Case study: Video feedback

Kevin Henshaw, Senior Lecturer, SOLSTICE Fellow, Faculty of Health and Social Care, Edge Hill University, UK

Video feedback is used as part of a formative exercise in Clinical Simulations at the Faculty of Health and Social Care Edge Hill University.  In terms of Pedagogy, a Social Constructivist model, where the need for experiential learning is seen as the crucial factor (Kolb, 1984; Grant & Marsden, 1992), was adopted. Feedback (or debriefing) is seen as the crucial factor in Simulated Exercises. In this case, the use of video feedback allows students to review and reflect on their ‘performances’ any number of times.

The students are all 3rd year Operating Department Practitioners (ODPs) who are undertaking a BSc (Hons). The scenarios never have more than 5 students per group and use a 3G Manikin which can react to any interventions by participants while being controlled by an instructor via a lap top computer. Part of the role of an ODP is to provide emergency care in acute medical settings such as during a Cardiac Arrest.

ODPs are members of a multidisciplinary team so Human Factors and the ability to work as an effective Team member is crucial to any clinical scenario.

The role of simulation based learning within any safety-critical industry is well established and is crucial to both pre and post registration education within Healthcare.

In this instance, all Simulation Exercises are recorded, saved as a WMV file and stored within the Institutional VLE. A hyperlink to an electronic repository is then e mailed to each individual student. At the end of each scenario, the recordings are reviewed by a Tutor who overlays the recording with verbal feedback. The recording can be stopped at any point to emphasise either good or bad practice.

The introduction of individual feedback via an electronic link is (to my knowledge) unique to EHU. As the link is sent out to either individual students or, to the group members who carried out the exercise, participants can reflect on their role within the scenario. Participants can feel a degree of reassurance that they are in learning environment which is both safe (they have access to who views the scenarios) and conducive to learning. The micro-analysis of the scenario allows the student to reflect and can be used as part of an electronic portfolio.

At this point, no formal evaluations have taken place but a request for informal e mails has produced very positive outcomes as often students perception of how they reacted is very different than how they reacted.

Outcomes

Some of the limitations of this method of feedback include the degree of technical support that was, initially, needed to set up the recordings. Mini i-Pads mounted on a drip stand (secured by a clamp). This allows a degree of portability and gives a ‘Birds eye’ view of the scenario.  Feedback is given verbally and is over-layed onto the original recording via a set of headphones and microphone. A digitally ‘safe’ area needs to be secured to ensure that the recordings stay within the Institutional VLE. Consent from the students should be gained and an agreement that some of the materials recorded can be used at some point in the future for either research or teaching purposes.

Grant, J & Marsden P: ‘Training senior house officers by service based training’. London: Joint Conference for Education in Medicine, 1992

Kolb, D. A. (1984). Experiential learning: Experience as the source of learning and development (Vol. 1). Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall

Further reading:

• Allam, C (2006). Using filmmaking to teach students about Shakespeare, urban regeneration and other stuff, DIVERSE Conference, Glasgow, UK
• BBC2005.“GoodShootingGuide” http://www.bbctraining.com/onlineCourse.asp?tID=5914&cat=2781 (accessed 5th January 2014)
• Biggs, J. (1996). Enhancing teaching through constructive alignment. Higher education, 32(3), 347-364.
• Dale, E (1969). Audio-visual methods in teaching. New York: Dryden
• Fee, S AND Fee, L (2003) Pedagogical approaches for the use of video . In C Crawford et al. (Eds)  Proceedings of Society in Information Technology and Teacher Educattion International Conference 2003 (pp. 1407-1414)
• Gladwell, M (2005). Blink: the power of thinking without thinking, Allan Lane, London
• Millar, S. M. (2005). Video as process and product, Educause Quarterly, 2005, 58-61
• Strathie, C (2006). Promoting Collaborative Learning and Development through Video Enhanced Reflective Practice (VERP) http://escalate.ac.uk/2363 (accessed 5th January2014)
• Uskov V (2005). Technology for advanced e-learning, E-Learn Conference, Vancouver, Canada
• Vygotsky, L. (1934). Thought and language. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
• Wallance, I & Donald,  D (2006). Project Pad: An open source, browser based video animation tool, DIVERSE Conference, Glasgow, UK
• West J and Donald D (2006) “Clydetown”: The use of audio and video resources within a virtual community learning resource, DIVERSE Conference, Glasgow, UK