One health in our backyard: Design and evaluation of an experiential learning experience for veterinary medical students

Abstract

BackgroundNew educational approaches are needed to improve student understanding of the wider sociological and ecological determinants of health as well as professional responsibilities in related areas. Field trips allow students to observe interaction between plant, animal and human communities, making them an ideal tool for teaching One Health concepts.MethodsVeterinary medical students participated in a field trip to a local parklands area, frequented by humans, dogs, horses, and wildlife. Students rotated through 5 learning activities (‘stations’) that focused on: (1) response to exotic animal disease incursion (equine influenza); (2) impact of cultures and belief systems on professional practice; (3) management of dangerous dogs; (4) land use change, biodiversity and emerging infectious disease; and (5) management of environmentally-acquired zoonoses (botulism). Intended learning outcomes were for students to: evaluate the various roles and responsibilities of veterinarians in society; compare the benefits and risks associated with human-animal and animal-animal interactions; and evaluate the contributions made by various professionals in safeguarding the health and welfare of animals, humans and the environment. Following the field trip, students participated in a debrief exercise and completed an online survey on their experiences.ResultsFeedback from students collected in 2016/2017 (n = 211) was overwhelmingly positive. The learning experience at each station was rated as 4 (‘Good’) or 5 (‘Very Good’) out of 5 by 82–96% of students. Responses to closed- and open-ended questions − as well as outputs generated in the debrief session − indicated that students achieved the learning outcomes. Overall, 94% of students agreed or strongly agreed that they had a better understanding of One Health because of the field trip.ConclusionsField trips to local parklands are effective in promoting learning about One Health and can be incorporated into the core curriculum to maximize student exposure at relatively low cost.

Stimulating Intrinsic Motivation in Millennial Students: A New Generation, a New Approach

“…Literature is replete with reports of the positive effects of providing autonomy to students in the development of IM (Cook and Artino, ; Abdel Meguid and Khalil, ; Christensen et al, ). It is also noteworthy that controlling behavior of educators has been consistently reported to impede student learning (Emerson, ; Mor et al, ), and achieve only short‐term compliance (Fryer et al, ; Nuffer et al, ). Thus, autonomy‐supportive health care education is intrinsically valuable by providing students with opportunities to learn from different perspectives (Vandewaetere et al, ; Burch et al, ; Mestdagh et al, ; Rowland and Kumagai, ; Woolley and Fishbach, ), and thereby enhance a greater conceptual understanding of the material (Abdel Meguid and Khalil, ; Christensen et al, ).…”

“…However, learning communities will only be effective if they address the specific objectives of health care education that include: service (Jacobs et al, ; Skodova et al, ; Tackett et al, ), advocacy (Gonzalo et al, ; McBride and Drake, ), research (Aboul‐Fotouh and Asghar‐Ali, ; Burch et al, ), global health (Toohey et al, ), and wellness (Miller, ; Oommen et al, ). Additionally, it is vital that these learning communities ensure that students “learn” and are not simply “taught” by identifying the current level of student achievement, establishing goals for improvement, and periodically evaluating evidences of progress (Mor et al, ; Rowland and Kumagai, ). Hence, while such educational reforms deserve to be lauded, continuous monitoring is necessary to ensure that they do not undermine the fundamental tenets of health care education.…”

“…This review is based on a scrutiny of scientific publications that have been largely derived from the data generated from surveys of student personal satisfaction (Kong et al, ; Zielezinski and Karlowski, ; Strombach et al, ) and preference (Nuffer et al, ; Eidson et al, ; Khalil et al, ). Since most of the reported studies are usually from one or two similar institutions (Kong et al, ; Streilein et al, ), the opinions that have been espoused are at times based on the observations (Jacobs et al, ; Pape et al, ) and perceptions (Lopes et al, ; Rogers and Tutty, ; Mor et al, ) of researchers of isolated student populations. Thus, the published literature may not be accurately reflective of the extraordinary diversity of the present‐day student population (Bradley et al, ; Strombach et al, ; Brass et al, ; Mabel and Britton, ).…”

“…Generational groups are classified by their birth years (Khalaila, 2015;Rutledge et al, 2018), and are typically shaped by congruent historical and societal events that define their values, beliefs, attitudes, and behaviors (Kirch and Ast, 2015;Harpe, 2017;Christensen et al, 2018). The current population of health care professionals is unique in that it comprises of numerous generations (Cook and Artino, 2016;Everson et al, 2018), which at times struggle to interact productively with each other (Tai et al, 2016;Rothmaler et al, 2017;Mor et al, 2018). This exemplifies the issues related to generational differences that scientists and educators have anticipated for decades (Khalaila, 2015;Rogers and Tutty, 2016;Gauer and Jackson, 2018).…”

“…These individuals consider all aspects of life from a global perspective (Fryer et al, 2016;Berger et al, 2019), tend to adopt technology at its highest levels (Hennessy et al, 2016;Shatto and Erwin, 2017), expect on-demand services (Orsini et al, 2016b) that are always available (Woolley and Fishbach, 2018;Manspeaker et al, 2019) and easily accessible (Fond et al, 2018;Lysak et al, 2018). Hence, they prefer educational opportunities that allow them to stay connected with technology (Agius et al, 2018), and expect their educators to do the same (Joshi et al, 2017;Mor et al, 2018). They also desire constant rewards (Coyne, et al, 2018;Gauer and Jackson, 2018) and want a close relationship with their peers (Nuffer et al, 2017) and those in authority (Persky and McLaughlin, 2017;McLuckie et al, 2018).…”