Journal of Professional Nursing 50 (2024) 47–52
Available online 16 November 2023
8755-7223/© 2023 The Authors. Published by Elsevier Inc. This is an open access article under the CC BY license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).
Developing discipline-specific online pedagogies for nursing education
Pauline Cooper-Ioelu, MA (hons)
a,*, Marea Topp, PhD, RN
b, Cynthia Wensley, PhD, RN
baLearning and Teaching Unit, Faculty of Medical and Health Sciences, University of Auckland, Auckland, New Zealand
bSchool of Nursing, Faculty of Medical and Health Sciences, University of Auckland, Auckland, New Zealand
A R T I C L E I N F O Keywords:
Online learning Embodied pedagogies Nursing education
Pre-licensure nursing education
A B S T R A C T
Background: Many nurse educators have pivoted their teaching to online formats since the COVID-19 pandemic began. Nurse educators face the dilemma that person-centred approaches are particularly challenging to repli- cate online. Current research provides general recommendations for designing and delivering online learning, but less is known about the usefulness of discipline-specific pedagogies for nursing education.
Aim: This study explores the value of creating discipline-specific pedagogies for online learning in baccalaureate nursing education.
Method: Using an action research approach, the authors document their lived experience of designing and delivering a course in two different formats - blended and entirely online. Drawing on existing and new educational models related to online learning, we explore how practice can inform the development of emergent frameworks to guide online education.
Results: Using reflective practice, the authors developed an emergent framework that draws on embodied learning theory to enhance the online delivery of a disability and enablement course for nursing students.
Conclusions: The concept of embodied pedagogies may offer a starting point for developing guidelines for person- centred and student-centred nursing education online.
Introduction
Many nurse educators have pivoted their teaching to online formats since the COVID-19 pandemic began. Nurse educators face the dilemma that person-centred approaches are particularly challenging to replicate online. Current research provides general recommendations for designing and delivering online learning, but less is known about the usefulness of discipline-specific pedagogies for nursing education.
Through our lived experience of designing, delivering and facilitating online and blended teaching of a course on disability studies for pre- licensure nursing students, we suggest that it may be helpful to create profession-specific pedagogies to develop online courses that can work in unison with general theories of online learning. The concept of embodied pedagogies may offer a starting point for developing guide- lines specific to Nursing. Embodied pedagogies emphasize non-mental factors involved in learning and signal the importance of the body and feelings alongside cognition (Kelly et al., 2019). We discuss discipline- specific pedagogies in the context of a (Dis)ability and Enablement course for nursing students and introduce a framework for implement- ing embodied learning principles in online settings.
Contemporary online learning theories such as constructivism and connectivism (Anderson, 2008; Siemens, 2018; Vaughan et al., 2013) assist educators in ensuring that online asynchronous and synchronous environments function in ways that help students learn. Online learning approaches align well with adult theories that give students flexibility in how, when and where they learn and may also reduce operational costs for educational institutions (Allen & Seaman, 2016; Foo et al., 2019). In some ways, online learning is well suited to the health professions;
continuing professional development is often delivered (either partially or entirely) online to fit in with the demanding work schedules of busy clinicians (Seymour-Walsh et al., 2020).
While there are advantages to delivering the curriculum either partially or fully online, role-modelling and peer-to-peer interactions can be challenging to replicate in online settings (Kunin et al., 2014).
Bandura and Walters (1977) argue that in educational settings, new and sustainable patterns of behaviour occur when students interact with and observe the behaviours of their peers. Moreover, peer and teacher in- teractions and role-modelling are arguably more important when educating health professionals because learning to interact with others is an essential skill. Interactions in face-to-face environments are difficult
* Corresponding author.
E-mail address: [email protected] (P. Cooper-Ioelu).
Contents lists available at ScienceDirect
Journal of Professional Nursing
journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/jpnu
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.profnurs.2023.11.001
Received 7 March 2023; Received in revised form 18 October 2023; Accepted 5 November 2023
to replicate or role model online. Palermo (2021) suggests that syn- chronous online learning may be a critical factor in recreating face-to- face teaching experiences because they support meaningful social in- teractions, but robust evaluation, she argues, is yet to be undertaken.
The question then becomes, is it possible to create online learning spaces that are as good as or even better than face-to-face environments to ensure that students in the health professions develop the necessary knowledge, skills and attributes to enter the health workforce?
