A model of best practice for delivery of CR education · Guidelines for delivery of CR education has been developed based on literature ... • offering an ‘immersion’ component

Guidelines for best practice delivery of CR education and training in Queensland

Prepared by: Professor Stephanie Short

Megan Dalton Libby Henderson

Debra Domalewski (Griffith Health)

For the: Community Rehabilitation Workforce Project, Queensland Health

August 2006

Contents Introduction..........................................................................................3 The Guidelines .....................................................................................3

Content..............................................................................................3 Delivery ............................................................................................6 Support..............................................................................................7 Sustainability ....................................................................................8

References..........................................................................................12 Appendix A Methodology ...............................................................13 Appendix B: Strength Rating Framework Form ..............................19 Appendix C: Interview Protocol .......................................................21

Introduction These recommendations for a best practice educational approach have been developed as a resource for educators wishing to enhance their curricula and delivery of CR education and training. These recommendations are not designed to be prescriptive but rather to give suggestions. This best practice approach centres on content, delivery, support and sustainability. It is also intended that these guidelines be revised and adapted as further information and evaluation come to hand. Guidelines for delivery of CR education has been developed based on literature review (see full review at http://www.health.qld.gov.au/qhcrwp/default.asp#resources), examination of content and delivery of existing programs/courses, and results of interviews conducted with CR educators. The full data collection methodology is shown in Appendix A. These guidelines have been investigated and developed with particular reference to undergraduate and postgraduate CR curricula for physiotherapist, occupational therapists, speech pathologists and nurses.

The Guidelines

Content Educators should ensure a theory – practice nexus by:

• promoting practicum in community settings (including metro, rural and remote placements),

• employing a tiered practicum placement scheme that gives the students experience at the practice settings along the continuum (acute, transitional, home/community),

• incorporating multidisciplinary teamwork opportunities including a range of interdisciplinary tasks and activities designed to support the development of identified interdisciplinary CR skills and competencies,

• offering an ‘immersion’ component of practicum such as is offered at The Centre for Remote Health, Alice Springs (a 6-day intensive practicum component),

• offering practicum in a range of practice settings including developing countries which requires students to be able to map communities, make linkages and create services in order to fill gaps in service provision and meet consumer need (interview participant),

• incorporating postgraduate practicum within students existing workplace but extending normal roles. See for example, the University of Calgary’s ‘Workplace Alternative Model’ (Marlett et al., 2001),

http://www.health.qld.gov.au/qhcrwp/default.asp#resources

• complementing practicum placements with regular seminars/discussions so that students have the opportunity to reflect and share experiences and learnings (interview participant),

• developing care planning scenarios that span acute, transition and home/community contexts (interview participant) using an ICF framework,

• developing an understanding of CR competencies and philosophies as transferable life skills which are essential for effective caseload management e.g. self-management focus, empowering the consumer, goal setting, care planning etc (interview participant),

• ensuring the course has broad application to the diverse range of CR opportunities within the community (interview participant), and

• encouraging student volunteerism in community settings (interview participant).

Educators should introduce the concept of CR by:

• incorporating the competencies as early as possible in the course or program thereby, maximising the potential to reinforce the competency/philosophy (interview participant),

• beginning with CR competency ‘Frameworks of Understanding’ to illustrate the history of disability and CR service provision.

• weaving an awareness of CR philosophy and competency throughout the program

• taking a career laddering approach which supports a ‘tiered’ approach to the introduction and development of competency domains for example, undergraduate introduces the competency domains while the postgraduate may focus on the specific competency sub domains.

Educators should use appropriate language:

• which ideally is common and standardised, • which makes the implicit, explicit by consistently labelling the CR skills so

that the students are aware of the skills they are developing and can therefore envisage practicing in a community setting.

• to clearly articulate the political and economic context within which community practice operates and how systemic forces affect community rehabilitation/practice.

Educators should provide students with the reality of CR practice by:

• dispelling myths and unrealistic expectations of ‘real world’ practice. (interview participant),

• emphasizing that the reality of community practice will require the students to be innovative and resourceful as opposed to being too prescriptive,

• using problem-based learning and using challenging and even confronting examples (transformative education),

• embedding CR competencies and working in a community setting in the course readings and other course literature, and

• using community practitioners from a variety of disciplines as guest lecturers.

