Measurement Strategy & Connecting and Communicating the Idea

Blended Learning in the Radiography Curriculum: An Action Research Plan

​

Radiography requires that new graduates be excellent critical thinkers because all patients come in with a variety of circumstances that make it difficult or impossible to follow the typical standard of practice. These circumstances do not excuse the radiographer from obtaining optimal images. The radiography curriculum at Dallas College has moved to 8-week semesters from the standard 16 week, however; the amount content has remained the same. Owing to the speed of the curriculum, we need to engage in those skills sooner and speed up the process of critical thinking and adjusting to patient conditions. Students are struggling to grasp concepts. I recognize the need to add something to the coursework that will create an opportunity for better understanding. My goal is to introduce blended learning to meet different objectives. First, bringing the methods used to instruct the students into the current century using digital platforms instead of the traditional lecture/lab format. The second is creating a better grasp of the content and how the varying pieces of the content connect by using real-world scenarios. Using Lev Vygotsky’s social constructivist theories, I will be putting students at different cohort levels together to work through scenarios to make concepts more meaningful. Vygotsky believed that putting more knowledgeable learners with newer learners worked to improve understanding (McLeod, 2023).

​

Fundamental Research Question

The fundamental research question is: Does collaboration between first semester radiography students and fourth semester radiography students impact critical thinking in real-life scenarios with the first semester students?

 

This is an important question because students and new graduates must be able to utilize critical thinking to make modifications in their practice. This is an area that was already a struggle in the longer semester but seemed to become exponentially worse when the semesters became shorter, but content remained the same. This generation of students is far more technology savvy than other students, which coupled with radiography application in the hospital being technology driven, makes using blended learning appear to be a necessary tool to add for student satisfaction and engagement. This action research plan will be the first step in identifying if adding blended learning can impact student understanding.

 

Summary of the Literature Review

The literature reviewed for this action research project was immensely helpful in indicating that collaboration between healthcare professionals at various levels was impactful for improving both teamwork and critical thinking skills. It offered general guidance in creating a framework and metric but lacked the specificity needed for radiography although other health professions did have guidance. Establishing a metric for evaluating online discussion forums so there is a viable way to measure outcomes will be imperative. I also need to provide a distinct way for both adequate quality and equal engagement among the students. Creating relevant topics for radiography so critical thinking can be engaged, students staying engaged and motivated will also be a priority.

Conclusions drawn from this body of literature is that there is more research needed in using blended learning in health science curriculums. Although nothing appears to be lost from implementation of blended learning within the radiography curriculum, the true long-term student outcomes are still in question. The time intensive process for implementation and lack of qualitative ways to measure the data do give pause. 

Study Information

In the area of allied health education, qualitative research can explore how students perceive and experience blended learning models. Interviews, evaluations, and case-studies can uncover insights into students' challenges and successes with simulations, and face-to-face interactions, which will serve to inform the design and improvement of the radiography program. The objective is to see the impact of the activity on both groups of students across more than one cohort and see if any change occurs.

Research Design

Qualitative research design will be the method utilized for this action research plan. This method provides a deeper emphasis on learner perspectives and experiences. It is more flexible and adaptable to changes in the research process. Qualitative research focuses on the interpretation of experiences and captures the context in which participants operate. Understanding the context helps in interpreting behaviors, experiences, and interactions within the research topic. It also allows for better reflection and interaction between the learner cohorts and the faculty (researcher) (Mertler,2020). I must use qualitative measures because I am looking for student engagement and experience which cannot be measured quantitatively.

There are multiple areas of quantitative measurement within the radiography curriculum already. The goal of this action research is to establish if the students feel engaged and satisfied in their learning and if they feel the objectives intended impacted their understanding and improved their critical thinking. This will be the first of several opportunities to investigate student understanding using qualitative measures.

Data Collection and Analysis

The data collection will happen over two different cohorts of students. The collection will begin with the spring A group which begins in January of 2025. A discussion forum will be established between the two groups of students. The more advanced students will offer real-life scenarios and the new students will have to interact with at least two different scenarios. The more advanced students will then be required to engage with the replies to guide the new students to a place of outside of the box thinking. Student cohorts begin every summer and every spring. The semesters are 8 weeks in length so I will measure on the following timeline. 

•  Week 1- Case study #1 presented for first semester students to complete (see Appendix                A).

•  Week 4- Mid-semester evaluation for both groups (see Appendix B)

•  Week 7-End of semester evaluation for semester 1 students (see Appendix C) and fourth                       semester  students (see Appendix D).

•  Week 8- Case study #1 completed again by first semester students (see Appendix A). fourth semester students evaluate experience (see Appendix E) 

The data is analyzed to see if there is better understanding of the case study through the mentorship. The data will also provide if the students found value in the discussion forums with their peers. The mid-semester evaluation results will be compared with the end of semester results for both groups of students. If 50% of more students evaluate as “agree” or “strongly agree” then we will continue with the implementation and move to the next area of research. The case study (Appendix A) presented in week one will be compared to the second presentation in week eight for improved understanding. This process will be repeated for two cohorts of students (roughly eighty students). The process will take 8 months to complete so two separate cohorts of students can be evaluated.

Sharing and Communicating Results

After the data collection and analysis, the results of this research will be shared with all the program faculty for the radiography program. All the program faculty share students across class, labs, and clinicals so it is essential that all faculty understand the impact of the analysis. They may have other case studies to offer or other important observations that should be examined moving forward. The students that are collaborating can belong to any of the faculty when they move into clinicals. This is relevant so that faculty can also evaluate if they believe the students are exhibiting changes in critical thinking in their clinical work moving forward.

Final Reflection

Once the study has been completed and the data analyzed, I will sit with my program director and curriculum committee to determine if the results are worth making curriculum adjustments. The program director and curriculum committee are responsible for any changes implemented into the curriculum for the students, so they must know if changes are being considered. I will also collaborate with the faculty for the courses that are affected if we want to implement these additions across other courses and if we should analyze different elements for impact.

 

References

 

McLeod, S. (2023, June 2). Vygotsky’s sociocultural theory of cognitive development. Simply                                          Psychology. https://www.simplypsychology.org/vygotsky.html  

Mertler, C. A. (2020). Action research: Improving schools and empowering

            educators. SAGE Publications, Inc.