Blended learning configurations may offer sustainable ways to bal- ance the tensions between flexibility for students and teachers while maintaining high-quality, person-centred learning. Garrison and Kanuka (2004) define blended learning as “the thoughtful integration of class- room face-to-face learning experiences with online learning experi- ences” (p. 96). Thus, blended learning can involve a combination of online and face-to-face learning experiences that combine face-to-face learning with synchronous or asynchronous learning components (Davis et al., 2022). Applying a blended learning approach to curricula design offers numerous opportunities but is not without challenges.
Boelens et al. (2017) cite four challenges with blended learning: incor- porating flexibility, stimulating interaction, facilitating students' learning processes, and fostering an effective learning environment.
These challenges are relevant to health professional education (HPE) and also highlight the need for educators to create and maintain learning environments that give credence to the affective domain of learning so that students develop the necessary interpersonal and communication skills.
Stojan et al. (2022) argue that to demonstrate the effectiveness of online learning environments, educators must also show that robust learning theories underpin their approaches. However, robust principles of good practice for online learning for HPE have yet to be developed (Palermo, 2021; Ten Cate, 2021). Developing new pedagogies for HPE could guide the design, development and facilitation of courses with an online learning component along the same lines as those created for face-to-face teaching and learning in HPE. As Jowsey et al. (2020) comment, increased confidence in technology usage drives the devel- opment of online fit-for-purpose theories and guidelines for best educational practice. Due to social distancing requirements during the COVID-19 pandemic, many college educators have rapidly upskilled in technologies that facilitate learning. Yet, there is uncertainty about how to optimize learning in these new learning spaces (Williamson et al., 2020).
Embodied pedagogies
One idea that could help HPE develop fit-for-purpose online theories of learning is embodied pedagogies. Embodied pedagogies emphasize the connection between the body and the mind because, as the theory maintains, learning is both a physical and mental act. Embodied peda- gogies give credence to the non-mental factors involved in learning and signal the importance of the body and emotions in the learning process.
This union entails thoughtful awareness of body, space and social context (Kelly et al., 2019). Thus, as a theory, it rejects the idea that the body is epistemologically unimportant to learning and knowing.
Instead, the theory suggests that developing informal ways of knowing through embodied practices forms the basis for formal, propositional, and conceptual knowledge to develop (Barnacle, 2009). Embodied pedagogies are not widely applied in HPE (Kelly et al., 2019). Yet the concept of embodied pedagogies may help educators to think about learning as more than just an intellectual experience. In nursing edu- cation, a learning experience that gives credence to the body is arguably more important because of the physical nature of caring for others.
Embodied pedagogies and learning online
The body is typically less important in online spaces than in face-to- face settings. For this reason, preference is usually given to the cognitive
aspects of learning, omitting a more holistic approach to knowledge development. Bayne (2004) argues the mere fact that we even conceive of the possibility of an online learner is revealing because it is dependent on “a vision of education in which, as long as the ‘mind’ of the learner is engaged, the locus of his or her body is largely irrelevant” (p. 106). This mind-body dualism seems particularly incongruent in the context of HPE, where the body of the patient, learner and professional is central to developing the necessary expertise to attend to the healthcare needs of others. If educators leave Bayne's (2004) vision of the online learner unchallenged, positive characteristics of online learning, such as flexi- bility and autonomy, can easily translate into student disengagement and absence. For instance, educators who taught online during the COVID-19 pandemic will be acquainted with the infamous “sea of black”
on videoconferencing platforms, representing some students' strong aversion to visible online presence.
The anonymity of online spaces may also allow students to construct identities that are emotionally absent. Online learning may lack the emotional intensity and immersion in context to facilitate students' journey from novice to expert (Benner, 1984; Oshvandi et al., 2016).
Dreyfus (2013) argues that bodily absence is problematic for learning because it is devoid of risk, which prevents the development of the af- fective domain of learning. Expertise, he argues, develops when students have opportunities to safely bring to bear their knowledge in the class- room under pressure. In this way, students are socialized to be open to
“making interpretations that can be mistaken and learn from their mistakes” (p. 90). In face-to-face learning, students can see examples of professionalism and expertise modelled by their teachers - the learner sees the master at work. Role modelling is more difficult to achieve online because facilitator presence takes on a different form that is often also devoid of the body and prioritizes the intellectual aspects of learning.
