FA16 Immunization Module’s Updates
Introduction
Welcome to our Community! This module will help students enrolled in the University of Illinois Medical Program learn the basics of Immunization and Vaccination.
Please only join this community if you are a student enrolled in the program and have been sent here by your instructors. This community will have Open Enrollment for approximately 24 hours, after which time we will make this space Private for Program Members only.
To facilitate your work in this part of the course we will be using the Scholar system. Scholar is a "social knowledge" platform that combines social media features with knowledge sharing and learning management software. Information about how its features work can be found on the Tutorials Page - which you can always get to by clicking the "Help" button in the top-right corner of this screen.
You will:
- Comment on updates in the Community app
- Make an update in the Community app
- Write a clincal case study in the Creator app that demonstrates your capacity to translate the concepts addressed into clinical practice, peer review others' case studies, write a self-review reflecting on the processes of peer review. Your completed clinical case study will be published to the community and your personal profile page.
If you are viewing this as an update in your activity stream and you would like to look ahead, you can find the whole learning module here. However these updates will be released one by one into your activity stream, and you will receive notifications to start your case study, peer review others case studies, then revise and write a self-review.
This learning module has been created as part of a National Science Foundation grant in which we are creating a knowledge sharing environment that elicits a great deal of structured peer interaction. This supports the development of a culture of professional collaboration that is today so important in the medical profession. As part of the project, we will be seeking your opinions and user suggestions about this enviroment and its processes of collaboration.
In order for us to comply with the requirements of studying this course we need everyone to take the IRB Consent Survey. This item should appear soon as an Update in your Activity Stream, so please check it out.
Project Timeline:
September 26: Join CG Scholar and Enroll in the Immunization Module
September 26: Read the Introduction Update
- Comment on the Introduction Update as part of Class Discussion
September 26: Take the Consent Survey
September 27: Read Update 1 and Participate in Class Discussion
- Make your own Update by September 28
- Comment on 2 or 3 Peer Updates by September 30
September 30: Read Update 2 and Participate in Class Discussion
- Comment on Update 2 by October 4
October 3: Case Study Project Assigned
- Follow Instructions to begin your Case Study
October 10: Case Study Draft 1 Due
October 17: Peer Reviews Due
- Results of Peer Reviews are sent to Case Study Creators
October 24: Case Study Final Draft Due
- Finalized Works will be published to Personal Profiles
- Following publication of Case Studies you will discuss them in class
Comment: How do you think new media and communications technologies might impact peer collaborations in the medical profession? If you want to react to another participant's comment, start your comment with @Name?
@Jonathan Knisley Thank you for your comments. I completely agree that we need to provide honest critical feedback in this medium if we want it to be useful. It's of little use if we just pat each other on the back. My main point is to be make sure we are respectful and professional when we are posting comments. On the flip side, students who receive comments should recognize that criticisms are provided in the spirit of helping them improve. I hope this clarifies things and thank you again for your own comments on this point!
I agree with Crystal and others. Although I like the equal opportunity that technologies like this provide, there's a threshold to how much information is useful information and how much is too much. Information beyond that threshold is impossible to keep track of, and research the validity of the contributor's interpretation of the resources cited.
New media and communication technologies can be both good and bad, as so many before me have mentioned. I feel that a technologic platform creates a medium where everyone involved can have equal opportunity to contribute. However, the impact is diluted when there is too much input. Not to mention, when someone before you has a similar viewpoint, one could be discouraged from participating out of fear of not being authentic. In addditon, I agree with @Nicholas Romito when he mentions that technology gives people access to more information. More information encourages collaboration and make for a richer learning experience.
Many have expressed doubts about the efficiency of learning in a more self-directed medium with many participants, and I can appreciate that. It would be almost impossible to keep up with the comments of all 130 of us. So for now, skimming through the titles for a subject that piques one's interest might be the way to go. Hopefully when we get into the content of the course, there will be a more natural discussion and less repetition since we have so many sources available.
I think the idea of this sort of online learning forum is terrific. Approaching learning from a different perspective is always helpful, particularly in a field as ever-changing as medicine. Additionally, I agree with some of the previous comments noting that sharing the latest medical research , and exercising the best care for patients increasingly requires a strong understanding of using online content, social media, and devices (so exposing us to this sort of thing early is absolutely a positive).
