Strategically aligning same-year/level peer-assisted learning implementation objectives with the aim of foundation provision for health sciences education in South Africa: A qualitative Delphi survey
Article Sidebar
Main Article Content
Abstract
Background. The aim of foundation provision (FP) in higher education (HE) is focused on the concept ‘access to success’ through the provision of academic and curriculum support to previously disadvantaged students. Same-year/level peer-assisted learning (SPAL) is implemented increasingly in medical curricula worldwide to support the academic, personal and professional development of students in the same year of study. However, there is no literature available on the strategic alignment between SPAL implementation objectives and the aim of FP for health sciences education (HSE) offered in South Africa (SA).
Objective. To establish SPAL implementation objectives that were expertly and strategically aligned with the aim of FP in HSE in support of vulnerable students’ academic, personal and professional development.
Methods. A four-round qualitative Delphi method was used. The qualitative questionnaires were electronically distributed to 12 purposively sampled experts in the field of HSE and health professions education (HPE). A consensus level of 75% agreement between panel members was applied for the identification of endorsed statements.
Results. SPAL implementation objectives for 16 students and four departments were identified and strategically aligned with the aim of FP for HSE students and departments.
Conclusion. A SPAL strategy was expertly validated in support of the academic, personal and professional development of previously disadvantaged students. This article offers SPAL implementation objectives that are strategically aligned with the access to success aim of FP. These implementation objectives are recommended for consideration by SA higher education institutions (HEIs) when planning SPAL for extended curriculum programme students and departments offering HSE.
Downloads
Article Details
Issue
Section
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License.
The AJHPE is published under an Attribution-Non Commercial International Creative Commons Attribution (CC-BY-NC 4.0) License. Under this license, authors agree to make articles available to users, without permission or fees, for any lawful, non-commercial purpose. Users may read, copy, or re-use published content as long as the author and original place of publication are properly cited.
Exceptions to this license model is allowed for UKRI and research funded by organisations requiring that research be published open-access without embargo, under a CC-BY licence. As per the journals archiving policy, authors are permitted to self-archive the author-accepted manuscript (AAM) in a repository.
How to Cite
References
1. Scott I. Access, success and curriculum. In: Dhunpath R, Vithal R, eds. Alternative Access to Higher Education: Underprepared Students or Underprepared Institutions? Pinelands: Pearson, 2014:26-50.
2. Dhunpath R, Vithal R, eds. Alternative Access to Higher Education: Underprepared Students or Underprepared Institutions? Pinelands: Pearson, 2014.
3. Kloot B, Case J, Marshall D. A critical review of the educational philosophies underpinning science and engineering foundation programmes. S Afr J High Educ 2008;22(4):799-816. https://doi.org/10.4314/sajhe. v22i4.25817
4. Council on Higher Education. Extended Programmes with an Integrated Foundation Phase: Theoretical Considerations for Curriculum Design. Pretoria: CHE, 2002. https://www.che.ac.za/file/6372/ download?token=4lPkfc7G (accessed 11 November 2023).
5. Chukwuere JE. Student voice in an extended curriculum programme in the era of social media: A systematic review of academic literature. Int J High Educ 2021;10(1):147-156. https://doi.org/10.5430/ijhe.v10n1p147
6. Garraway J, Bozalek V. Theoretical frameworks and the extended curriculum programme. Alternation 2019;26(2):8-35. https://doi.org/10.29086/2519-5476/2019/v26n2a2
7. Capstick S. Benefits and shortcomings of peer assisted learning (PAL) in higher education: An appraisal by students. 2004. https://www.bournemouth.ac.uk/sites/default/files/asset/document/stuart-capstick.pdf (accessed 11 November 2023).
8. Herrmann-Werner A, Gramer R, Erschens R, et al. Peer-assisted learning (PAL) in undergraduate medical education: An overview. J Evidence Based Med Healthc 2017;121:74-81. https://doi.org/10.1016/j. zefq.2017.01.001
9. Coliñir JH, Gallardo LM, Morales DG, et al. Characteristics and impacts of peer assisted learning in university studies in health science: A systematic review. Revista Clinica Española (Barcelona) 2022;222(1):44-53. https:// doi.org/10.1016/j.rceng.2021.02.006
10. ToppingKJ.Trendsinpeerlearning.EducPsychol2005;25(6):631-645.https://doi.org/10.1080/01443410500345172 11. Slabbert R, du Plessis J. Quality assurance of peer-assisted learning by measuring academic performance of health sciences extended curriculum students. Perspect Educ 2021;39(2):95-112. https://doi.org/10.18820/2519593X/
pie.v39.i2.8
12. Sekayi D, Kennedy A. Qualitative Delphi method: A four round process with a worked example. Qual Rep 2017;22(10):2577-2763.
13. Ritchie J, Lewis J, Gilliam Elam RG. Selecting samples. In: Ritchie J, Lewis J, McNaughton C, Orston R, eds. Qualitative Research Practice: A Guide for Social Science Students and Researchers. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications, 2013:77-108.
14. Naisola-Ruiter V. The Delphi technique: A tutorial. Res Hospitality Manage 2022;12(1):91-97. https://doi.org/1 0.1080/22243534.2022.2080942
15. Meertens R. Utilisation of a peer assisted learning scheme in an undergraduate diagnostic radiography module. Radiography 2016;22(1):e69-e74. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.radi.2015.08.004
16. Cole JC, Ruble, MJ, Donnelly J, Groves B. Peer-assisted learning: Clinical skills training for pharmacy students. Am J Pharm Educ 2018;82(6):6511. https://doi.org/10.5688/ajpe6511
17. Ngcobo S. Lecturers’ and students’ reflections on a bilingual programme. In: Leibowitz B, van der Merwe A, van Schalkwyk S, eds. Focus on First-Year Success: Perspectives Emerging from South Africa and Beyond. Stellenbosch: SUN Press, 2009:209-226.
18. Dhunpath R, Subbaye R. Student success and curriculum reform in post-apartheid South Africa. Int J Chin Educ 2018;7:85-106. https://doi.org/10.1163/22125868-12340091
19. Abay ES, Turan S, Odabaşı O, Elçin M. Who is the preferred tutor in clinical skills training: Physicians, nurses, or peers? Teach Learn Med 2017;29(3):247-254. https://doi.org/10.1080/10401334.2016.1274262
20. Silbert BI, Lake FR. Peer-assisted learning in teaching clinical examination to junior medical students. Med Teach 2012;34(5):392-397. https://doi.org/10.3109/0142159X.2012.668240
21. McKenna L, Williams B. The hidden curriculum in near-peer learning: An exploratory qualitative study. Nurse Educ Today 2017;50:77-81. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.nedt.2016.12.010
22. McKenna S. The context of access and foundation provisioning in South Africa. In: Dhunpath R, Vithal R, eds. Alternative Access to Higher Education: Underprepared Students or Underprepared Institutions? Pinelands: Pearson, 2014:50-60.
23. Muller J, Young M. Knowledge, power and powerful knowledge revisited. Curric J 2019;30(2):196-214. https:// doi.org/10.1080/09585176.2019.1570292
24. Gamage KAA, Jeyachandran K, Dehideniya SCP, et al. Online and hybrid teaching effects on graduate attributes: Opportunity or cause for concern? Educ Sci 2023;13(2):221. https://doi.org/10.3390/educsci13020221
25. Callese T, Strowd R, Navarro B, et al. Conversation starter: Advancing the theory of peer-assisted learning. Teach Learn Med 2019;31(1):7-16. https://doi.org/10.1080/10401334.2018.1550855