How might we bring the body and emotions into online learning to address some of the perceived deficiencies outlined by Dreyfus and Bayne? Could embodied learning inform and transform online teaching practices in HPE? In the next section, we describe our experience developing online and blended course iterations for a (Dis)ability and Enablement for year two undergraduate nursing students. In this example, we explore the value of creating discipline-specific pedagogies for online learning using embodied learning theory. We document our evolving thinking and an emergent framework for online learning in HPE.
Method Reflective practice
We used reflective practice – reflecting in and on action (Sch¨on, 1987) – to guide our interpretations. In the context of this course redesign, reflection involves a thoughtful examination of experiences to make meaning of the course design process. Educational theory and student evaluations of teaching were also used to guide our perceptions of events and inform continuous redesign. Authors one and two kept detailed notes of their experiences during the design and delivery of the course. These reflective experiences were then used to identify patterns, themes and insights, which we used to improve the course delivery (Xue
& Desmet, 2019).
Context
The Bachelor of Nursing at the Faculty of Medical and Health Sci- ence, University of Auckland, is a three-year degree that prepares stu- dents to be New Zealand registered nurses. Before COVID-19, the curriculum was taught face-to-face, although students were exposed to various online learning activities, including online clinical skills prep- aration, clinical e-portfolios, and online workbooks. ‘Nursing in Mental Health, Addiction and (Dis)ability and Enablement’ is a second-year
compulsory course that students complete as part of their undergraduate degree. Embedded in this course is a (Dis)ability and Enablement component, which consists of a two-week theory block designed to prepare students for a four-week clinical placement where they work alongside people who live with intellectual and/or physical disabilities.
The course has traditionally been taught twice per semester, so the class can be divided into smaller groups of approximately 50 students.
The course content includes theories and models of disability, the underlying physiology of different disabilities, and nursing manage- ment. During the ‘theory’ block, students also hear from people who have lived experience of disability. After the theoretical component of the course, students then complete a clinical attachment in the com- munity, such as in a school or a residential home. During the COVID-19 pandemic, students did not complete the clinical attachment component due to the increased risk to vulnerable populations.
Learning objectives for the disability and enablement
1. Develop an understanding of the impact of stigma, discrimination, and social exclusion/inclusion for people using disability services.
2. Demonstrate and apply competence in communicating with people using disability services.
3. Analyze the impact of trauma on individuals and populations.
4. Demonstrate culturally safe practices
5. Develop and demonstrate skills in reflective practice to promote self- awareness
6. Demonstrate an understanding of etiology and engage in person- centred nursing management for people with disabilities across the lifespan.
7. Demonstrate collaborative relationships with service users/clients, their families, and health care teams.
8. Articulate and discuss the medico-legal legislation informing disability sectors.
9. Analyze current models of disability care and demonstrate knowl- edge of these in nursing care.
Authors One and Two partnered in 2019 to redesign the course to address issues with low student attendance and challenges with content sequencing due to the flexibility required to accommodate external stakeholders. Before the COVID-19 pandemic, we considered moving components of the course online to have more control over the pacing of
the course and to allow students more flexibility in how, where, and when they learn. We could not have imagined the new teaching and learning landscape we would encounter as we prepared to teach in 2020.
The lockdowns in New Zealand - and subsequent rapid pivot to online teaching - allowed us to experiment with blended and fully online for- mats and compare student engagement in ways we would not be able to do under normal circumstances. We taught the course four times in two years during the COVID-19 outbreak, which required us to rapidly adapt our teaching methods to continuously improve the course. We document what we learned from this iterative design process and how our lived experience teaching the course led us to seek conventional and uncon- ventional learning theories to resolve teaching and learning problems.
We also discuss how we developed accompanying embodied pedagogies to teach person-centred and student-centred approaches in synchronous and asynchronous online contexts.
Results
Iteration 1: using general theories for improvement
We wanted to build a pathway through the course so students could first engage with theoretical concepts, understand the lived experience of people with disabilities and/or impairments and then attempt to apply knowledge to practice. We also wanted students to have more flexibility in where and how they learned (Fig. 1). We decided that a flipped classroom, blended approach (Bergmann & Sams, 2012; Beti- havas et al., 2016) to learning would allow us more control over the sequencing and pacing of the course as it was not as reliant on the availability of clinical experts and speakers. In preparation for the the- ory block, we invited students to complete a module exploring their thinking about person-centred care and the impact of bias on providing care for people with disabilities. We then planned to run a day on campus where students formulated inclusive definitions of disability and enablement, interrogated their biases and beliefs about disability, and examined the role of othering and stigmatization in healthcare settings.
