How do you measure quality in Interprofessional education? Are the same measurements required for Interprofessional e-learning?
Recently at an EIPEN workshop Hugh Barr (12.09.08) identified a number of existing documents which inform IPE quality. These were:
QAA Benchmark statements
Regualtory and professional bodies (QA/Education) standards
Barr H (2000) Ensuring Quality in Interprofessional Education:2-3 available from http://www.caipe.org.uk
CAIPE (2007) Creating an Interprofessional workforce: An Education and Training Framwork for Health and Social Care. Executive Summary (Known as CIPW document!) Available at http://www.caipe.org.uk or http://www.dh.gov.uk
EIPEN have a research project considering: What kinds of QA methods and processes for education and training currently exist across the European Union? (Researcher - Dr Andre Vyt University of Ghent)

The Cipel (CETL) hosted a creative workshop on 16th September 2008 to consider our definitions of Interprofessionality. Following a demonstration by Andi Brookes (CIPeL Learning Technologist) of “crazy talk”, “sketchup”, “comic life”, “antics” and “facegen” the CIPeL team got to work to produce a number of definitions of Interprofessionality. Once individuals had written their paragraphs on what Interprofessionality is we then set about being creative. Following a photo shoot, audio recordings and suggested scenarios the CIPeL team went on to produce learning objects to illustrating their definitions of “Interprofessionality”. The CIPeL team can post comments below regarding their definitions and Learning Objects.

Computer assisted learning (CAL) or e-learning may be one of a number of solutions to the delivery of Interprofessional education. E-approaches are thought to offer potential solutions to some of the barriers with Interprofessional education (namely deliverying IPE to large numbers of health and social care students, logistical aspects, accommodation and time constraints)
Possible barriers to Interprofessional learning include:

Barrier - Lack of appropriate learning material. Most health related digital resources focus on individual rather than collaborative learning.
E-advantage. Students can collaborate around e-resources (scenarios and activities) that are precisely tailored to address IPL outcomes and capabilities, and which encourage collaborative learning

Barrier - Stereotypical and counter-productive views of other professions often stemming from lack of knowledge of the roles, skills, values and philosophies espoused by other professions.
E-advantage. Students can explore differences in philosophical approaches, values and models of practice in a safe virtual learning environment.

Barrier - Limited professional representation: No single HEI in the UK offers programmes for every health and social care profession. This means that there are inevitably institutionally biased gaps in professional representation and perspectives which can undermine the validity and relevance of IPL
E-advantage. Students can gain access to professions which have interacted with the patient/client but who are not represented in the HEI. (Either through representation in the e-resource or guest participation in online interactions).

Barrier - Professional status and power relationships. Documented evidence suggests that students from professions perceived as ‘less powerful’ may be reticent about expressing their views when in the presence of ‘more powerful, higher status’ professions.
E-advantage. Online interaction permits timely and considered responses: students have time to form a group identity in which they feel comfortable about sharing insights.

Barrier - Unequal exposure to inter-professional collaboration during practice placements. Some placements expose students to frequent interactions with other professionals and good practice in inter-professional working, many placements do not.
E-advantage. Through e-resources, students can experience a wider and more equitable range of opportunities to fulfil IPL capabilities than can be guaranteed by their individual practice placements

Barrier - Capacity and logistics. There is often insufficient teaching space with appropriately sized and configured breakout rooms to accommodate large numbers of students from different professional courses. Meanwhile all health and social care courses require students to spend a significant part of their learning time in practice settings. Thus opportunities for inter-professional ‘classes’ are severely constrained and impacted by timetabling restrictions.
E-advantage. The use of e-approaches to IPL enables students to undertake learning at any time of day or night while in the University or on placement. Thus they can communicate via virtual learning sets even when geographically separate.

