Timetable Time Monday 14th May 2012 Tuesday 15th May 2012 Wednesday 16th May 2012 Thursday 17th May 2012 Friday 18th May 2012 8.00 – 10.15 Welcome Introduction to leadership Audit feedback David Davies Paul Long Paul O’Hare Introduction to values based practice Ed Peile Saliya Chipwete Service improvement and the cycle & implementing clinical guidelines Paul O’Hare Chisale Mhango Quality improvement in obstetrics & obstetrics expert panel Paul O’Hare Chisale Mhango Saliya Chipwete Francis Kamwendo Shared leadership & Clinical Leadership Competency Framework Paul Long 10.15 – 10.30 Break Break Break 10.30 – 12.00 Audit feedback Paul O’Hare Values based practice Ed Peile Saliya Chipwete Evidence based practice and research Paul O’Hare Chisale Mhango Team working & managing change Alan Davies Behaviours & skills for leadership Alan Davies 12.00 – 1.00 Lunch Lunch Lunch Lunch 1.00 – 2.30 Introduction to service improvement & problem identification Garry Swann Values case studies Ed Saliya Chipwete Service improvement scenarios Paul O’Hare Chisale Mhango Neonatal scenarios Dube Ed Peile OSCE assessment All faculty 2.30 – 2.45 Break Break Break Break (flexible) 2.45 – 4.00 Values stream mapping & service improvement Garry Swann Values case studies Ed Peile Saliya Chipwete Service improvement scenarios Paul O’Hare Chisale Mhango Neonatal scenarios Queen Dube Ed Peile Preparing for your independent learning & log book David Davies Paul Long
Appendix 1: Portfolio Assessment Criteria (Adapted from ‘New masters level assessment criteria from September 2007’) CRITERIA A+80% plus A 70–79% B 60–69% C 50-59% D 40 – 49% E 39% and below KNOWLEDGE AND UNDERSTANDING 1. Evidence that a wide range of high quality literature has been accessed Credible sources – peer reviewed, professional / academic texts, websites, DOH directives. Original work accessed whenever possible. Contemporary - with exception of seminal work. 2. Discussion is supported by relevant literature and research Claims are substantiated. Literature / reference material is appropriate and clearly linked to the portfolio topic. Integration, paraphrasing and summarising of 80% plus mark is awarded when work satisfies all of the ‘A’ criteria in each section to an exceptional demonstrating mastery of complex and specialised knowledge and is worthy of dissemination to a wider audience. There is excellent evidence of widespread reading from a variety of sources. Excellent use of literature and research, appropriately integrated into the assessment to demonstrate exceptional understanding of the key issues. There is very good evidence of background reading and reference material is used appropriately to support the discussion. Very good grasp of the relevant material demonstrating a good understanding of the key issues. is evidence of relevant background reading and this is generally used in a suitable way to substantiate the assignment content. There is a competent level of understanding of the key issues. Whilst there is some evidence of background reading this is not of a quality consistent with this level of study. There is limited understanding of the key issues. Little evidence that suitable background material has been accessed and poor understanding of the key issues.