The on-campus day also included sessions that showcased how disability was reflected in the general population, including topics such as learning disabilities, stroke, intellectual disability, rehabilitation and enable- ment, and chronic pain.
The on-campus day was followed by three self-directed learning days where students worked through interactive learning activities where
Fig. 1. Course structure.
they worked through content about specific disabilities. Learning ac- tivities were interactive and supported knowledge development under- pinning common disabilities and the nurse's role when working alongside and advocating for people with disabilities, their families and communities across the healthcare continuum. Each self-directed day concluded with a synchronous videoconferencing session where we discussed the clinical gaze, different models of disability (medical and social models), person-centred approaches to care, diagnostic over- shadowing, and culturally safe care. Our learning and teaching decisions were motivated by a social justice approach arising from disability studies (Anyinam et al., 2019). We wanted students to understand that scientific knowledge needs to be accompanied by an awareness of the different social contexts of people with disabilities, agency and advocacy in practice, and an awareness of the inequities that can arise from ableist conceptions of care of a person. At the beginning of the second week, we reconvened in person for an interactive ‘speed-dating’ exercise where students were able to assess their learning and identify knowledge gaps from the theoretical material presented in the course. In the second week, we wanted students to begin to connect the theoretical to the real world through exposure to the lived experience of disability. Course content focused on understanding the client's lived experience and the nurse's role as an advocate for person-centred care facilitated by sessions from clinical experts.
We ran this course iteration twice - once entirely online, adapting the planned face-to-face sessions for videoconferencing and a second time in the original blended format. From student course evaluations and our reflection, students found it difficult to build connections while video- conferencing, noticeably more so in the first online iteration. On videoconferencing, students seemed detached from learning and did not engage with the content as we intended; most students were hesitant to participate during synchronous videoconferencing classes. Some stu- dents expressed frustration with the course delivery when they entered breakout rooms, and others were unwilling to engage, leaving cameras and microphones off. A small number exited the session altogether. This experience, alongside student evaluations, suggested the need for further modification of the course and additional models to inform teaching and learning practice were sought.
The community of inquiry model
We previously knew about the Community of Inquiry (COI) model (Vaughan et al., 2013), which advocates for the importance of student- student and teacher-student interactions online. Underpinning the COI is the view that learning occurs when individuals are engaged in activ- ities, receive feedback and interact with others in social contexts (Hill et al., 2009). Learning is shaped by student interactions with other students, teachers, and the content (Vaughan et al., 2013). To improve the course, we decided to explore how to enhance social and teaching presence elements of the COI during the course, particularly during classes held on videoconferencing. We used strategies such as encour- aging cameras to be on, including icebreakers and giving students more time in breakout rooms where they could record their thoughts on the discussion tool called padlet. We also asked students to pick a group representative to provide feedback during the plenary session. The purpose of these strategies was to encourage non-threatening peer in- teractions and build confidence. As teachers, we also decided we would not go into breakout rooms as our presence seemed artificial and curbed natural conversations. Students also wanted a more overt teaching presence in the self-directed resources (that used the H5P interactive tool), so we worked on improving this course element by personalizing the content.
During this iteration, we were again able to run the course once in a blended format and then, due to a government-mandated lockdown - a second time, entirely online. Enhancing the social presence in the course helped to improve student interactions, but still, there was a silent group of students who were not engaging in breakout rooms or plenary
sessions. While we acknowledge that not all students feel comfortable sharing their perspectives in a large group, again, there was a notable difference between the group that was able to meet face-to-face and the fully online group. The group that had a face-to-face introduction day appeared more ready to engage in synchronous videoconferencing classes, sharing their personal experiences of disability. Most came with cameras on and were prepared to participate actively in learning activities.