Eductors should consider assessing CR content by:

• clearly articulating what is required from students in terms of CR education and training learning outcomes/objectives in the course outline and in discussion (interview participant),

• using Viva (i.e. oral exam) format for assessing interpersonal/communication skills,

• assessing CR values and attitudes via practicum placements, monitoring the student in the workplace, gaining feedback from clients and talking to students,

• making values and attitude a highly weighted component of a practicum portfolio, and

• weighting the CR content of core courses heavily (interview participant). Exams ensure students take the subject matter seriously and also ensure students attend the final lectures/tutorials (interview participant).

Educators should consider using education processes to teach CR that:

• develop and embed a CR specific module inside a core foundational course that spans the target disciplines. To do this, you must first identify where the CR module sits ‘naturally’ within the current curriculum and place it there (interview participant),

• make CR courses core (as opposed to elective), • use group work often and highlight group process so that students

become adept at working effectively in teams, • develop skills of self-awareness and critical reflection as an assessable

component of as many courses as possible. Self-awareness is a catalyst to students availing themselves of professional development opportunities and postgraduate studies (interview participant),

• enhance interpersonal and therapeutic communication skills with basic counselling training,

• allow for shared teaching arrangements across disciplines for foundational courses such as interpersonal and communication skills. Interdisciplinary collaboration in designing the course is provided for and course replication may be reduced (interview participant),

• use powerful teaching resources such as client experiential video e.g. ‘Dance to my Song’ by vertigoproductions.com.au (ph: 08-8348 9382). This video demonstrates a graphic lack of interpersonal and consumer engagement skills by one practitioner as she engages with her client (interview participant),

• incorporate competency domains and sub domains into curricula simultaneously as both content and process. Self-awareness/reflection and communication may be addressed along with culture by having the students think about different cultural communication styles and their own

experiences of being helped. Combining content and process reinforces the idea that competencies are interrelated,

• require students to compile a community resource directories, • use social models of health and behaviour to promote the understanding

of psychosocial issues, • use the CBR - CR continuum framework so the students can visualize the

continuum of care from prevention and primary health to self-management and tertiary health,

• use transformative education (University of Calgary, 2006) such as problem based learning in order to affect change in student assumptions, values and attitudes. Transformative education “emphasizes the role of education in personal and social change (University of Calgary, 2006 p. 3). This theory challenges conventional views and uses social problems and issues to provide discomfort, challenge and curiosity to begin the learning process,

• enhance courses by offering a range of multimedia deliveries e.g. students could be asked to produce a publication, a short video on their choice of theme around disability (interview participant), and

• take a multidisciplinary approach by including contributions from special education, psychology, philosophy, sociology, health and rehabilitation.

Delivery Institutions should offer flexibility of delivery of CR content, such as:

• choice of on-line and/or attendance and use of workshops, summer school, short courses, guests, teleconferencing and videoconferencing etc. Providing choice in attendance (eg attending or viewing a lecture on line) accommodates student-learning styles and circumstances. It also maximises access and therefore uptake/sustainability. Flexible delivery and choice provides for the ‘modern student’ and personal situations at both under and postgraduate levels (interview participant),

• a combination of block intensive and on-line delivery. The block intensive should be provided early in the course to maximise on-line interaction thereafter (eg via discussion forums etc) and to maximise reinforcement via other courses. Ideally it should also be placed prior to practicum to maximise the learning potential of ‘real life’ practice. This is particularly important for communication and interpersonal skills courses that require some face-to-face component (interview participant),

• postgraduate studies that provide for internships so that students are able to complete their practicum components in their workplace. This also provides for a ‘mentoring’ style of learning,

• bridging the transition from TAFE to University. See for example, the Career Laddering framework (Marlett et al., 2000), and

• double degrees (discipline + CR/disability). Institutions should engage educators to deliver CR content who:

• are able to articulate CR philosophy (based on their experience, qualifications, academic and research interests and motivation for teaching), .

• ideally also have a background in the target disciplines, • can provide a multidisciplinary focus with contributions from special

education, psychology, philosophy, sociology, health and rehabilitation and

• can shared teaching duties across target disciplines. e.g. James Cook University uses common foundational courses (as opposed to discipline specific courses).

