Advertisement

Making Neuroscience Important and Relevant: Online Learning in an Innovative Bachelor of Dementia Care Program

  • Lynette GoldbergEmail author
  • Andrea Carr
  • Alison Canty
  • Shannon Klekociuk
  • David Ward
  • Lila Landowski
  • Carolyn King
  • Fran McInerney
  • James Vickers
Conference paper
Part of the Lecture Notes of the Institute for Computer Sciences, Social Informatics and Telecommunications Engineering book series (LNICST, volume 160)

Abstract

Neuroscience is an important component of STEM disciplines and fundamental to understanding dementia, a growing worldwide public health issue. Understanding the neuropathology and clinical manifestations of dementia is important for those who need to provide effective daily care for adults with dementia. Dementia care workers form a non-traditional student cohort and the Wicking Dementia Research and Education Centre at the University of Tasmania (Australia) has developed a fully online Bachelor of Dementia Care degree to facilitate their educational and professional development. This paper documents the success of 65 adult learners as they completed four neuroscience units in the degree. Adult learners with no previous university experience performed similarly to those with university experience suggesting that this unique online degree is appropriately designed for students with limited educational backgrounds. Analysis of students’ comments on the impact of their neuroscience learning indicated increased understanding and confidence in the care they provided.

Keywords

Dementia Effective care Neuroscience Neuropathology Online learning 

References

  1. 1.
    Australian Bureau of Statistics (2013). Population projections, Australia, 2012 (base) to 2101. http://www.abs.gov.au/
  2. 2.
    Genet, N., Boerma, W., Kroneman, M., Hutchinson, A., Saltman, R.B.: Observatory studies series 27. World Health Organization, Copenhagen (2012)Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Institute of Medicine: Retooling for an Aging America: Building the Healthcare Workforce. National Academies Press, Washington, DC (2008)Google Scholar
  4. 4.
  5. 5.
    Kyndt, E., Dochy, F., Onghena, P., Baert, H.: The learning intentions of low-qualified employees: a multilevel approach. Adult Educ. Q. 63(2), 165–189 (2013)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Goldberg, L.R., Canty, A.: Quality assurance in online learning: the contribution of computational linguistics analysis to criterion referenced assessment. eLearning papers, 40, 1–4 January 2015. ISSN: 1887-1542. www.openeducationeuropa.eu/en/elearning_papers
  7. 7.
    Waugh, A., Austin, A., Manthorpe, J., Fox, C., Stephens, B., Robinson, L., Iliffe, S.: Designing a complex intervention for dementia case management in primary care. BMC Fam. Pract. 14, 101 (2013). http://www.biomedcentral.com/1471-2296/14/101 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Razavi, S., Staav, S.: Underpaid and overworked: a cross-national perspective on care workers. Int. Labour Rev. 149, 407–422 (2010)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Robinson, A., Eccleston, C., Annear, M., Elliott, K.-E., Andrews, S., Stirling, C., Ashby, M., Donohue, C., Banks, S., Toye, C., McInerney, F.: Who knows, who cares? dementia knowledge among nurses, care workers, and family members of people living with dementia. J. Palliat. Care 30, 158–165 (2014)Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Goldberg, L.R., Bell, E., King, C., O’Mara, C., McInerney, F., Robinson, A., Vickers, J.: Relationship between participants’ level of education and engagement in their completion of the Understanding Dementia Massive Open Online Course. BioMed. Cent.– Med. Educ. Approaches Teach. Learn. (2015) (in press)Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Ross-Gordon, J.M.: Research on adult learners: supporting the needs of a student population that is no longer traditional. Peer Rev. 13(1, winter), 1–6 (2011)Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    Cercone, K.: Characteristics of adult learners with implications for online learning design. AACE J. 16(2), 137–159 (2008)Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    Kasworm, C.E.: Adult learners in a research university: negotiating undergraduate student identity. Adult Educ. Q. 60(2), 143–160 (2010)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    King, C., Doherty, K., Kelder, J.-A., McInerney, F., Walls, J., Robinson, A., Vickers, J.: “Fit for purpose”: a cohort-centric approach to MOOC design. RUSC Univ. Knowl. Soc. J. 11(3), 108–121 (2014)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Melkun, C.H.: Nontraditional students online: composition, collaboration, and community. J. Continuing High. Educ. 60, 33–39 (2012)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Snyder, M.: Instructional-design theory to guide the creation of online learning communities for adults. TechTrends: Linking Res. Pract. Improve Learn. 53(1), 45–57 (2009)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Dixon, R., Dixon, K., Siragusa, L.: Individuals’ perceptions of online environments: what adult learners are telling us. In: Proceedings Ascilite Singapore 2007, ICT: Providing Choices for Learners and Learning (2007). http://www.ascilite.org.au/conferences/singapore07/procs/dixon.pdf
  18. 18.
    Smith, A.E., Humphreys, M.S.: Evaluation of unsupervised semantic mapping of natural language with Leximancer concept mapping. Behav. Res. Meth. 38(2), 262–279 (2006)CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Institute for Computer Sciences, Social Informatics and Telecommunications Engineering 2016

Authors and Affiliations

  • Lynette Goldberg
    • 1
    Email author
  • Andrea Carr
    • 1
  • Alison Canty
    • 1
  • Shannon Klekociuk
    • 1
  • David Ward
    • 1
  • Lila Landowski
    • 1
  • Carolyn King
    • 1
  • Fran McInerney
    • 1
  • James Vickers
    • 1
  1. 1.Faculty of Health, Wicking Dementia Research and Education CentreUniversity of TasmaniaHobartAustralia

Personalised recommendations