Zoekresultaten

Al 25 jaar op zoek naar het eBoek

Self-regulation strategies in blended learning environments in higher education

Although self-regulation is an important feature related to students’ study success as reflected in higher grades and less academic course delay, little is known about the role of self- regulation in blended learning environments in higher education. For this review, we analysed 21 studies in which self-regulation strategies were taught in the context of blended learning. Based on an analysis of literature, we identified four types of strategies: cognitive, metacognitive, motivational and management. Results show that most studies focused on metacognitive strategies, followed by cognitive strategies, whereas little to no attention is paid to motivation and management strategies. To facilitate self-regulation strategies non-human student tool interactional methods were most commonly used, followed by a mix of human student-teacher and non-human student content and student environment methods. Results further show that the extent to which students actively apply self-regulation strategies also depends heavily on teacher's actions within the blended learning environment. Measurement of self-regulation strategies is mainly done with questionnaires such as the Motivation and Self-regulation of Learning Questionnaire.Implications for practice and policy:•More attention to self-regulation in online and blended learning is essential.•Lecturers and course designers of blended learning environments should be aware that four types of self-regulation strategies are important: cognitive, metacognitive, motivational and management.•Within blended learning environments, more attention should be paid to cognitive, motivation and management strategies to promote self-regulation.

The integrated recovery Scales

Introduction The Integrated Recovery Scales (IRS) was developed by the Dutch National Expertise board for routine outcome monitoring with severe mental illnesses. This board aimed to develop a multidimensional recovery measure directed at 1. clinical recovery, 2. physical health, 3. social recovery (work, social contacts, independent living) and 4. existential, personal recovery. The measure had to be short, suited for routine outcome monitoring and present the perspective of both mental health professionals and service users with severe mental illnesses. All aspects are assessed over a period of the pas 6 months. Objectives The objective of this research is validation of the Integral Recovery Scales and to test the revelance for clinical practice and police evaluation. Methods The instrument was tested with 500 individuals with severe mental illnesses (80% individuals with a psychotic disorder), of whom 200 were followed up for 1 year. For the questions concerning clinical recovery, physical health and social recovery mental health care workers conducted semi structured interviews with people living with serious illnesses. The questions concerning personal health were self-rated. We analyzed interrater reliability, convergent and divergent validity and sensitivity to change. Results The instrument has a good validity and is easy to complete for service users and mental health care workers and appropriate for clinical and policy evaluation goals. Conclusions The Integrated Recovery Scales can be a useful instrument for a simple and meaningful routine outcome monitoring. Page: 121

Impactonderzoek Programma Verbindend Leiderschap

Sinds 2019 biedt de HvA academie het programma Verbindend Leiderschap aan. 175 leidinggevenden verbonden aan de HvA en UvA namen in 2019 en 2020 deel aan dit interne leiderschapsprogramma. Het programma beoogde leidinggevenden te stimuleren 1) te werken aan persoonlijk leiderschap en hun leiderschapsstijl, 2) samen te werken aan de uitvoering of ondersteuning van hoogwaardig onderwijs en onderzoek, 3) het netwerk binnen de HvA en UvA te vergroten en contact te maken met andere leidinggevenden binnen andere posities en 4) een scherper beeld te ontwikkelen bij Verbindend Leiderschap in context van de HvA.

Wound infection following implant removal of foot, ankle, lower leg or patella; a protocol for a multicenter randomized controlled trial investigating the (cost-)effectiveness of 2 g of prophylactic cefazolin compared to placebo (WIFI-2 trial)

Background: Elective implant removal (IR) after fracture fixation is one of the most common procedures within (orthopedic) trauma surgery. The rate of surgical site infections (SSIs) in this procedure is quite high, especially below the level of the knee. Antibiotic prophylaxis is not routinely prescribed, even though it has proved to lower SSI rates in other (orthopedic) trauma surgical procedures. The primary objective is to study the effectiveness of a single intravenous dose of 2 g of cefazolin on SSIs after IR following fixation of foot, ankle and/or lower leg fractures. Methods: This is a multicenter, double-blind placebo controlled trial with a superiority design, including adult patients undergoing elective implant removal after fixation of a fracture of foot, ankle, lower leg or patella. Exclusion criteria are: an active infection, current antibiotic treatment, or a medical condition contraindicating prophylaxis with cefazolin including allergy. Patients are randomized to receive a single preoperative intravenous dose of either 2 g of cefazolin or a placebo (NaCl). The primary analysis will be an intention-to-treat comparison of the proportion of patients with a SSI at 90 days after IR in both groups. Discussion: If 2 g of prophylactic cefazolin proves to be both effective and cost-effective in preventing SSI, this would have implications for current guidelines. Combined with the high infection rate of IR which previous studies have shown, it would be sufficiently substantiated for guidelines to suggest protocolled use of prophylactic antibiotics in IR of foot, ankle, lower leg or patella. Trial registration Nederlands Trial Register (NTR): NL8284, registered on 9th of January 2020, https://www.trialregister.nl/trial/8284

Effectiveness of risk controls as indicator of safety performance

The objective of the study described in this paper is to define safety metrics that are based on the effectiveness of risk controls. Service providers define and implement such risk controls in order to prevent hazards developing into an accident. The background of this research is a specific need of the aviation industry where small and medium-sized enterprises lack large amounts of safety-related data to measure and demonstrate their safety performance proactively. The research department of the Aviation Academy has initiated a 4-year study, which will test the possibility to develop new safety indicators that will be able to represent safety levels proactively without the benefit of large data sets. As part of the development of alternative safety metrics, safety performance indicators were defined that are based on the effectiveness of risk controls. ICAO (2013) defines a risk control as “a defence with specific mitigation actions, preventive controls or recovery measures put in place to prevent the realization of a hazard or its escalation into an undesirable consequence”. Examples of risk controls are procedures, education and training, a piece of equipment etc. It is crucial for service providers to determine whether the introduced risk controls are indeed effective in reducing the targeted risk. ICAO (2013) describes the effectiveness of risk control as "the extent to which the risk control reduces or eliminates the safety risks”, but does not provide guidance on how to measure the effectiveness of risk control. In this study, a generic metrics for the effectiveness of risk controls based on their effectiveness was developed. The definition of the indicators allows, for each risk control, derivation of specific indicators based on the generic metrics. The suitability of the metrics will subsequently be tested in pilot studies within the aviation industry.