The COI model helped develop our thinking about the importance of building the social aspects of learning. We had hoped that by applying COI principles, we would create an environment where students felt safe and free to collaborate with their peers and facilitators. Yet, during the online iteration of the course, most students still chose to keep their cameras off (even after consistent encouragement). Only a handful of students regularly participated in the plenary session. Students were still uncomfortable being directly asked for their thoughts by their facilita- tors. Peer-to-peer interaction during videoconferencing classes was non- existent. While the COI model was valuable because it highlighted the role of different types of online presence, it did not speak to other as- pects, such as emotional presence, role-modelling, and risk-taking, which we wanted to explore.
Developing a framework for implementing embodied pedagogies online In preparation for the third year of teaching the course, we sought new ideas about engaging socially and emotionally absent students. We were also intrigued by the absence of the body and emotion in online settings, which led us to explore the theory and applicability of embodied pedagogies. We felt that students needed to feel safe to communicate their understanding of the content so that the facilitators could build on and sometimes provide alternative discourses about people who live with disabilities. We wanted students to engage collaboratively in theoretical discourses about disability, pathophysio- logical understandings of common conditions, and knowledge of pro- fessional practice using a person-centred approach. It was also crucial that students felt comfortable sharing their personal experiences of disability where applicable. We also searched for other relevant peda- gogies, leading us to experiment with how embodied learning principles could be translated into techniques to enhance online learning envi- ronments. We wondered, for example, what methods could help stu- dents build an awareness of body, space and social context in online settings to develop interpersonal skills (Kelly et al., 2019). Could stu- dents be scaffolded through a course to gradually become more comfortable taking risks with their learning in synchronous online set- tings? How could we purposefully employ techniques to enhance the role-modelling (of peers and teachers)?
From our experiences facilitating this course, we developed an emergent framework for embodied online pedagogy (refer to Table 1).
The framework aims to help students become more confident in engaging with their peers and facilitators to build their knowledge and critically appraise their belief systems in the context of online learning.
The framework draws on the key concepts of bodily and emotional presence, role modelling, and risk-taking, which we identified as inte- gral to the success of the course in both the blended and fully online formats. The framework has three phases; each is designed to develop the confidence to engage deeply with content, teacher and other stu- dents. The three-phased design aims to progressively build learner confidence to engage deeply with content, teachers and other students.
Conclusion
This article outlines how COVID-19 acted as a revolutionary force in our teaching, leading us to reconsider what good teaching looked like in online and blended learning contexts. We document our experience designing and delivering a course in blended and online formats during COVID lockdowns in New Zealand. We recount our reflective process for
Table 1
Emergent framework for implementing principles of embodied learning in HPE.
Phase Self Other students/teachers Client/family/community
Phase 1:
Socialization and setting expectations
Students become comfortable with their online selves and others.
Camera is on.
The educational rationale and the expectations for engagement and participation are explained.
Teacher promotes emotional safety.
Students engage in low-stakes activities that engage the mind and body. For example, an activity where they use their body.
Teacher reiterates the important role of peers in learning.
Students work with other students they feel comfortable with in smaller groups, such as breakout rooms.
Relationship-building activities, including sharing professional aspirations and aspects of identity.
The experience of the client/family/
community is introduced through low-stakes activities. Such as stories from practice or experience
Students are encouraged to share their own stories and make connections between these and new knowledge.
Course Examples Teacher explains clearly the rationale for the
course and expectations for the course – cameras on, the importance of having a go and trying, and that we are here to learn and that there is no expectation to “get it right” as we work through the material. Students find an item representing who they want to be as future healthcare professionals. All students return to the plenary. The teacher takes a picture and uploads it to the Learning Management System.
Students view images of people with a disability on an online discussion board.
Students discuss their own beliefs and biases about disability with peers of their choosing in groups. Plenary discussion led by the teacher about othering and unconscious bias using images as a focal point.
Students complete a pre-session activity introducing othering, cultural safety, bias, and stigmatization concepts. Pre-session includes understanding others' lived experiences (interviews with people who have or care for someone with a disability).
Phase 2: Knowledge and Online learner Identity building
Students are given opportunities to interact and take risks
▪ Teacher reiterates expectations of engagement outlined during Phase 1.
▪ Students build confidence with a body of knowledge and reflect on their positioning within that body of knowledge.
▪ Students are encouraged to engage with others in their home environment.
▪ Students are encouraged to engage with peers in their class to complete work
▪ Students are encouraged to discuss the experience of disability with family/flatmates/friends.
▪ Students engage with peers (not necessarily of their choosing) to gain outside perspectives as they attempt to combine theory and practice.
