18. Instructor Training Action Research Proposal

  19. Instructor Training Agenda Action Research Proposal

  20. Student Agenda Action Research Proposal

  21. Student Agenda Action Research Proposal

  22. Week 2: March 10-14, 2014 Action Research Proposal

  23. Week 3: March 17-21, 2014 Action Research Proposal

  24. Week 4: March 24-28, 2014 • Study Group A • Weekly collaboration • Friday, March 28 Action Research Proposal

  25. Week 5: March 31-April 4, 2014 • Study Group B • Weekly collaboration • Friday, April 4 • Evaluate Results Action Research Proposal

  26. Week 6: April 7-11, 2014 • Study Group A • Weekly collaboration • Friday, April 11 Action Research Proposal

  27. Week 7: April 14-18, 2014 • Study Group B • Weekly collaboration • Friday, April 18 • Evaluate Results Action Research Proposal

  28. Week 8: April 21-25, 2014 • Study Group A • Weekly collaboration • Friday, April 25 Action Research Proposal

  29. Week 9: April 28-May 2, 2014 • Study Group B • Weekly collaboration • Friday, May 2 • Evaluate Results Action Research Proposal

  30. Expected Outcomes Standardization of course sequence is complete • The outcomes: • 100% of courses are sequenced • 90% of instructor’s trained in course sequence • 100% of staff have time established for weekly collaboration Action Research Proposal

  31. Measurement of Outcomes The outcomes: • Knowledge Acquisition • Learners tests • Acceptability of Sequence • Learners surveys • Educators journal entries Action Research Proposal (Microsoft, 2010)

  32. Analysis of Results • Implemented plan has impacted the problem • Quantitative • Learner’s Test • Qualitative • Learner’s Survey • Educator’s Journal Entries Action Research Proposal

  33. Analysis of Results • Present findings to leadership • Written report • Presentation Action Research Proposal

  34. Questions Action Research Proposal (Microsoft, 2010)

  35. References • Cendan, J. and Johnson, T. (2011). Enhancing Learning through Optimal Sequencing of Web-Based and Manikin Simulators to Teach Shock Physiology in the Medical Curriculum. Advances in Physiology Education, 35(4), 402-407. • Ciceroa, M., Auerbacha, M., Zigmonta, J., Rieraa, A., Chinga, K., and Baum, C. (2012). Simulation training with structured debriefing improves residents' pediatric disaster triage performance. Prehospital Disaster Medicine, 27(3), 239-244. • Lawrence D. (2007). The ethics of educational research. Journal Of Manipulative & Physiological Therapeutics, 30(4), 326-330. • Lee, J. (1999). Effectiveness of computer-based instructional simulation: A meta analysis. International Journal of Instructional Media, 26(1), 71-85. • Hendricks, C. (2009). Improving schools through action research: A comprehensive guide for educators (2nd ed.). Upper Saddle River, NJ: Pearson Action Research Proposal

  36. REFERENCES CONTINUED • Issenber, B., & McGaghie, E. (2005). Features and uses of high-fidelity medical simulations that lead to effective learning. Medical Teacher, 27(1), 10-28. • McGaghie, W., Issenber, B., Cohen, E., Barsuk, J., Wayne, D. (2011). Does simulation-based medical education with deliberate practice yield better results than traditional clinical education? A Meta-analytic comparative review of the evidence. Academic Medicine, 86(6), 706–711. • Microsoft, (2010). Image “All graphics”. • Stefaniak, J., & Turkelson, C. (2013). Does the sequence of instruction matter during simulation. Society for Simulation in Healthcare, 00(00), 1-6. • Zendejas, B., Cook, D., & Farley, D. (2010). Teaching first or teaching last: Does the timing matter in simulation-based surgical scenarios. Journal of Surgical Education, 67(6), 432-438. Action Research Proposal

  37. Appendix A: Education Scenarios STATUS ASTHMATICUS Action Research Proposal

  38. STATUS ASTHMATICUS ALGORITHM Action Research Proposal

  39. FBAO ARREST Action Research Proposal

  40. FBAO ALGORITHM Action Research Proposal

  41. SUPRAVENTRICULAR TACHYCARDIA Action Research Proposal

  42. SUPRAVENTRICULAR TACHYCARDIA ALGORITHM Action Research Proposal

  43. HEAT ILLNESS Action Research Proposal

  44. HEAT ILLNESS ALGORITHM Action Research Proposal

  45. Appendix B: Participant Tests and Answers Action Research ProposalTest Weeks 2 and 3 Action Research Proposal

  46. Continued Action Research ProposalTest Weeks 2 & 3 Action Research Proposal

  47. Action Research ProposalAnswers Weeks 2 & 3 ANSWERS 1.B 2.D 3.B 4.D 5.B 6.A 7.C 8.C 9.B 10.C Action Research Proposal

  48. Action Research ProposalTest Weeks 4 and 5 Action Research Proposal

  49. Continued Action Research ProposalTest Weeks 4 & 5 Action Research Proposal

  50. Action Research ProposalAnswers Weeks 4 & 5 ANSWERS 1. C 2.A 3.C 4.B 5.C 6.D 7.C 8.B 9.B 10.C Action Research Proposal

More Related