Support Institutions providing CR training must provide educators and students access to technology which:

• is reliable for distance education students and for remote and rural students who often have problems with ‘connecting’ to information technologies (interview participant),

• is well supported - providing IT learning support for students and educators,

• delivers the content via the most contemporary technologies that will attract and maintain student interest (interview participant),

• mimic emerging trends in rehabilitation delivery (interview participant), and

• facilitate high levels of student support. Institutions providing CR education must incorporate consumers and community by:

• engaging consumers or consumer support groups as educators and content advisors,

• extending the roles/responsibility of the community in developing the students as a part of a practicum placement, and

• highlighting to community members the way they are contributing to student development. This provides for effective community engagement and two-way learning.

Institutions and educators need to build a relationship of trust by:

• making learning a collaborative and inclusive journey (interview participant),

• being flexible and responsive to students as this helps students to be proactive in their own learning (eg. in negotiations about placements, projects etc) (interview participant),

• using transformative education because it emphasizes dialogue between teachers and learners, shared learning processes and addresses personal and collective responsibility for learning and change (University of Calgary, 2006),

• supporting students through their experiential and transformative learning process by offering emotional support and avenues for discussion that allow students to share their experiences,

• being prepared to counsel students when they are challenged or confronted in the community and/or by their own practice (interview participant),

• being an educator who embodies the CR philosophy and competencies. Be a role model for your students (interview participant),

• making sure that students are brought together with each other and with faculty as much as possible, even those enrolled in distance/flexible learning because if they do not feel supported, they may withdraw (interview participant).

Sustainability Institutions providing CR education may reduce costs by:

• conducting an audit across disciplines to locate common foundational courses to reduce replication. This also provides for multidisciplinary processes at the course design level,

• reviewing foundational courses that are common across disciplines (eg. communication skills courses) then placing the course with the school/faculty that is best resourced to deliver it,

• utilising lectures (which are cost effective) to deliver content but making them as interactive as possible, encourage discussions especially, and

• promoting international access – this not only provides for increased uptake but also provides for a multicultural contribution.

Institutions providing CR education might maximise program uptake by:

• recognition of prior learning, credit and exemption to be considered for communication and interpersonal courses for those who have a lot of ‘life’ experience such as mature aged students (interview participant),

• the use of up-to-date technologies/resources to attract and maintain student interest,

• improving accessibility by offering a broad range of multimedia mediums, • broadening the access base to postgraduate ‘specialities’. Provide for

skills/specialities the practitioners want to combine with community practice for example, postgraduate certificates in specialities (interview participant),

• making CR a postgraduate speciality in its own right, • reducing and/or supplementing fees. For example, following changes to

higher education by the Federal Government in 2004, universities have been given autonomy in setting students contributions covered by HECS-HELP arrangements. As a result, the cost of many postgraduate nursing courses has been reduced based on the current shortage of nurses in Australia (interview participant; www.goingtouni.gov.au),

http://www.goingtouni.gov.au/

• allowing practicum to be conducted at the student workplace (logistics - providing the ‘learning contract’ reflects course objectives and challenges the student). If students are employed in the CR field, allow them to use ‘real life’ scenarios as a part of their assessment and for their practicum placements,

• beginning awareness of community practice during high school years when potential university students are considering their careers for example, via high school career counsellors or university open days (interview participant),

• giving it practical appeal by introducing academic rewards or low assessment requirements and selling it as providing a competitive edge in the employment market,

• taking every opportunity to enhance the profile of CR. Raise the awareness and interest and promote CR broadly for example, via conferences, scholarships, newsletters, information days etc. promote CR as a ‘whole’, as an ‘entity’ (interview participant),

• promoting work in the community as challenging and rewarding, • linking the potential inevitability of community practice to government and

industry reports for example, those related to health reform. This makes CR practice a legitimate option for students and also provides a base from which governments and funding bodies may be lobbied for support.

• ensuring courses have broad application relative to the diverse range of CR opportunities in the community. Broaden the number of specialisations for example, at the Graduate Certificate level,

• making students aware of the scope for entrepreneurial opportunities in the community. This provides impetus for CR as a career choice and opportunities for innovative CR delivery and networks (interview participant),

• providing ‘bite sized’ chunks of CR education and training opportunities such as workshops, modules, intensives etc as learning ‘stepping stones’ that credit toward undergraduate and higher degrees (interview participant), and

• increasing international student access. This provides for a greater ‘multicultural’ awareness and diversity and supports international exchange arrangements.

