Forfattere: River J, Currie J, Crawford T, Betihavas V, Randall S.

År: 2016

Kilde: Nurse Education Today, 45:185-192

Sammendrag:

BACKGROUND: Technological advancements are rapidly changing nursing education in higher education settings. Nursing academics are enthusiastically blending technology with active learning approaches such as Team Based Learning (TBL). While the educational outcomes of TBL are well documented, the value of blending technology with TBL (blended-TBL) remains unclear. This paper presents a systematic review examining the effectiveness of blended-TBL in higher education health disciplines.

OBJECTIVES: This paper aimed to identify how technology has been incorporated into TBL in higher education health disciplines. It also sought to evaluate the educational outcomes of blended-TBL in terms of student learning and preference.

METHOD: A review of TBL research in Medline, CINAHL, ERIC and Embase databases was undertaken including the search terms, team based learning, nursing, health science, medical, pharmaceutical, allied health education and allied health education. Papers were appraised using the Critical Appraisal Skills Program (CASP).

RESULTS: The final review included 9 papers involving 2094 student participants. A variety of technologies were blended with TBL including interactive eLearning and social media.

CONCLUSION: There is limited evidence that blended-TBL improved student learning outcomes or student preference. Enthusiasm to blend technology with TBL may not be as well founded as initially thought. However, few studies explicitly examined the value of incorporating technology into TBL. There is a clear need for research that can discern the impact of technology into TBL on student preference and learning outcomes, with a particular focus on barriers to student participation with online learning components.

DOI / Lenke: http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.nedt.2016.08.012

Metodisk kvalitetsvurdering:

Klar og tydelig problemstilling. Forfatterne har tilsynelatende brukt en grundig metode for å utarbeide denne oversikten. Visse elementer er mindre godt beskrevet, som hvordan litteratursøket endelig ble gjennomført og kun engelskspråklige artikler ble inkludert. 2-3 av forfatterne har vært inkludert i de ulike fasene av screening og inklusjon/eksklusjonsprosessen. Det er også foretatt en vurdering av kvaliteten på studiene, og en rekke studier er ekskludert på grunn mangelfull eksplisitt redegjørelse for blended- eller team based learning. Stor variasjon mellom inkluderte studier ga ingen mulighet for å slå sammen resultatene. Fire av studiene var studentene fra farmasi, fire andre studier var studentene fra medisin og en av studiene var studentene fra sykepleie. Utdanningsnivået på inkluderte studier gikk fra 1. år på bachelor til phd-nivå. De inkluderte studiene er presentert på en oversiktlig og tilfredsstillende måte.