Train the trainer @ Bruges: evaluation
The train-the-trainer week @ Bruges took place the last week of September 2022.
On Monday, a cultural visit of Bruges with a professional guide was planned. In the afternoon, the VIVES campus was visited, and three cases of occupational therapy were discussed (acquired brain injury, spinal cord injury and one about intellectual disability). After that, there was a practical workshop in the care lab of VIVES Bruges.
On Tuesday, a workshop about communication skills was given, followed by a lecture about the development of the profession ergotherapy after war and the added value of the profession in the afternoon. The program on Tuesday ended with a Q&A session
On Wednesday, visits were planned (Stimul and XiNiX and AZ Sint-Jan). Stimul is a care ethics lab that allows caregivers, executives and students from care and welfare organizations to explore the perspective of care recipients. The XiNiX project wants to give ‘insight’ in a life without sight in a pleasant and creative way. Someone who visits XiNiX can experience that other senses can offer great added value to what we see. Information about the guidance of people with vision loss to live an independent life using helping aids, methods and strategies was given. AZ Sint-Jan is a clinic in Bruges, where the unit of physical rehabilitation was visited in order, among other things, to get to know the equipment.
On Thursday, In the morning there was a Q&A session followed by a parallel session with a case about physical rehabilitation and intellectual disability. In the afternoon there was a visit to “Ons Erf” was planned. “Ons Erf” is a facility with expertise in the field of care and support for adults with a congenital intellectual disability.
On Friday there was a session about how you can start with mobility and orientation training by visual impaired people. In the afternoon there was a session about assessment tools that can be used in the daily practice.
All the participants reported that the information regarding participation, time, conditions, etcetera.… prior to the train-the-trainer week was clear and found the train-the-trainer week well organised. They moreover indicated that the content taught during the train-the-trainer week was relevant and understandable and that attention was paid to recent developments within the field of occupational therapy.
They were enthusiast about the teaching material used during the train-the-trainer week. The participants found the teaching methods and activities well-chosen and in line with the goals of the train-the-trainer week. They indicate that the week was attractively designed, sufficiently interactive and that the language used during the week was clear. The participants moreover mentioned that the week had a logical structure, was cohesive and that the visual materials used in the courses had an added value. Consequently, they all agree that the course materials used were clear enough and they were all appreciative to the (interactive) assignments used in the courses during the train-the-trainer week.
The participants were also extremely positive about the trainers. They found that the trainers were able to keep their attention during the courses and were open to questions and feedback. The trainers are seen as people with sufficient professional knowledge and didactic skills to teach the courses and as people who made good translations from theory to practice.
The majority of the participants indicated that the content of the different courses suited their level. Only 13% of the participants had no real opinion about it and responded to this item with neither agree nor disagree. Seventy-five percent of the participants also mentioned that the content of the courses of the train-the-trainer week fitted their prior knowledge. Twenty-one percent had no real opinion about this item and 4% found that the content of the courses did not fit their prior knowledge and responded with rather disagree. We believe that there are differences in prior knowledge among the participants, which may explain these results. However, they all indicated that they learned new knowledge about occupational therapy during the train-the-trainer week.
There is nevertheless a disagreement among the participants about the integration of the content taught during the train-the-trainer week in their own teaching practice. Eight percent will not integrate the content in their teaching practice, while 75% will. The 17% participants left expressed no opinion about the transfer of the content to their own teaching practice and responded with neither agree nor disagree. When we look at the applied learning methods and activities the same incongruence is visible. The majority of the participants found the applied learning methods and activities used during the train-the-trainer week inspiring for their teaching practice (86%) and indicate that they will integrate these learning methods and activities in their teaching practice (84%). On the other hand, 5% reported that the applied learning methods and activities were not inspiring for their teaching practice and 8% will not integrate them in their teaching practice. We believe that this can possibly be linked with the situation of war Ukrainian people are dealing with, which make transferability to their teaching practice unsure and difficult in times of uncertainty. The rest of the participants had no opinion about it and responded with neither agree nor disagree.
More than the half of the participants found that the content taught during the train-the-trainer week was in line with the daily reality of Ukraine. Thirteen percent however disagreed and 33% had no opinion about this item. Although 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 train-the-trainer week accessible for Ukrainian students, the war may hinder opportunities for doing this.