Institutions providing CR training may create sustainability by developing industry partnerships. They might do this by:

• providing practicum via internships and/or cadetships as opposed to field supervisors. This provides for building community/industry partnerships that in turn, inform needs-based training and education developments (interview participant),

• seeking feedback from employers of students. Developing healthy collaboration and consultation with industry partners informs the development of courses based on skills etc identified by industry as necessary in a changing practice environment and also provides for

practicum placements and prepares students well for the employment market,

• developing postgraduate programs in conjunction with a specific field of practice. The needs of certification and remuneration commensurate with training can then be met,

• considering adopting the Circles of Change practicum (Macfarlane et al., 2005) approach, which supports internships and/or cadetships and gives industry and community responsibility in the training and development of students (see The Interdisciplinary Student Placement Project, Queensland Health http://www.health.qld.gov.au/qhcrwp/docs/student_placement_fs.pdf ),

• looking for ways of extending the roles/responsibility of the community in developing the students for example as a part of a practicum placement or using community/consumer educators,

• providing programs that have opportunities for elective choices that may be taken up at other institutions/universities. This also provides for university collaboration and promotes new and shared initiatives and developments in the field,

• developing affiliated programs and projects which are essential for training students because they provide meaningful real world experiences (and placements) and also provide a community profile for the University/department. Examples of such affiliations at Flinders University include DASS, Up the Hill, Community Re-entry Program and DaPRA (www.flinders.edu.au),

• anchoring CR developments well to industry partners and community organizations eg. using industry and government research and reports for leverage in funding developments , and

• developing a community reference group. Development of CR career paths and general profile raising within the field will improve sustainability of CR tertiary programs. This might be achieved by:

• providing an awareness that CR is an ‘entity’ and an awareness of what the practitioners role is or potentially could be within that ’entity’ and how to work in that ‘entity’ (interview participant),

• providing a tiered approach to the acquisition of CR competencies and philosophies for example, introduction and awareness in the undergraduate with a view to specialisation at the postgraduate level,

• employing the Career Laddering (Marlett et al., 2001) approach. The career-laddering framework “creates upward momentum and enables workers to see some potential for growth and professional development” (Marlett et al., 2001 p. 6). It also provides a framework for implementing a ‘tiered’ approach to the training of CR competencies that may articulate from TAFE level diplomas, through undergraduate bachelor degrees and postgraduate programs,

• presenting CR as a viable and legitimate practice setting with a career path supported by professional development opportunities, postgraduate

http://www.health.qld.gov.au/qhcrwp/docs/student_placement_fs.pdfhttp://www.flinders.edu.au/

studies and responsive and appropriate remuneration. Students who continue to study in the CR field will provide the CR necessary management, mentoring and supervision in the field, as well as the next generation of CR educators and CR research that will contribute to the growing CR evidence base,

• offering a Graduate Certificate in CR Management that gives students the ability to employ/mentor the target disciplines in the field. For example, Flinders University’s Graduate Certificate in Disability Services Management equips students with management skills that are underpinned by all of the Audit (Griffith University, 2006) competencies and CR philosophy.

References Griffith University. (2006). Competencies for Community Rehabilitation in

Queensland. .Audit of the Training and Education Needs of Staff Working in Community in Community Rehabilitation in Queensland. Brisbane: QHealth. Retrieved May 2006, from http://www.health.qld.gov.au/qhcrwp/docs/competency_audit2.pdf

Macfarlane, K., Noble, K. , and Cartmel J. (Eds). (2005) Circles of change: Challenging orthodoxy in practitioner supervision (pp. 11-20). Frenchs Forest: Pearson.

Marlett, N. (2001). Twenty and Still in the Early Stages. Calgary, Canada: Retrieved May 2006 from http://www.ucalgary.ca/crds/contacts/faculty_pages/marlett/resources/articleforinternational2.pdf

Marlett, N., Neufeldt, A., Hughson, A., Cran, S., Kinash, S. et al. (2000). Career Laddering: a Canadian Approach to Education in Community Rehabilitation and Disability Studies. Rehabilitation Education, 14 (1), 59-75.

