Group Collaboration in Education

Author(s):  
Gary B. Peters

When we collaborate, there is an interaction between two or more individuals who are working together to achieve a particular goal. “Teachers who use collaborative approaches tend to think of themselves less as expert transmitters of knowledge to students, and more as expert designers of intellectual experiences for students, as coaches or mid-wives of a more emergent learning process” (Smith & McGregor, n.d., ¶ 1). In certain environments, collaboration may be more difficult to achieve; it does not occur by simply putting individuals together and asking them to work collectively (Galagher, Kraut, & Egido, 1990). Friend and Cook’s (1992) definition of collaboration emphasizes goal orientation: “Interpersonal collaboration is a style of direct interaction between at least two co-equal parties voluntarily engaged in shared decision making as they work toward a common goal” (p. 5). Collaboration is further defined as “a process through which parties who see different aspects of a problem [or issue] can constructively explore their differences and search for solutions that go beyond their own limited vision of that is possible” (Gray, 1989, p. 5).

Author(s):  
Rosalind Austin

AbstractThis chapter explores the values issues arising in voice-hearing through the resources of a new skills-based approach to working with values called values-based practice. The chapter is focused on the experiences of two voice-hearers, Paul and Mary, so as to highlight the diversity of ways that people experience voice-hearing, and how a correspondingly nuanced way of supporting voice-hearers is needed. It employs an inclusive definition of values covering anything that matters or is important to the person concerned. The chapter demonstrates that values-based practice in voice-hearing supports shared decision-making when working with values challenges in health care. Both Paul’s and Mary’s stories offer illustrations of the complex and sometimes conflicting values associated with voice-hearing.


2019 ◽  
Vol 32 (1) ◽  
pp. 37-47
Author(s):  
Bettina Baldt

Abstract Definition of the problem The Shared Decision Making model is becoming increasingly popular also in the German-speaking context, but it only considers values of patients to be relevant for medical decisions. Nevertheless, studies show that the values of physicians are also influential in medical decisions. Moreover, physicians are often unaware of this influence, which makes it impossible to control it. Arguments The influence of both patients’ and physicians’ values is examined from an empirical and normative perspective. The review about the empirical data provides a necessary overview about the status quo, whereas I deduct rules for value-influenced behaviour in the decision making process in the normative approach. Therefore, different scenarios are taken into account to explore in which situations it is acceptable for physicians to let their values be part of the decision making process. The conscious use of values is only possible, when physicians are aware of their influence. To raise awareness, the best option would be to educate future physicians about it in their training. Therefore, this article provides a teaching concept for a unit that could be part of an ethics class for physicians in training. Furthermore, patient’s rights and responsibilities in the decision making process are discussed. Conclusion I conclude that it is necessary to take the influence of values (more) into account and include this knowledge into the training of physicians. Conclusively, recommendations for patients and physicians and their dealing with values in shared decision making processes are suggested.


Author(s):  
Chaina Hanum ◽  
Ardi Findyartini

Background: The increasing complexity of health problems consequently demands problem solving from various perspectives of health professionals. The interprofessional approach in solving health problems, by working together with patients, their families, and the communities is called Interprofessional Shared Decision-Making (IP-SDM). The capability of various health professionals in IP-SDM becomes one of the abilities to be achieved in Interprofessional Collaborative Practice (IPCP). IP-SDM learning should also be achieved through Interprofessional Education (IPE).Method: This is a literature study aiming to elaborate IP-SDM and its correlation to IPCP and IPE.Results: IP-SDM is a decision making process which involves collaboration between two or more health professionals and also patients aiming at idenfication of best choices while considering patients’ preferences. IP-SDM consists of two core processes: shared decision-making (SDM) between health professionals and patients and collaborative clinical reasoning (CCR) among health professionals. Conclusion: Although SDM and CCR learning has been widely reported, including the potential emphasis in interprofessional education and interprofessional collaborative practice, IP-SDM learning is still limited. For this particular reason, further exploration is needed regarding the development of IP-SDM learning method in IPE, especially in Indonesia context.   


2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
George Athanasiou ◽  
Chris Bachtsetzis

Patient-doctor relationship has traditionally been paternalistic, in which the doctor decided on behalf of the patient. It focused mainly between the patient who called for help and the doctor whose decisions had to be silently observed and followed by the patient. In this paternalistic model, the physician used his skills to choose the necessary interventions and treatments that were likely to restore the health of the patient. All the information given to the patient was selected to encourage them to consent to the doctor’s decisions. This definition of the asymmetric or unbalanced interaction between physicians and patients has begun to be questioned over the last 20 years. There has been a shift from this direction to one where the patient is more informed, empowered, and independent - a move from a “paternalistic” to a more “complementary” relationship. Critics suggested a more active, autonomous patient-centered role which supports greater patient control, reduced doctors’ dominance, and a more mutual participation. This approach has been described as one where the doctor attempts to enter the patient’s world to see the disease with the eyes of the patient and is becoming the predominant model in clinical practice today.


2014 ◽  
Vol 21 (1) ◽  
pp. 15-23 ◽  
Author(s):  
Helen Pryce ◽  
Amanda Hall

Shared decision-making (SDM), a component of patient-centered care, is the process in which the clinician and patient both participate in decision-making about treatment; information is shared between the parties and both agree with the decision. Shared decision-making is appropriate for health care conditions in which there is more than one evidence-based treatment or management option that have different benefits and risks. The patient's involvement ensures that the decisions regarding treatment are sensitive to the patient's values and preferences. Audiologic rehabilitation requires substantial behavior changes on the part of patients and includes benefits to their communication as well as compromises and potential risks. This article identifies the importance of shared decision-making in audiologic rehabilitation and the changes required to implement it effectively.


2004 ◽  
Author(s):  
P. F. M. Stalmeier ◽  
M. S. Roosmalen ◽  
L. C. G. Josette Verhoef ◽  
E. H. M. Hoekstra-Weebers ◽  
J. C. Oosterwijk ◽  
...  

2013 ◽  
Author(s):  
Shirley M. Glynn ◽  
Lisa Dixon ◽  
Amy Cohen ◽  
Amy Drapalski ◽  
Deborah Medoff ◽  
...  

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document