2.5 TEACHING AND LEARNING IN THE CLINICAL SKILLS LABORATORY
2.5.1 Interaction of Educators and Students
Empathetic understanding is the ability of the teacher to recognise and comprehend the feelings of students, which further aids in the non-judgmental interpretation of their actions and behaviours. It is being able to view the world from the students' perspective that facilitates understanding and working with them through their present emotional situation to maximise the academic experience, thus demonstrating consideration (Bryan, Lindo, Anderson-Johnson & Weaver, 2015:141). The main goal of faculty is to help their students develop and mature academically to become competent professionals (Bryan et al., 2015:141).
According to Arbaugh and Benbunan-Fich, instructional interactions are reciprocal events happening between a learner and the learner's environment with changing learners and assisting them to their professional goals. Depending upon the interacting parties, there
~ 43 ~
are three types of interaction: learner–instructor, learner–learner and learner–content (Arbaugh & Benbunan-Fich, 2009:853).
Learner–instructor interaction measures the involvement of the instructor with the students and the extent to which they experience the proximity of the instructor through his/her presence. Depending on the instructional approach, the instructor can take a prominent role (instructor-centred) or a facilitator role, Such as an objectivist mode of instruction, which is based on the transfer of information from the lecturer to the learner (Arbaugh & Benbunan-Fich, 2009:853).
Learner–learner interaction refers to the exchanges among students enrolled in the course. This uses a collaborative model of learning that is based on the notion that learning is most successful when small groups of students share and discuss information.
Interaction with peers provides participants with the synergy and motivation to excel.
Through task-oriented and socio-emotional interactions, students obtain the resources and support necessary to succeed in the learning environment (Arbaugh & Benbunan- Fich, 2009:853).
Learner–content is the interaction between the learner and the material to be learned, which can be presented in different formats such as text, audio, video, graphs and images. The connection between the learner and the material is influenced by subject matter and the design of the simulated environment (Arbaugh & Benbunan-Fich, 2009:853). A defining feature of adapting content to learners’ needs is the teacher’s ability to transform content knowledge comprehensively to students’ varied abilities and backgrounds (Ayvazo & Ward, 2011:675)
For instance, in constructivist courses, students should actively construct their own knowledge through intensive engagement with multiple sources of information, whereas in objectivist courses based on lectures and textbooks, the students are mostly expected to recall the material as presented. Consequently, technological support for objectivist approaches of instruction is focused on learner–content and learner–instructor interaction, while technological platforms for constructivism must provide access to
~ 44 ~
content in a non-linear or non-structured way, using learning tools such as databases, conceptual models, simulations and hypermedia (Arbaugh & Benbunan-Fich, 2009:853).
Faculty members are viewed as nurturers within the academic setting and may be able to influence students' behaviours by forming of positive interpersonal relationships (Bryan et al., 2015:141). An effective educator can facilitate positive Interpersonal Relationships that will enhance students' success because they recognize that partnering with students, instead of dictating to them, will smooth a nurturing classroom climate, encourage learning, and enhance students' integrity (Evertson, 2009:2013; Saavedra & Saavedra, 2009:75). Similarly, nurturing classroom climate can contribute to a higher sense of well- being and enable students to take risks, build trust, and develop a strong sense of community when strong caring interpersonal relationship between educators and students are fashioned (Bryan et al., 2015:141). For some students learning depends on their attitudes and perception of the classroom and the educator. Educators who use realness, pricing and empathetic understanding in creating positive social experiences in the classroom will increase the likelihood that students meet the objectives of the curriculum (Bryan et al., 2015:141).
Again, the students' construction of a nursing identity is grounded in their social interactions with a faculty and is shaped by values and norms learned in both the formal and informal curriculum (Del Prato, 2013:286). Del Prato contends that educator’s discourteousness included demeaning experiences, subjective evaluation, rigid expectations, and targeting and weeding out practices and impoliteness hinders professional formation by interfering with learning, self-esteem, self-efficacy, and confidence of the student (Ajibade & Olaitan, 2014:142). Studies also suggest that faculty who model professional values in the formal and hidden curriculum contribute to the positive formation of future nurses. Therefore, nursing educators should be formally prepared to establish respectful, connected relationships with students and should role model professional values, deemphasize their evaluative role, provide constructive formative feedback, and remain open to the student's potential for growth (Bays, Engelberg, Back, Ford, Downey, Shannon, Doorenbos, Edlund, Christianson, Arnold,
~ 45 ~
O'connor, Kross, Reinke, Cecere Feemster, Fryer-Edwards, Alexander, Tulsky & Curtis, 2014:1; Del Prato, 2013:286).