University of Calgary. (2006). CRDS Explicit Syllabi of Bachelor Programs. Retrieved May, 2006 from http://www.crds.org/explicit_curr.pdf#search=%22CRDS%20Explicit%20Syllabi%20of%20Bachelor%20Programs%20university%20of%20calgary%22

http://www.health.qld.gov.au/qhcrwp/docs/competency_audit2.pdfhttp://www.ucalgary.ca/crds/contacts/faculty_pages/marlett/resources/articleforinternational2.pdfhttp://www.ucalgary.ca/crds/contacts/faculty_pages/marlett/resources/articleforinternational2.pdfhttp://www.crds.org/explicit_curr.pdf#search="CRDS Explicit Syllabi of Bachelor Programs university of calgary" http://www.crds.org/explicit_curr.pdf#search="CRDS Explicit Syllabi of Bachelor Programs university of calgary"

Appendix A Methodology This project utilised multiple methods to gather data that would address the research questions, aims and objectives. These included:

• A statewide, national and international CR course and program search • A course/program rating and culling process, and • Semi structured interviews with course/program providers.

Statewide, National and International CR Course and Program Search A systematic search of state, national and international universities for CR relevant undergraduate/postgraduate courses and programs was conducted. For the state search, investigation was at the course level, the national investigation was at the program level and the international search was contained to institutions within USA and Canada. The Queensland state search was conducted via QTAC administered state universities and identified 315 courses (including Griffith University). The national search was conducted via Hobson’s Good Guides (a site that provides a facility to search all Australian universities by institution, course or career). The national search was limited to programs only rather than courses within programs. Fifty-two (52) programs were identified. The international search was confined to the USA and Canada. Course/Program Rating and culling process (State and National Only) Due to the large number of courses/programs generated, a culling process was designed and applied to isolate the most relevant CR courses/programs and to achieve a workable interview participant pool. The culling process included:

• inter-rater (level 1), • strength rating (level 2), and • threshold cut-off (level 3).

The rating and culling process is represented by Figure 1 below:

Course/program search (state, national and international)

National and state culling process begins

Inter-rater (Level 1)

Strength rating (Level 2)

Threshold limit (Level 3)

Interview Pool (Level 4)

Final Results (courses and programs of highest CR

relevance and access)

Figure 1: The Collection, Rating, Culling and Final Results Process

Inter-rater reliability process and results (culling level 1) Two course raters were required to discuss each course until consensus could be reached on the merits of inclusion of each course. From the initial Queensland pool of 315 courses, 81 courses were retained after the inter-rater process. The researchers isolated those programs/courses that correlated most strongly with competency content. Also examined were factors such as entry requirements, credit, articulation and attendance as these needed to be considered as potential barriers to access/uptake. These 81 courses were submitted for the strength rating process. From the initial national pool of 52 courses and after the inter-rater process, sixteen (16) courses were identified to continue to the strength rating process. Strength rating (culling level 2) Once tabulation of findings from the inter-rater process was completed (detailing contacts and other relevant information, categorizing courses/programs in relation to each other and illuminating identified barriers to access/uptake) those

courses/programs that correlated the strongest with competency domains (Griffith University, 2006) and also provided access and delivery modes to offset potential barriers to uptake, were given a strength rating (refer Strength Rating Framework, Appendix B). Strength rating ranged from 0 – 21 for Queensland courses and 0 - 18 for national programs. The difference in the upper limit score for state and national occurred because 3 of the criteria were specific to courses only. Threshold rating (culling level 3) If a Queensland course had a strength rating of 13 or above (with seven (7) or more representing competency domains), the course was included in the final pool. If a national program had a strength rating of 10 or above (with five (5) or more representing competency domains) the course was included in the final pool. The state and national cut off scores (13 and 10 respectively) were decided upon to provide the project with a workable recruitment pool of interview participants of the courses/programs that were deemed to have the highest relevance to CR competency domain content and accessibility. The number of competency domains evident was given greater weighting than accessibility. That is, more than 50% of the strength rating had to be for the existence of content which reflected the CR competency domains. Thirteen (13) courses were selected from the post inter-rater total of 81 from the statewide list. Nine (9) national programs were selected from the post inter-rater total of 16 Interview Participant Recruitment Course/program conveners of the 23 identified course/programs were invited to participate in semi-structured interviews. Where they were unable to participate they were invited to nominate someone else from the organisation who could represent the course/program. Recruitment commenced with initial contact being made via telephone, followed by emailing the introduction letter, consent form and participant information sheet to the educator’s who were available to participate. The interview schedule (refer Appendix C) was developed based on the objectives of the current project and information gleaned from the literature review. A total of 15 participants representing twenty-three (23) state and national courses and programs participated in interviews. Some participants were involved in the delivery of more than one course/program. One course and four programs were not represented at interview. Additional Key Informants

