Report course 3: Interprofessional collaboration

This course focused on the need and importance of collaboration in partnership among the client and different professionals for the purpose of providing high quality care to individuals (interprofessional collaboration.

In chapter one of this syllabus three ways to collaborate are presented: multidisciplinarity, transdisciplinarity and interdisciplinarity. Chapter two focuses on a model of collaboration between professionals in health care. Chapter three addresses important competencies for interprofessional collaborative practices. Chapter four concerns communication within teams and between professionals and in chapter five tools are presented to assess the interprofessional practice (e.g. interprofessional practice and education quality scale (IPEQS), Team Decision Making Questionnaire (TDMQ), Interprofessional collaboration scale,…). Chapter six focuses on an introduction of The International Classification of Functioning, Disability and Health (ICF) classification as a common language. In the last two chapters of the syllabus cases of interprofessional collaboration are presented.

The information regarding participation, time, conditions, etc. prior to the course was clear for all the participants. When we look to the course ‘Interprofessional collaboration’, all the participants are positive about the understandability and relevance of the content of the course. They indicate that the course was well-organized and found the course attractively designed, sufficiently interactive and appreciated the (interactive) assignments during the course.

The participants agreed that the content of the course suited their level well and mostly all the participants found that the content fitted their prior knowledge. Only two of the nineteen participants neither agreed nor disagreed about it. The majority of the participants also found that the content of the course was in line with the daily reality in Ukraine. Three of the participants had no real opinion (neither agree nor disagree) and one participant did not agree with the majority. We believe that it is the task of the teacher to make the transition to the daily reality in Ukraine in order to make the content of the course accessible for Ukrainian students.

Despite that, all the participants mentioned that they learned new knowledge about occupational therapy during the course and eighteen participants said that they will integrate the course content in their own teaching practice. Moreover, all the participants agreed that the course paid attention to recent developments within the field of occupational therapy.

The participants were extremely positive about the trainer. They found that the trainer was able to keep their attention during the course and was open to questions and feedback. The trainer is seen as someone with sufficient professional knowledge and didactic skills to teach the course and someone who made good translations from theory to practice.

The course materials (syllabus and presentations) and the language used during the course were clear, and the participants saw the visual materials as an added value to the content of the course. There is also a consensus that the course was cohesive and had a logical structure. Furthermore, the participants indicated that the teaching methods were well-chosen and in line with the goals of the course. Not surprisingly, all the participants indicated that they would integrate the same learning methods and activities in their own teaching practice and almost all the participants indicated that the applied learning methods and activities were inspiring for their own teaching practice. Only one participant had no opinion.