No abstract

There has been much criticism about undergraduate engineering education not focusing on authentic real-world contexts which are most often associated to ill-structured domains. Undergraduate research experience is one context which provides a strong basis for our students to learn essential problem solving skills. Yet, although such experiences enable engineering students to begin the practice of solving complex problems in authentic contexts, there is a lack of understanding of the nature of these research projects. To fill this gap, we conducted in-depth interviews with students and utilized qualitative data analytic methods in tandem with the Problem-based Learning theory to classify research projects. Initial findings indicate that the research projects tend to be highly complex, moderately structured, and very different from the course-based projects. These findings are important for educators looking to incorporate research-based PBL projects into the classroom.

Background: Shared Decision-Making (SDM) is an inclusive approach where patients and providers work in partnership to make health care decisions that are grounded in clinical best practice and align with patient preferences and values. Despite a growing recognition that SDM can lead to improved outcomes and reductions in unnecessary health investigations, tensions exist between patient agency and a historically paternalistic model of health care. As an evolving ideology, the Research Team sought to better understand the current state, challenges, and implementation opportunities of SDM practices across the health system. Methods: This study used a cross-sectional quality improvement design utilizing semistructured interviews to gather information from focus group participants. Five open-ended, qualitative questions were used to generate discussion on the perceptions of SDM and its role in clinical appropriateness in a variety of clinical contexts in our health system. A total of 12 focus groups (n = 95 participants) representative of patients and families, leaders, physicians, and frontline clinicians were engaged in the study. Results: Through a consensus-based approach, study results identified 4 recommendations based on 4 themes: Time, Communication, System Design, and Clinical Appropriateness. Conclusion: There are no easy solutions to the challenges of enabling SDM; however, success will be dependent upon recognizing the importance of patient agency, while maintaining an inclusive and continuous stakeholder engagement with both patients and providers. Implementation of the 4 recommendations at the organizational level highlighted in this study can serve as a road map for other health care institutions and will require a gradual approach to transform the general principles of SDM into tangible solutions to meet the emerging needs at both the local and system level.

The following steps are needed to complete the project: 1) Research need for course 2) Write the course description and outline 3) Submit to Advisory Committee for recommendations 4) Present to administration for corrections 5) Make corrections 6) Resubmit to administration for approval 7) Submit to Templeton School Board for approval 8) Offer course for 2011-2012 school year Step 1-Research need for course As a department, we met and discussed the option of adding the course. Currently, students enrolled in the Introduction to Agriculture class receive life science graduation credit but not college entrance credit for the class. Some of these students also choose to take college required Biology through the Science Department, but not all. We wanted to give this option to students who have an invested interested in agriculture to pursue college credit within our department. Additionally, students in the Introduction to Agriculture Science class are responsible for taking the Biology CST, so an Agriculture Biology class would offer redundancy of curriculum and instruction for those students possibly enhancing test scores. I then met with Principal Tom Harrington to discuss the possibility of adding a UC/CSU approved Agriculture Biology course to our program. He was very positive about the idea. We discussed how it would work in conjunction with our currently offered courses and any implications it may have on the Science Department. After our meeting, I was given the go ahead to begin writing the course. Step 2-Write the course description and outline This initial process was very simple. Having come from San Luis Obispo High School where the course was already implemented in both college preparatory and honors formats, I was able to use the course materials from them. Additionally, having taught the class before, I was able to access my old notebooks, curriculum calendars, and materials to organize a logical outline for the course to follow. I was also able to use information on the Templeton High School Science Department's currently taught Biology course to align my newly written course with those. This would allow for similar instruction between both departments. Step 3-Submit to Advisory Committee for recommendations The initial rough draft was first submitted to our Advisory Committee on October 12 th , 2010. Mitch Roth moved to approve the Agriculture Biology course outline with the addition so Career Technical Education Agriculture and Foundation standards. The motion was seconded. Index Step 4-Present to administration for corrections After making the changes recommended by the Advisory Committee, I submitted an electronic copy of the new course outline to Principal Tom Harrington. Principal Harrington came back with the following recommendations: New school wide course description format should be followed Break down units of instruction into smaller pieces He also offered up several questions in regards to requiring students to participation FFA and SAE for a class that qualifies for college entrance c...