What makes a good clinical portfolio?

Presenters: Beau Pontré and Shelley Park

While portfolios are used, and indeed required, in a variety of disciplines to collate student work and document progress, there isn’t likely a one-size-fits-all solution. That was certainly the experience we had when setting up the clinical portfolios for our postgraduate medical imaging programmes. After implementing a custom-built solution using Google Apps, the faculty introduced Chalk and Wire. In this session, we will share our experiences using both of these platforms with the intent to start a discussion about portfolio use in different programmes around the Faculty.

2017-06-29 (Thu)
503-020 Grafton
10:30-11:00

Attendance & apologies

View meeting dates

Facilitator:
Note-taker:

Meeting Agenda

10.30-10.35 Welcome and overview

Meeting Notes

Aim

Identify users of clinical portfolios
- SoP: placements - Chalk and Wire
  - Log book = paperless

Show-and-tell

Shelley's old radiography note book
- Record of examinations
- Workplace clinical assessment
Paper-based = OK for local setting
But postgraduate students = all around NZ; needed to post to students / students needed to post back
Back-up = photocopies
Issues of privacy

Background

Different programmes offered in Medical Imaging
Academic and clinical requirements in tandem
Students need to collect evidence of their learning from the very start and all throughout
Developed a "Clinical Competency Framework"
- Miller's pyramid (1990, p. 630)

Our needs / requirements

SoP: Placements - 5 paper-based documents per student; huge volume; risk of losing documents
Refer PPT for full list of needs:
- Accessibility online, easy-to-use, mimic (but eliminate) hard-copy documentation, (by-in from stakeholders if familiar-looking); minimise manual hand-writing (easier to read and interpret) and up-loading; accessible by multiple parties; single sign-on; supported by LTU; graphic display of clinical progress
- Need to suit staff (supervisors) as well as students

1. Experimented with Google Drive

Temporary trial; knew an investigation was underway
Suited most of our needs but not all
- Fillable PDFs - people tended to print these out to fill and returned manually

2. Tried Chalk and Wire when it became available

Did get rid of paper-based forms
Looked quite different to hard-copy documentation
Could not display graphics
Relatively easy to use (detailed user guides developed)
- SoP: Getting students to read and use the guides was a challenging
  - Students would rather "trial and error"
  - When referred to user guide issues become "resolved" immediately
  - We're probably not utilising all the affordances (e.g. reporting)
  - Needs to be as seamless as possible
    - Usability survey = above average. Some people will always prefer paper.
  - Can divide marking load easily
    - Can transfer to another colleague for moderation without any paper
  - Improved quality of student work
Medical Imaging:
- Main purpose = recording clinical learning
- Students and supervisors didn't generally like Chalk and Wire

3. Google Drive v2

Revised & enhanced
Overcame original limitations
Beau has devised a way for the e-forms responses to be "miraculously" transferred to the correct folder
Question re "life long learning" - exportable?
- Answer: Yes - but nobody has asked yet
- Answer: Chalk and Wire can export too

Beau Demo

Linked with students' Google accounts
Staff create portfolios & share with students
- Match table of contents
Log book = spreadsheet
- Fill out row by row
- Drop-down menus; categorise exam type; role, etc.
  - Question: "Verify"?
  - Answer: User permissions are set up so students cannot verify themselves
  - Answer: Ability for supervisors to randomly audit entries
- Visual graphs that show progress
- Hours
- Target to meet requirements for completion

Longitudinal Evaluation of Performance
- Google form
- Pre-populated with drop-down menus etc.
  - e.g. Patient safety; communication with patient
- Once form is submitted goes into students's LEP folder
- Data entered on the form is automatically populated into a PDF template
  - Question: Calculated?
  - Answer: Rubric - automatically tabulated
  - Question: Flagging?
  - Answer: LEP log (yes, students can track passed/not passed). Working on staff notification.

Reports
- Self-evaluative report
  - Fill in details, etc.
  - Once filled, data is populated into a PDF document
  - Collates all hours they've done etc.

Supervisor also fills form; also populates into folder

Able to track

Question: New cohort? How do you copy over folders?
Answer: Beau has a script that makes a copy of the template; very quick process.
BTW form submitted are automatically cross-checked against the database.

Question: How many supervisors per cohort externally? Was it a challenge to move them?
Answer: Was a reasonably big process. ~50 at the start to ~100 now.
Assessors = "External collaborators"
Need to be set up with student email address in order to access Google Drive.

Question: Student numbers?
Answer: about 110 across different specialties

Question: How many hours went into getting to this point?
Answer: Beau has lost count. Getting things to go from a form into a PDF took a lot more effort.

SoP: Chalk and Wire has changed - may suit MI UG space better

Can't just convert "paper" to "digital"
Must review process and workflow
Change in accreditation requirements
Educational lens: What are the skills that the students need to learn now, and in the future?

Follow up/ Resources/Links to Explore

Presentation: 'What makes a good clinical portfolio?' - Shelley Park and Beau Pontre

Next TLC meeting

Next meeting: Fri 21 July, 1600-1730, 730-220 Tamaki

Teaching Excellence, Promotion and the Scholarship of Teaching and Learning (SoTL)