NERVE, InterPLAY, and Design-Based Research: Advancing Experiential Learning and the Design of Virtual Patient Simulation
Systematic reviews and meta-analyses of randomized controlled studies conclude that virtual patient simulations (VPs) are consistently associated with higher learning outcomes compared to other educational methods, such as lectures, handouts, textbooks, and standardized patients (e.g., Consorti et al., Comput Educ 59(3):1001–1008, 2012; Cook and Triola Med Educ 43(4):303–311, 2009; McGaghie et al., Acad Med J Assoc Am Med Colleges 86(6):706, 2011). However, we cannot assume that students will learn by simply giving them access to the simulations. The instructional features that are integrated before, during, and after the simulations may affect student learning as much as or more so than the simulations. The strategy used to integrate the simulation into the curriculum and evaluate student performance may also have a significant effect on its use and learning. Here, we document the design, development, and testing of NERVE (a VPs created to develop medical students’ ability to examine, interview, and diagnose patients with cranial nerve disorders) in one definitive source and elaborate on what went on in each team members’ mind as the system evolved. Specifically, we examine the skills, knowledge, and dispositions called upon and the key lessons learned by team members during the last year of research and development. Concluding remarks related the individual accounts and discuss common findings to shed further insights on the team’s experience.
KeywordsVirtual patient simulations Medical simulations Medical education Simulation-based training Design-based research Instructional design Instructional theory
Research reported in chapter paper was supported by the National Institutes of Health (NIH) under award number 1R01LM010813–01. The content is solely the responsibility of the authors and does not necessarily represent the official views of the National Institutes of Health.
(MP4 4075 kb)
(MP4 10302 kb)
- Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality (AHRQ). (2013). PAR-11-024 advances in patient safety through simulation research. http://grants.nih.gov/grants/guide/pa-files/PAR-11-024.html. Accessed January 20.
- Atkinson, T., & Hirumi, A. (2010). The game brain. In A. Hirumi (Ed.), Playing games in school: Using simulations and videogames for primary and secondary education (p. 63). Eugene, WA: International Society for Technology in Education.Google Scholar
- Bateman, J., Allen, M. E., Kidd, J., Parsons, N., & Davies, D. (2012). Virtual patients design and its effect on clinical reasoning and student experience: A protocol for a randomised factorial multi-centre study. Medical Education, 12(1), 62.Google Scholar
- Colder, B. (2011). Emulation as an integrating principle for cognition. Frontiers in Computational Neuroscience, 5(54), 1–12.Google Scholar
- Cook, D. A., Erwin, P. J., & Triola, M. M. (2010). Computerized virtual patients in health professions education: A systematic review and meta-analysis. Academic Medicine, 85, 15890–11602.Google Scholar
- Dewey, J. (1938). Logic: The theory of inquiry. New York: Holt, Rinehart and Winston.Google Scholar
- Edelbring, S. (2010). A three-fold framework for relating to innovations and technology in education: Learning from, with and about technology. In A. Bromage, L. Clouder, J. Thistlethwaite, & F. Gordon (Eds.), Interprofessional E-learning and collaborative work: Practices and technologies (pp. 23–33). Hershey, PA: IGI Global.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- Fullan, M. (1993). Change forces: Probing the depth of educational reform. London, UK: Falmer.Google Scholar
- Gibbons, A. S., McConkie, M., Seo, K. K., & Wiley, D. A. (2009). Simulation approach to instruction. In C. M. Reigeluth & A. A. Carr-Chellman (Eds.), Instructional-design theories and models: building a common knowledge base (Vol. III, pp. 167–193). New York, NY: Routledge.Google Scholar
- Hall, G. E., & Hord, S. M. (2001). Implementing change: Patterns, principles and potholes. Boston, MA: Allyn and Bacon.Google Scholar
- Hirumi, A., Johnson, K., Kleinsmith, A., Reyes, R., Rivera-Gutierrez, D., Kubovec, S., … Cendan, J. (in press). Advancing virtual patient simulations and experiential learning with InterPLAY: Examining how theory informs design and design informs theory. Journal of Applied Instructional Design.Google Scholar
- Hirumi, A., Johnson, T., Reyes, R. J., Lok, B., Johnsen, K., Rivera-Gutierrez, D. J., et al. (2016). Advancing virtual patient simulations through design research and InterPLAY: Part II – testing and integration. Educational Technology, Research & Development. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11423-016-9461-6