An additional interview pool was generated to recruit participants who were involved in current CR education and training initiatives but who had not received an invitation to participate through the courses/program identification process. The project team initiated discussions with members of the Flinders University Department of Disability Studies who were identified as leaders in the field in Australia regarding development of undergraduate and postgraduate programs specifically in disability and rehabilitation studies. Flinders University is also involved in a program-to-program exchange arrangement with the University of Calgary and provides an adjunct professor that enables local Australian students, who wish to study community rehabilitation and disability at the postgraduate level, access to the University of Calgary via distance education. Three members from the current research team followed up initial discussions with a site visit to Flinders University. This visit provided the research team with greater insight into the development of relevant CR undergraduate and postgraduate courses/programs, particularly the Bachelor of Disability Studies and Community Rehabilitation being introduced in 2007. Interviews were conducted as required. For example, as discussions progressed with the faculty, it became apparent that postgraduate certificates offered by the department that had not been identified via the Hobson’s Guide search facility, were actually more relevant to the current research than other Flinders University degree programs that had been identified (namely the Bachelor of Nursing/Bachelor of Health Science - Disabilities). The research team then decided to focus investigations on the postgraduate programs offered by the Disability Studies Department and the new Bachelor of Disability Studies and Community Rehabilitation. The project team contacted the coordinators of the Queensland Community Rehabilitation Curriculum Development Initiatives who are sponsored by the Community Rehabilitation Workforce Project to ascertain:

• The context of the CR initiative, • The scope of the CR initiative (and stage of development), • What qualification level the CR initiative was aimed at

(undergraduate/postgraduate), and • The influence of CR initiatives with regard to content, support,

sustainability and delivery. Five (5) coordinators involved in Queensland CR initiatives were contacted and agreed to participate. The pool of participants includes one representative of Queensland Health, and four from universities. Interviews (Culling Level 4) The interviews were designed to focus predominately on investigating currently available undergraduate and postgraduate tertiary education courses and programs that best reflect the competency domains as outlined in the Audit (Griffith University, 2006). The objectives for the interviews included identifying the educator’s

understanding and perspective of CR and obtaining information regarding a best practice educational approach for qualifications in CR incorporating CR competency domain content and appropriate modes of delivery. That is, the interview sought the educator’s input into ways to strengthen the CR content of courses/programs and suggested modes of delivery to maximise uptake. Other objectives of the interviews were to determine congruence between available course information and actual teaching practice and the educator’s qualifications, experience, interest and educational objectives in relation to CR education and training. The interview schedule (refer Appendix C) was informed by the project objectives and literature review and was divided into four sections: 1. Participant Background This section was designed to inform the project about the background which each interview participant (educator) brought to their delivery of CR education. Capacity building does not only refer to the content and the mode of delivery, it must also mean building the capacity of those educators and institutions that train the CR practitioners. Key areas were:

• Qualifications, • Experience, • Academic and research interest, and • Interest and motivation for CR teaching

2. Defining CR This section provided insight into the educator’s understanding and perspective of the objectives of CR. 3. Course/program content This section provided an indication of whether or not the educator’s understanding and perspective were reflected in the course/program content. 4. CR Education/training Service Delivery This section explored the participant’s understanding of access and uptake issues in regard to CR education and training (particularly at the postgraduate level) and if this understanding was reflected in the course/program educational processes and delivery mode. Analysis and Post-interview Rating Content analysis was determined as an efficient process for extracting broad views about CR education and training from interview transcripts. The object of using content analysis was to give the content depth by using both the coding of the manifest content (the visible surface content) and the latent content of the communication (its underlying meaning) (Babbie, 2004). The thematic analysis of text interpretation was collectively grouped under four categories:

• CR content,

• delivery mode and access, • support, and • sustainability.

To ensure the rigour of the transcript analysis, this was undertaken by two member of the project team. The two project team members had to reach consensus on thematic categorisation of data.