Barrier - Addressing the patient perspective: As the principle of IPL is to encourage inter-professional working around the needs of the patient, then it follows that IPL must be informed by the patient’s voice. This introduces further logistical and ethical barriers (related to patient consent and data protection) to achieving effective patient-centred IPL for large numbers of students without intimidating the patient.
E-Advantage. Patients’/clients’ authentic accounts of illness or care can be presented through an interactive virtual learning environment that facilitates interaction without the patient/client having to speak to students en masse.

One of the main strands of CIPeLs work is to test out the validity of possible solutions. CIPeL currently have three areas for staff to consider and engage in learning activites and research utilising technological solutions. These are:
CIPeL in CURVE http://curve.coventry.ac.uk
CIPeL Interprofessional Centre in Second Life (SL) - Coventry University Island.
CIPeL Centre and laboratory in James Starley Building (Coventry University). A physical space where we welcome visitors to meet, and engage with our learning technologies.
One of our current research projects is IPLOMUVE focuses on Interprofessional learning in second life. If you wish to socialise and engage with other IP activities in Second life contact e.clarke@coventry.ac.uk

Since January 2007, the CIPeL team have been exporing what makes a Learning Object Interprofessional. We have considered the CUILU competencies, IMS and the RLO LOAM tool. Following our SIG meeting on 15.07.08 further progress was made. At a CIPeL workshop in Sheffield in July the following attributes were considered to be componants of an Interprofessional learning object:
Authentic, Role of Others, Shared/common goals and Collaboration. These attributes provide a handprint for others who wish to develop learning objects that support Interprofessional learning. Luke Miller (learning technologist) has developed a CIPeL tool to enable developers of Learning objects to identify the extent to which a learning object demonstrates the Interprofessional Attributes.

Professional Indentity - what is it? when is it acquired or adopted? What does your professional identitiy say about you? Do some professions reinvent themselves? The IPID Applied research group have been considering some of the above questions. Here is the start of relevent literature around Professional Identity:
Jowett R (2008) “The changing role of the academic engaged in health care education” in HEA Newsletter available from: www.health.academy.ac.uk – it identifies how health care academics have to accommodate and perfect new practices and skills.
Aiken S (2007) Identitiy crisis - reality or myth? Presentation at Plymouth ceppl conference 08.10.07
Workman A and Packard J (2007) Professional identitiy in multi-disciplinary teams: a case study. NHS North East.
Hall S (1996)

Here is a start of relevent literature around strategic, policy and political drivers for IPE

Department of Health (2001) Working together, Learning together: a framework for lifelong learning for the NHS. Department of Health, London.
Leatherhead A (ed) (2003) Interprofessional Collaboration.From policy to practice in health and social care. Brunner-Routledge.
Meads G & Ashcroft J with Barr H, Scott R and Wild A (2004) The case for Interprofessional collaboration in health and social care. Blackwell Publishing.

Please add literature that you consider informs this area of IPE. Thank you.

What are the barriers to interprofessional/Interdisciplinary working?
Here are some possible barriers for you to consider
Different incentives (Ovretveit 1993) Lymbery (1998)
Personality clashes
Different Systems e.g. resource allocation, accountability structures
Professional tribalism
Pace of change
Workloads
Spending constraints
Policy
What does the literature identify?

Here is a start of relevent literature
Stepney P & Callwood I (2006) Collaborative working in Health and Social Care: A review of the literature. University of Wolverhampton. Learning and Teaching Projects 2005/06
Rummery and Glendinning (1997)

