Evaluating learning environments for interprofessional care

Abstract

Many institutions have invested considerably in the provision of student facilities--lecture halls, tutorial rooms and classrooms--spaces we call collectively learning environments. In expending resources on such facilities, we have assumed that we have needed to create this range of spaces for such activities. However, how do we know we have invested wisely in support of learning for interprofessional care? In this article I review the literature to identify evidence in a range of fields, including health care, to consider the issues and difficulties of employing established approaches from practices of evidence-based design. Central in this article is the role of evidence in the assessment of learning environments. In particular, I argue that the evidence must include qualitative dimensions of the learning experience. To address the qualitative outcomes from education, with particular attention to the concerns of interprofessional education, a model is proposed to examine different levels of outcomes. By developing an interpretation of Kirkpatrick's model, four levels are described for the effective evaluation of interprofessional learning environments.

Improving quality of referral letters from primary to secondary care: a literature review and discussion paper

“…Bibliographies of selected publications were screened for any more potentially relevant resources. Previous research (Frye and Hemmer, 2012;Kvan, 2013;Lewis et al, 2017) in the fields of medical and inter-professional education have applied Kirkpatrick's levels as a model for evaluating learning and training outcomes (Kirkpatrick, 1967). The approach involves categorising the outcomes of an intervention into one of four levels: (1) the level of attitude or reaction; (2) whether learning has occurred in terms of knowledge or skills; (3) to what extent has the skills or knowledge been applied in practice; (4) an impact on the health system or patients (Lewis et al, 2017).…”

Future learning environments: the advent of a “spatial turn”?

“…In order for corporations to stay on the market they have to adapt, be innovate and flexible. Kvan (2013) addresses the important issue of evaluations of learning environments. How do we know that the massive amount of financial resources often connected to the development of existing and new production of spaces have the intended effect?…”

Designing learning spaces for interprofessional education in the anatomical sciences

“…Kvan () argued that “we cannot undertake control trials, randomized or not, to tease out relevant factors in the design of buildings.” He suggested that the evidence must include qualitative dimensions of the learning experience (Kvan, ). Such an approach is aligned with renewed interest in evaluation at the intersection of the physical and the social and a return to the origins of post occupancy evaluation in environmental psychology (Cleveland and Fisher, ).…”

“…To achieve better alignment between learning activities, experiences, and space, Kvan () suggested an evaluation framework based on Kirkpatrick's () model for the evaluation of training programs. He proposed a four‐level model for the effective evaluation of interprofessional learning environments based on the following levels and corresponding guiding questions: (1) Reaction—Do the learners like the learning environment which they are using?…”

“…; (4) Results—Do the learning environments contribute to improved learning experiences and outcomes for the institution/school? (Kvan, ).…”