However, I also agree with some of the previous comments about potential drawbacks. The utility of this sort of online learning forum will be limited by having such a large group of participants in terms of people being able to have meaningful conversations about all the posted topics. I think future forums could benefit from initially breaking the class into smaller groups for commenting and conversations about posted comments right from the start (like TBLs).
Overall, look forward to participating!
I think this collaborative, online environment is very interesting. I agree with a few students here that this may hinder - but I'm excited for the challenge. I'm worried that I may spend more time reading through long posts than actually learning relevant material. However, the idea that we have to create our own case studies sounds interesting for me. I am excited for the challenge and will try my best to adhere to the requirements.
As an educator this is an incredibly insightful thread for me. Thank you for all your comments and input. Clearly there are pros and cons to this medium but I believe the pros definitely outweigh the cons. I agree however, it shouldn't be only method of teaching, especially doctors who need to engage patients and other health professionals face-to-face!
New media and communication technologies will likely have a positive impact on future peer collaborations within the medical profession. Such media allows for more efficient collaboration over long distances and could be useful in connecting students within a given region, across the country, and around the globe. Educational media utilizing online forums can create a platform for learning and discussion, especially with regards to ethical issues in the medical profession and possibly conditions with no current understood cause and/or treatment. The efficiency of such collaboration, however, wanes as the group size increases. It becomes more difficult to keep up with updates and comments posted within the group as it grows, and more time than what is typically available is required to review posts and remain informed. Once the size of the group exceeds 20 to 30 individuals (and this range may be generous), the benefits of this platform are lost. At a certain point, the same ideas start to get rehashed and the discussion becomes stagnant. Plus, there is the issue of misinformation if the material presented via the media is not under constant review by faculty or other knowledgeable individuals in a given field. When it comes to material of a less debatable and more concrete nature, instruction from an authority on the material would seem to be a better means of learning.
Media and new forms of communications have already greatly facilitated and advanced the sharing of information with peers furthering our collaboration with others in the same field. I think it makes sense to expand that into the classroom using a collaborative forum such as this. It will be great way to learn from one another and share information regardless of geographical location and expose us to the technology we will use to collaborate with our colleagues in the future.
I however share the same concerns as many of my peers that when learning something new it is best to learn it in person with someone who is an expert in the field. In order for us to collaborative appropriately in this setting as in any other we must have a frame work to go from. Having learned the information first hand from someone who is knowledgeable in the topic will greatly improve our ability to take something from a collaborative forum like this. I nevertheless look forward to learning from a new modality of learning and collaboration that I know I will use throughout my career.
I agree with @Angela Delano when she says that she is reluctant to use a forum when we are not geographically limited. And, while it is much easier to get a response from everyone in a forum like this, inevitably there are a limited number of points that come out of the whole discussion, as many people say the exact same thing, making it cumbersome to read through thread after thread or comment after comment.
Overall, technology like this is a powerful tool to share information across divisions of all kinds--specialty, language, nationality--especially when it is in a less formal setting than a journal. People can put out their ideas, and even if those ideas/hypotheses are wrong, another person may see a work-around or gain some level of inspiration from another's failure.
I noticed that several people have wondered what the usefulness, particularly when considering time input, of this exercise is. As far as I'm concerned, this is to teach us not the facts that we need to learn, but rather how to learn. I was fortunate enough to spend a year studying at Oxford, and most of the learning that one does through the Oxbridge tutorial system is independent--combing through textbooks and scientific papers to understand the assigned topic. Basic knowledge is supplied in lecture, and then a topic/topics are discussed in great detail in tutorials (one teacher and a few students, and the students prepare an essay on the topic), with the tutor explaining where students fell short, what they did well, and what they have factually incorrect. As clinicians, we can't just sit there and say, Well, I was never directly fed this information or hypothesis so I have no idea what might be going on. No. We have to use our knowledge base to synthesize coherent ideas, and use our how to learn skills to separate useful information from the not useful, good research from bad, and the like. Learning how to learn is one of the most powerful tools I have ever been given. Take advantage of it, even though it will probably make your brain hurt a good portion of the time.