Interprofessional education, multiprofessional education, interdisciplinary, multidisciplinary education all mean the same things don’t they? Many people use the terms interchangably (Wee 2001) and some assume that an audience will know what they mean.(Leathard (2003) refers to this as a “terminology quagmire” and that it should be clarified to enable sucessful implementation. The Standing Committee on Postgraduate Medical and Dental Education (SCOPME) defines multiprofessional learning as “ranging from different professionals being educated together in a formal sense to having a mutual respect and understanding for the contribution of individuals within a team” Wee (2001) goes on to site the original CAIPE (1996) Interprofessional education definition of “professionals from different backgrounds learn with, from and about each other in a more dynamic and interactive process. The definitions provided by CAIPE (2006) are “Multiprofessional education: Occasions when two or more professions learn side by side for whatever reason” and “Interprofessional Education:occasions when two or more professions learn from and about each other to improve collaboration and the quality of care”. Some commentators have focused on distinguishing between “inter” and “multi” (Pirrie et al 1998) others have focused on “profession” and “discipline” (Smith and Clouder 2008).
Here are some articles for interest and consideration:
Thistlethwaite J and Nisbet G (2007) The Clinical Teacher 4:67-72, Blackwell Publishing Ltd.
Here are some articles to interest and promote further discussion:
Leathard (2003) Introduction in Leatherhead A (ed) Interprofessional Collaboration. Brunner-Routledge.London
Pirrie et al (1998) multidisciplinary team working: Beyond the Barriers? A review of the issues.The SCRE Centre. Accessed at http://www.scre.ac.uk/resreport/rr96/section1.html on 22.05.07
Stepney P and Callwood I (2006) Collaborative working in health and social care: A review of the literature. available at http://wlv.openrepository.com/wlv/bitstream/2436/7586/1/Collaborative%20Working%20in%20Health%20and%20Social%20Care.pdf
Wee B et al (2001) Palliative care: a suitable setting for undergraduate interporfessional education. Palliative Medicine 2001, 15: 487-492

One of the most frequently asked questions is - what is or are Interprofessional Learning Objects? A simple question perhaps! There is a simple answer or is there? One of the interesting outcomes of working in a CETL is that knowledge is challenged and created.
Wiley (2002) defined learning objects as “any digital resource that can be reused to support learning” whilst other definitions are more detailed, for example Koper (2003) suggests “any digital, reproducible and addressable resource used to perform learning activities or learning support activities, made available for others to use” Boyle (2006) considers that there is ambiguity in the use of terminology and that a conventional approach is to regard Learning Objects as “reusable chunks of content” One of the early definitions used by CIPeL was “a learning object is a reusable unit of instruction for learning” (CIPeL 2005) Another definition of learning object is “a digitized entity which can be used, reused or referred to during technology supported learning” (Rehak and Mason 2003). Learning objects have also been defined as:
“small, reusable units of learning” (Polsani 2003, Campbell 2003)
“a unit with a learning objective, together with digital and independent capabilities containing one or a few related ideas and accessible through metadata to be reused in different contexts and platforms” (Morgado et al 2005)
“ a set of resources that can be used as independent and reusable units through different context and platforms” (Morgado, Penalvo and Ruiz 2005)
“a unit with a learning objective, together with digital and independent capabilities containing one or a few related ideas and accessible through metadata to be reused in different contexts and platforms” (Morgado et al 2005)
All of the above definitions do not identify the Interprofessional aspects. or explain how a learning object becomes suitable or useful for Interprofessional education.
What makes a learning object interprofessional? Does the type of LO (trigger or scenario) make a LO into an IPLO? or can the LO itself be interprofessional? Clarke (2008) suggested that an IPLO may be defined as “any digital resource which supports professionals learning with, from and about each other” this definition which might be useful, utilises the term professional which could be considered restrictive or nebulous.
So just what is an Interprofessional Learning Object? responses to this question will be helpful in facilitating a “workable” definition. Please post your comments below.

Core CIPeL Staff (Director Lynn Clouder and Associate Director Elinor Clarke) presented at the Birmingham Conference, hosted by the West Midlands Deanery on Thursday 8th May 2008. The Birmingham Conference is the annual educational event for health care professionals. It is sponsored by the West Midlands Strategic Health Authority. Dr Lynn Clouder presented “The promotion of Interprofessional Learning throughout undergraduate health and social care education with the use of e-learning” and Elinor Clarke presented “Involving Service Users and Carers in the development of Interprofessional Learning Objects (IPLOs)”.