▪ Teacher does not enter the breakout room
▪ Groups nominate a representative to give feedback on their discussions in breakout rooms.
▪ Other students are free to contribute.
However, teacher will only ask groups and not individuals to speak. Students are encouraged to speak up if they have something additional to add to the discussion
▪ Activities are designed to help students apply knowledge in practice.
▪ Knowledge is always connected to increasingly complex case studies.
▪ The lived experience of people with disabilities has a strong focus at this stage, although only through the voice of the teachers/nurses/student experience.
Course Examples Students engage with online learning
activities. These resources link theoretical knowledge, lived experience, and person- centred practice.
Students participate in three synchronous videoconferencing sessions. These sessions focus on concepts such as diagnostic overshadowing, techniques for questioning clients, the clinical gaze and different models of disability. In each session, students work together in groups to put these concepts into practice using a case study. There is then a whole class discussion about the case, drawing on small group discussion and other relevant topics that arise.
Students can hear from registered nurses working in the community/sector. Interactive forum with registered nurses who discuss their experience of disability in practice. Students submit questions before the session and can also ask questions during the live session.
Phase 3: Dynamic Engagement Students are asked to take risks with their learning and adjust their perspectives based on new knowledge and feedback.
▪ Teacher reiterates expectations of engagement outlined during Phase 1.
▪ Learners are encouraged to identify their knowledge gaps by testing their learning with their peers and teachers.
▪ Students are prompted to adjust their perspectives based on feedback.
▪ Many opportunities to engage with other learners
▪ Teachers can enter breakout rooms, contribute to discussions, and offer constructive feedback
▪ Teacher asks students directly to answer questions in plenary sessions and can offer feedback where necessary. However, students are first allowed to ‘test’ ideas with other students.
▪ Students are asked to reconcile what they know (from a theoretical standpoint and in practice) with the lived experience.
▪ Activities focus on encouraging rich interactive environments where students can engage with others, outside teachers and students on the course.
▪ Students interact with people with relevant experiences in breakout rooms and in a larger group setting.
Course Examples Speed dating - students rotate in and out of breakout rooms and have “quick” conversations about a statement or idea proposed by the teacher (that has come up in the course so far). This is designed to give students an idea of their learning gaps by receiving feedback from other students.
The second half of this session is a plenary discussion facilitated by the teacher. Students suggest topics they want to discuss (guided by questions from part 1).
Students are asked to reconsider their initial definition of (dis)ability and enablement and consider how and why it has changed.
Learners engage with people who live with a variety of disabilities or impairments, as well as those who have relevant clinical expertise.
Students have many opportunities to interact and ask questions from those who are more experienced. Learning activities are geared towards helping students reconcile the theory, what they know about practice and the lived experience of disability/impairment.
documenting what we learnt about putting technology to work and how we developed - through reflective teaching practice - accompanying pedagogies that could be used in other HPE contexts to teach person- centred and student-centred approaches in synchronous and asynchro- nous online spaces. Our emergent ‘Framework for Implementing Embodied Learning in Online Spaces’ is derived from our lived experi- ence of designing and redesigning a second-year (Dis)ability and Ena- blement course for pre-licensure nurses in response to student feedback and our reflections on the usefulness of theory in practice. While these techniques were tested and refined in the context of our lived experience of running the course, further research is required to refine these prin- ciples. We offer the framework as a basis for a conversation about what pedagogies for online learning in the health professions might look like and a springboard for research to evaluate their effectiveness.
Funding N/A.
Grant information
The authors declared that no grants were involved in supporting this work.
Declaration of competing interest
The authors declare no conflict of interest.
References
Allen, I. E., & Seaman, J. (2016). Online report card: Tracking online education in the United States. ERIC.
Anderson, T. (2008). The theory and practice of online learning. University of Washington Press. https://books.google.co.nz/books?id=RifNwzU3HR4C.
Anyinam, C. K., Coffey, S., & Da Silva, C. (2019). Integrating critical disability perspectives in nursing education. Journal of Nursing Education and Practice, 9(9), 63.
https://doi.org/10.5430/jnep.v9n9p63
Bandura, A., & Walters, R. H. (1977). Social learning theory (Vol. 1). Englewood Cliffs:
Prentice Hall.
Barnacle, R. (2009). Gut instinct: The body and learning. Educational Philosophy and Theory, 41(1), 22–33.