research findings rather than overuse of direct quotations. 3. A coherent and thorough overview of theoretical concepts is presented demonstrating understanding of the relevant issues Key or issues relating to each task or piece of evidence included in the portfolio are identified. CRITERIA A+80% plus A 70 – 79% B 60 – 69% C 50-59% D 40 – 49% E 39% and below ANALYSIS AND EVALUATION 1. Evidence of critical thinking and analysis Questioning; identifying and challenging assumptions. An awareness of the importance of context in creating meaning. Identifying problems. Finding connections. 2. Uses data and evidence from practice selectively to construct a logical discussion Establishes a relationship between data (e.g. evidence of own practice ; research/literature) and topic under discussion. Doesn’t ‘over reference’. 80% plus mark is awarded when work satisfies all of the A’ criteria in each section to an exceptional level demonstrating mastery of complex and specialised knowledge and is worthy of dissemination to a wider audience. There is excellent evidence of critical analysis and reflection accompanied by a profound appraisal of the literature and evaluation of theoretical concepts. The material is managed in a highly There is very good evidence of critical analysis and reflection with evaluation of the literature/ theoretical concepts. The material is managed in a creative way with expression of some original thought. Whilst there is evidence of critical analysis and reflection some issues required further exploration. There is a competent level of evaluation of the literature and theoretical concepts. There is evidence of There is very limited evidence of critical analysis and reflection and much of the writing is descriptive. Evaluation of the literature and key concepts is scarce and there is a lack of originality in Little or no evidence of critical analysis or reflection and the discussion is entirely descriptive. There is very poor evaluation of the literature and theoretical concepts and no credible judgements are formed.
Creative use of concepts. Imagining and exploring alternatives. 7. Evidence of original and creative thought The topic is approached or discussed in an innovative way. Imaginative but realistic solutions to problems are suggested. There is evidence of unique perspectives on a problem. CRITERIA A+80% plus A 70 – 79% B 60 – 69% C 50-59% D 40 – 49% E 39% and below APPLICATION Credible links between theory and professional practice are demonstrated Evidence of the interpretation of theoretical perspectives through the use of practical examples. Awareness of the strengths and limitations of research or literature in terms of applicability to own professional practice. Realistic recommendations for professional practice are suggested. Evidence is evaluated and applied to professional practice Demonstrates how the material 80% plus mark is awarded when work satisfies all of the ‘A’ criteria in each section to an exceptional level mastery of complex and specialised knowledge and is worthy Credible links between theory and professional practice are to an exceptional level. There is excellent appraisal of evidence which supports the is good evidence of credible and relevant links between theory and professional practice. The evaluation of the evidence is of a good standard and Competent links between theory and professional practice are made although some areas could have been developed further to demonstrate evaluation of the evidence and the application of There are some attempts to link theory to professional practice but these are limited and, in some cases, unrealistic or inappropriate. The evaluation of evidence is minimal. Irrelevant or no links are made between theory and professional practice. Evidence is not evaluated.
COMMUNICATION 1. The assessment guidelines have been rigorously interpreted and followed The portfolio addresses the questions asked (i.e. the set tasks or module learning outcomes) Appropriate evidence of practice is selected and included. Achievement of the module learning outcomes is demonstrated. 2. Presentation and structure Structure is coherent and logical. Presentation and formatting of the portfolio follow module guidance. Sections and appendices are appropriately and clearly labelled. 3. References and citations An approved method of referencing has been used both within the main text and in the reference list. References and citations are correctly and consistently formatted. 4. Writing is articulate and clear Correct spelling, grammar and syntax. Appropriate use of technical language. Variety in the way information is presented. 5. Word limit is adhered to 80% plus mark is awarded when work satisfies all of the ‘A’ criteria in each section to an exceptional demonstrating mastery of complex and specialised knowledge and is worthy of dissemination to a wider audience. Excellent interpretation of assessment criteria. Writing is highly articulate and there is a logical, coherent structure. Referencing technique is excellent. Word limit is adhered to. Very good of the criteria. Generally the writing is articulate and there is a logical flow of information expressed through a clear structure. Work is accurately Word limit is adhered to. A competent interpretation of the assessment guidelines. There are clear attempts to provide a logical structure but there are some in the approach used. Referencing technique is satisfactory. Word limit is adhered to. are attempts to interpret the assessment guidelines but some of these are flawed. The assignment lacks a clear and logical structure and due to poor writing skills, ideas and concepts are not adequately expressed. Does not maintain an accurate referencing technique. length. The assignment little relevance to the assessment guidelines or the area of It lacks structure and there is poor use of language including several and recurrent grammatical and syntax errors. The expression of meaning is very weak and there are numerous referencing errors. length.