- Huwendiek, S., De Leng, B. A., Kononowicz, A. A., Kunzmann, R., Muijtjens, A. M., Van Der Vleuten, C. P., … Dolmans, D. H. (2015). Exploring the validity and reliability of a questionnaire for evaluating virtual patient design with a special emphasis on fostering clinical reasoning. Medical Teacher, 37(8), 775–782.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- Huwendiek, S., Duncker, C., Reichert, F., De Leng, B. A., Dolmans, D., van der Vleuten, C. P., & Tönshoff, B. (2013). Learner preferences regarding integrating, sequencing and aligning virtual patients with advancing virtual patient simulations through design other activities in the undergraduate medical curriculum: A focus group study. Medical Teacher, 35(11), 920–929.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- Illeris, K. (2014). Transformative learning and identity. [electronic resource]. Abingdon, Oxon: Routledge.Google Scholar
- Keller, J. M. (2010). Motivation design for learning and performance: The ARCS model approach. New York: Springer.Google Scholar
- Lindsey, L., & Berger, N. (2009). Experiential approach to instruction. In C. Reigeluth & A. Carr-Chellman (Eds.), Instructional-design theories and models: Volume 3. Building a common knowledge based (pp. 117–142). New York, NY: Routledge.Google Scholar
- McGaghie, W. C., Issenberg, S. B., Cohen, M. E. R., Barsuk, J. H., & Wayne, D. B. (2011). Does simulation-based medical education with deliberate practice yield better results than traditional clinical education? A meta-analytic comparative review of the evidence. Academic Medicine: Journal of the Association of American Medical Colleges, 86(6), 706.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- McKenney, S. E., & Reeves, T. (2012). Conducting educational design research: What, why and how. London, UK: Taylor & Francis Ltd..Google Scholar
- Mezirow, J. (1990). Fostering critical reflection in adulthood: A guide to transformative and emancipatory learning. San Francisco. CA: Jossey-Bass.Google Scholar
- Posel, N., Mcgee, J. B., & Fleiszer, D. M. (2014). Twelve tips to support the development of clinical reasoning skills using virtual patient cases. Medical Teacher, 37(9):1–6.Google Scholar
- Quinn, C. (2009). Computer-based simulations: Principles of engagement. In M. Silberman (Ed.), The handbook of experiential learning (pp. 138–171). San Francisco, CA: Pfeiffer.Google Scholar
- Reigeluth, C. M., & Schwartz, E. (1989). An instructional theory for the design of computer-based simulations. Journal of Computer-Based Instruction, 16(1), 1–10.Google Scholar
- Reyes, R. J., & Hirumi, A. (2016). Analyzing the pedagogical foundations of virtual patient simulations: A review of literature. Poster presented at the annual graduate research forum at the University of Central Florida, Orlando, FL, April 5.Google Scholar
- Rimmele, U. (n.d.). A primer on emotions and learning. Retrieved May 16, 2017, 2017 OECD. from http://www.oecd.org/edu/ceri/aprimeronemotionsandlearning.htm
- Rivera-Gutierrez, D., Kleinsmith, A., Johnson, T., Lyons, R., Cendan, J., & Lok, B. (2014). Towards a reflective practicum of embodied conversational agent experiences, IEEE international conference on advanced learning technologies (ICALT). Athens, Greece: IEEE.Google Scholar
- Rogers, E. M., & Rogers, E. M. (2003). Diffusion of innovations. New York, NY: Free Press.Google Scholar
- Salas, E., & Gregory, M. E. (2011). Simulation-based training: Beyond the bells and whistles! CyberTherapy Magazine, 4, 18–19.Google Scholar
- Salem-Schatz, S., Ordin, D., & Mittman, B. (2010). Guide to the after action review (version 1.1). Using evaluation to improve our work: A resource guide. Retrieved March 23, 2015. http://www.queri.research.va.gov/ciprs/after_action_review.pdf.
- Salminen, H., Zary, N., Björklund, K., Toth-Pal, E., & Leanderson, C. (2014). Virtual patients in primary care: Developing a reusable model that fosters reflective practice and clinical reasoning. Journal of Medical Internet Research, 16(1), e3. http://doi.org/10.2196/jmir.2616.
- Schank, R. C., Berman, T. R., & Macpherson, K. A. (1999). Learning by doing. In C. M. Reigeluth (Ed.), Instructional-design theories and models: Vol. 2, a new paradigm of instructional theory (pp. 161–181). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.Google Scholar
- Shank, R. C., Berman, T. R., & Macpherson, K. A. (1992). Learning by doing. In C. M. Reigeluth (Ed.), Instructional design theories and models: A new paradigm of instructional theory (pp. 161–179). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.Google Scholar
- Stapleton, C., & Hirumi, A. (2011). InterPLAY instructional strategy: Learning by engaging interactive entertainment conventions. In M. Shaughnessy & S. Fulgham (Eds.), Pedagogical models: The discipline of online teaching (pp. 183–211). Hauppauge, NY: Nova Science Publishers.Google Scholar
- Stapleton, C., & Hirumi, A. (2014). Designing InterPLAY learning landscapes to evoke emotions, spark the imagination, and promote creative problem solving. In A. Hirumi (Ed.), Grounded designs for online and hybrid learning (pp. 159–190). Eugene, WA: International Society for Technology in Education.Google Scholar