Appendix B: Strength Rating Framework Form Insert Program/Course Name:

YES NO

Competency Domains. (Total out of 10)

• Frameworks of Understanding • Networks • Cultural Awareness • Holistic Focus • Consumer Engagement • Reflective Practice • Community Engagement • Boundaries and Personal Safety • Systems Advocacy • Service Continuity

Flexibility of delivery mode. (Total out 7)

Program Level • Full time • Part time

Course level • Summer/Accelerated Program • On line • Distance education • Intensive Mode (i.e. workshop) • In person

Is the course embedded in a relevant targeted discipline program? (course only) Yes = 1 No = 0

Does it attract Commonwealth support? (course only) Yes = 1 No = 0

Is the course Core or elective (course only) Core = 1 Elective = 0

Is /are there any entry/or course requirements No = 1 Yes = 0

Total (maximum 21 for courses, 18 for programs)

Comments:

Appendix C: Interview Protocol Introduction This research is investigating currently available undergraduate and postgraduate tertiary education programs and courses that best reflect the competency domains as outlined in the Audi (Griffith University, 2006)t. This investigation has included National and International courses program content and delivery modes. Your course/program has been identified by the Research Team as reflecting some of the competency domains. Our target group is the current and future allied health practitioners currently working in or envisaging work in a community context. Our objective is to find ways to strengthen the content of courses/programs and propose modes of delivery that will maximise uptake and are sustainable. We will be seeking your input in these regards.

Comment This introduction can be reiterated at the beginning of each IV but when we send out the invitation to participate we should send something similar to the generic letter that we have already used. This letter will also state that we will follow up with a phone call ‘in a few days’ to gauge participation & to schedule an IV.

Participant background Would you please briefly describe your background including:

• qualifications • experience • current position • interest or involvement in CR education

& training

This section will inform us about whether or not the IV participant is really qualified to provide CR education. Capacity building does not only mean for the content and the mode of delivery – it must also mean building the capacity of those educators and institutions that train the practitioners. Also, refer to educators profile available at the relevant Uni website.

Defining CR

1. How would you describe CR?

2. In your opinion, what is the purpose of CR?

3. Is CR different from other forms of

This section will give us an idea of the IV participant’s understanding of CR.

rehabilitation? If so, in what ways?

4. Please consider the WHO definition of CR?

5. Does this definition accurately describe

the objectives/field of CR?

6. Do you think this definition is useful in providing a framework for CR education & training? How?

This definition will be on the protocol provided along with the executive summary prior to the IV.

Course/program content

1. What competencies, skills or principles do you feel a practitioner needs to provide CR effectively?

2. Can these competencies be taught? If

so, how are these competencies best taught/learned?

3. How does your course/program provide

your students with the opportunity to acquire these competencies, skills & principles?

4. Are these ideas (responses to 3.)

established in the content/delivery of your course/program? If so, how? If not, why not?

5. How do you know if your students have

gained the competencies (i.e. the objectives/learning outcomes of your course in relation to its CR component)?

6. Could you please describe what you

feel is your strongest aspect of incorporating CR competencies into your course/program content?

7. Could you please describe any

difficulties you experience in incorporating CR competencies into your course/program content?

8. How do you think you could improve

incorporating CR competencies into

This section will give us an idea of whether or not their understanding is reflected in the course/program content.

your course/program content?

9. Do you have any suggestions as to how you would implement the identified CR domains into your course curriculum?

CR Education/training service delivery

1. Is your course a core course or an elective? (not applicable to programs).

2. Can you describe the best

training/educational experience you have provided? What was good/appealing about this training/educational delivery? What do you think the students ‘got’ out of this experience?

3. Does your course provide for

multidisciplinary opportunities? If so, in what way? If not, why not? (eg may not be logistically feasible).

4. What do you think is the most effective

method of delivering CR education and training? (Eg lectures, tutorials, distance, group work, practicum, intensive etc).

5. What do you think could be improved

in terms of incorporating CR competencies with reference to:

• delivery • uptake • logistics (i.e. what is doable) • sustainability

6. Can you suggest any alternative modes

of education & training delivery for CR?

7. What sorts of resources/support would

you require?

8. Do you think a CR guide that would provide a ‘best practice’ framework for

This section will give us an idea of whether or not their understanding is reflected in the course/program delivery mode. From here we are specifically getting at suggestions re a delivery model. From here, we are getting at what the convenors/lecturers themselves feel is required to implement an appropriate delivery model.

the delivery of CR education & training would be a useful?

Introduction The Guidelines Content Delivery Support Sustainability References Appendix A Methodology Appendix B: Strength Rating Framework Form Appendix C: Interview Protocol