According to Benner and colleagues in their book Educating Nurses: A call for radical transformation, believe that Socialisation into nursing is the process whereby students develop the knowledge and skills needed to assume the professional role. They argue that becoming a nurse requires more than the mastery of knowledge and skills (Benner, Sutphen & Leonard166). They claim that socialisation into nursing is a process of professional formation that signifies “the development of perceptual abilities, the ability to draw on knowledge and adept adeptness, and a way of being and acting in practice and in the world” (Benner et al.166).
An essential result of nursing education is the formation of the student's identity as a caring professional, while The Code of Ethics for Nurses obliges nurses to demonstrate caring and respect (Del Prato, 2013:286). These attributes can only be learnt by interacting with educators whom the students have the access to. Within this context, research suggests that the construction of a nursing identity is grounded in social interactions with faculty and others (Del Prato, 2013:286).
In the higher educational literature, academic identity is defined as the extent to which students feel they belong to the greater academic community, their experience of personal academic worth and their visibility in the academic environment (Jensen &
Jetten, 2015:126). It is expected that students may derive bonding capital from interactions with peers at university and that this and the sense of belongingness that emerges from participation in group activities with peers, contributes to the development and formation of an academic identity. This helps students to understand the university environment and teaches them to successfully navigate this world. Consistent with this, there is a body of work that suggests that students inherit social capital from being in the academic environment and having social interactions with their fellow students (Scanlon, Rowling & Weber, 2009:223).
~ 46 ~
However, within universities, students will also interact with others with whom they do not necessarily share identity but these interactions form important building blocks for the formation of bridging capital. Some authors have argued that interactions between students and educators facilitate the process whereby students can view themselves as academics (Komarraju, Musulkin & Bhattacharya, 2010:332). Educators not only have an important role to play in academic identity formation, but they are also uniquely positioned to inform students on future job prospects and the skills required in the workforce and they can act as important role models—all which contributes to the development of a professional identity (Jensen & Jetten, 2015:126). Conversely, the way most universities are structured may affect the ease with which students perceive that there are opportunities to gain relational interaction. It could be argued that the reason such opportunities have declined over the last decades is the increasing conceptualisation of academic institutions as being research rather than teaching focussed (Jensen & Jetten, 2015:126). As a result of this perception while the traditional model of scholarly training for example, the Oxbridge model involves intense contact between a tutor and a small group of students, academic-student and face-to-face interaction, has decreased over the last few decades in favour of the class environment (Jensen & Jetten, 2015:126).
Despite this, considerable pedagogical effort in most institutions is expended on providing rich learning environments that promote volunteering and participating in community activities, clubs, and social organisations. It is however, unclear if these forms of social interaction are efficacious in developing the forms of social capital that provides for both academic and professional identity formation. It is also unclear whether students recognise the opportunities that are provided by institutions to develop an academic and professional identity. If they do recognise these opportunities, the question remains whether they perceive that there are barriers in making use of these opportunities (Meeuwisse, Severiens & Born, 2010:528).
Results from Jensen and Jetten (Jensen & Jetten, 2015:126), show that bridging interactions between students and educators facilitated academic identity formation.
However, students described only a handful of such interactions and that their educators were aloof (Jensen & Jetten, 2015:126).
~ 47 ~
Results further point to the importance of creating opportunities for social interaction with educators at university because this facilitates the generation of bridging social capital, which is essential for students’ professional identity development (Jensen & Jetten, 2015:126). Since clinical education is better when is face-to-face the type and quality of the relationship plays a key role in its promotion (Yaghoubinia et al., 2014:65), it is a key component of teaching and learning. An appropriate student–educator relationship can lead to positive consequences such as an increase in learning (Yaghoubinia et al., 2014:65). Students also required clinical educators to consider their needs and conditions in this relationship in stressful clinical environments, and to facilitate their learning by creating a relaxed and safe relationship atmosphere (Yaghoubinia et al., 2014:65).