|
|
OOER Case Study (DRAFT) |
|
|
OOER Case Study (DRAFT) |
|
Case Study Title |
CBT Module – Capacity |
|
School or Department |
Medical School |
|
Institution(s) involved |
University of Cardiff |
|
Contact + Email |
Nick Webb (webbnj1@cardiff.ac.uk) Mr Christopher Smith (enquiries@medev.ac.uk) |
|
Date |
29th June 2010 |
|
Tags |
Capacity; medical capacity; assessing capacity; informed patient consent; impaired capacity; e-learning; self-directed learning |
|
Questions |
Explanation and further information |
|
1. What is the curriculum context of the resource or resource collection? Approx. 250 words |
Resource title: Medical Capacity MBBCH course Aimed at Year 4 students – but available online to students in years 1-5 The aim of this module is to facilitate learning regarding the purpose of assessing capacity, its importance in obtaining informed consent from patients and how it affects management of every patient you will treat. Self-directed learning – e-learning |
|
2. What were the aims and objectives of the resource or resource collection? Approx. 100 words |
The aim of this module is to facilitate learning regarding the purpose of assessing capacity, its importance in obtaining informed consent from patients and how it affects management of every patient you will treat. Learning outcomes:
Describe how medical treatment can be provided to patients without capacity |
|
3. How was the resource or resource collection implemented? Approx. 250 words |
HTML web pages with embedded flash. Java script – for interactive components i.e. navigation and questions Not compliant with SCORM, but could be converted easily enough; however there are no current plans to make the conversion. Links to external sites for file downloads. |
|
4. What technologies and/or e-tools were needed to deliver this? Approx. 150 words |
Most of resources’ interface was hand coded by programmers. Video content was converted to Adobe .flv format for embedded flash clips. The .flv format was chosen as it requires the flash plug-in, which was deemed to be the most likely format/plug-in combination available in web browsers at NHS Trust sites (has generally proved accessible behind NHS Firewalls). Resources are available to students through Blackboard – centrally supported by Cardiff University and the university’s IT department. Students have secure on-site/off-site access, using their campus ID to login to Blackboard. |
|
5. What guidance and/or support did you develop? |
Categorisation The categorisation guidance was followed and the resource was successfully input into the categorization toolkit.
Patient Consent The patient consent guidance was followed and indicated that the resource was suitable for upload, providing that consent from the actors featured in the embedded video clips was given. The resource featured no real patient images, audio, video or data. However a number of simulated scene were created using actors, therefore requiring non-patient consent. Three actors appeared in the resource, two of which were the original content creators – implied consent, whilst a third actor was a paid actress – thus requiring informed non-patient consent for use as a teaching tool and potential release as an OER object.
Awaiting Nick Web to confirm with Jon Bisson that proper consent was obtained from the actress. Provided this is the case the resource will meet the consent guidance for public release.
IPR/Copyright The resource is already licensed under institutional copyright to Cardiff University, as all teaching materials created by staff are subject to copyright. Currently there is no policy in place that would preclude the release of materials that exist under copyright to Cardiff University as potential OER objects. Nick Webb suspects that IPR would be retained by Cardiff University in the case where resources are created by contractually employed members of staff, however this will need to be clarified.
Institutional Policy No specific institutional policy to cover the release of teaching resources as OER. Any materials to be released would probably use a creative commons license of some sort, most likely the Attribution, Non-Commercial, Share-Alike (by-nc-sa) type. Nick raised a question about attribution, specifically – at what point does the modification of a resource no longer require the original creators to be referenced.
Internationalisation No internationalisation guidance was available.
Pedagogy and Quality Assurance The pedagogy survey was completed successfully; however while completing the questionnaire a number of errors were encountered, requiring the user to input a different answer to progress through the survey. For the most part the definition of questions was clear, although questions 59 and 60 were seen as confusing, due to the manner in which the words “purpose” and “requirement” were employed. It was suggested that these questions be re-phrased and to showcase an example of what was meant by the question.
Resource Discovery and Re-use Resource Discovery/Re-use guidance was not available.
Upload Resource is suitable for upload, provided non-patient consent if confirmed for the actors involved in the embedded flash videos. Upon confirmation of appropriate consent, the resource will be uploaded to JorumOpen.
What evidence do you have of guidance/support being used and found helpful? User feedback on toolkit guidance indicated that the guidance for the most part was self explanatory, and was particularly useful in respect to licensing issues. The pedagogic survey had a few functionality problems, but no other problems encountered.
|
|
6. Uploading and hosting resources. |
Resource not uploaded yet – awaiting confirmation of non-patient consent for one of the role-play video clips. Unable to deposit the resource into JorumOpen, due to awaiting confirmation of non-patient consent, however the deposit process to JorumOpen was demonstrated with a dummy resource. Feedback indicated that inputting keywords in a comma delimited format would be preferable to single word/phrase entry. Cannot say whether the publishing environment meets Cardiff’s requirements at this time. Nick Webb - Learning Technologist |
|
7. What are the key outcomes of the resource and/or resource collection? Approx. 200 words |
Describe the outcomes for learners, teachers, staff, the institution(s), employers, partners etc. How has it contributed to OER practice within the department/institution/sector? What has been the impact on learners and staff? The outcomes of trying to submit this resource to JorumOpen have highlighted the need for Cardiff University to clarify its own policy and guidance relating to educational materials and OER created within the university.
|
|
8. What follow-up activity will be/has been carries out as a result of the resource or resource collection? Approx. 150 words |
Not applicable. |
|
9. What are the lessons learned from the resource or resource collection? Approx. 250 words |
Sustainability More consideration for standards – including accessibility etc More rigorous audit trail for copyright consent
Risks Consent the primary issue
Benefits Wider feedback on resources produced by the university/academic staff Potential for collaboration with other universities/institutions
Unexpected outcomes None yet
Further information Policy and guidance documentation in respect of consent and copyright should/could be reviewed
Advice for others None at the moment – not enough experience of OER. |