Bayne, S. (2004). The embodiment of the online learner. In Beyond the comfort zone:
Proceedings of the 21st ASCILITE conference.
Benner, P. (1984). From novice to expert. Menlo Park, 84(1480), 10.1097.
Bergmann, J., & Sams, A. (2012). Flip your classroom: Reach every student in every class every day. International Society for Technology in Education.
Betihavas, V., Bridgman, H., Kornhaber, R., & Cross, M. (2016). The evidence for
‘flipping out’: A systematic review of the flipped classroom in nursing education.
Nurse Education Today, 38, 15–21.
Boelens, R., De Wever, B., & Voet, M. (2017). Four key challenges to the design of blended learning: A systematic literature review. Educational Research Review, 22, 1–18.
Davis, D., McLaughlin, M. K., & Anderson, K. M. (2022). Universal design for learning: A framework for blended learning in nursing education. Nurse Educator, 47(3), 133–138.
Dreyfus, H. L. (2013). On the internet. Routledge.
Foo, J., Cook, D. A., Walsh, K., Golub, R., Abdalla, M. E., Ilic, D., & Maloney, S. (2019).
Cost evaluations in health professions education: A systematic review of methods and reporting quality. Medical Education, 53(12), 1196–1208.
Garrison, D. R., & Kanuka, H. (2004). Blended learning: Uncovering its transformative potential in higher education. The Internet and Higher Education, 7(2), 95–105.
Hill, J. R., Song, L., & West, R. E. (2009). Social learning theory and web-based learning environments: A review of research and discussion of implications. The American Journal of Distance Education, 23(2), 88–103.
Jowsey, T., Foster, G., Cooper-Ioelu, P., & Jacobs, S. (2020). Blended learning via distance in pre-registration nursing education: A scoping review. Nurse Education in Practice, 44, Article 102775.
Kelly, M., Ellaway, R., Scherpbier, A., King, N., & Dornan, T. (2019). Body pedagogics:
Embodied learning for the health professions. Medical Education, 53(10), 967–977.
Kunin, M., Julliard, K. N., & Rodriguez, T. E. (2014). Comparing face-to-face, synchronous, and asynchronous learning: Postgraduate dental resident preferences.
Journal of Dental Education, 78(6), 856–866.
Oshvandi, K., Moghadam, A., Khatiban, M., Cheraghi, F., Borzu, R., & Moradi, Y. (2016).
On the application of novice to expert theory in nursing; a systematic review. Journal of Chemical and Pharmaceutical Sciences, 9(4), 3014–3020.
Palermo, C. (2021). Time to challenge our approaches to education. Medical Education, 55(3), 281–283.
Sch¨on, D. A. (1987). Educating the reflective practitioner: Toward a new design for teaching and learning in the professions (1st ed.). Jossey-Bass.
Seymour-Walsh, A. E., Bell, A., Weber, A., & Smith, T. (2020). Adapting to a new reality:
COVID-19 coronavirus and online education in the health professions. Rural and Remote Health, 20(2).
Siemens, G. (2018). Connectivism: a learning theory for the digital age. In R. E. West (Ed.), Foundations of Learning and Instructional Design Technology. EdTech Books.
Stojan, J., Haas, M., Thammasitboon, S., Lander, L., Evans, S., Pawlik, C., … Peterson, W.
(2022). Online learning developments in undergraduate medical education in response to the COVID-19 pandemic: A BEME systematic review: BEME Guide No.
69. Medical Teacher, 44(2), 109–129.
Ten Cate, O. (2021). Health professions education scholarship: The emergence, current status, and future of a discipline in its own right. FASEB Bioadvances, 3(7), 510–522.
https://doi.org/10.1096/fba.2021-00011
Vaughan, N. D., Cleveland-Innes, M., & Garrison, D. R. (2013). Teaching in blended learning environments: Creating and sustaining communities of inquiry. Athabasca University Press.
Williamson, B., Eynon, R., & Potter, J. (2020). Pandemic politics, pedagogies and practices: digital technologies and distance education during the coronavirus emergency. Learning, Media and Technology, 45(2), 107–114. https://doi.org/
10.1080/17439884.2020.1761641.
Xue, H., & Desmet, P. M. A. (2019). Researcher introspection for experience-driven design research. Design Studies, 63, 37–64. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.
destud.2019.03.001