Evaluation of the use of team teaching for delivering sensitive content – a pilot study

Many programmes in further and higher education contain sensitive areas of content, such as diversity, racism, power and privilege, breaking bad news, counselling, sex education and ethical decision making. Team teaching may be a useful method for delivering sensitive areas of course content. This article presents a pilot study that was undertaken on the use of team teaching to deliver the ethical decision‐making component of a continuing professional development (CPD) module for trained nurses. The findings of the pilot study are presented and mapped against different models of team teaching from the literature, and they indicate that students found three key benefits of team teaching for this sensitive content area: the value of having differing perspectives; the way in which team teaching enhanced small group work during the teaching session; and the value of team teaching in the development of students' cognitive skills.

[1]  Diana Laurillard,et al.  Rethinking University Teaching: A Framework for the Effective Use of Educational Technology , 1993 .

[2]  K. Schaefer,et al.  Analyzing the Teaching Style of Nursing Faculty: Does It Promote a STUDENT-CENTERED OR TEACHER-CENTERED Learning Environment? , 2003, Nursing education perspectives.

[3]  F. Quinn,et al.  The Principles and Practice of Nurse Education , 1980 .

[4]  L. Spencer,et al.  Qualitative data analysis for applied policy research , 2002 .

[5]  M B HARTY,et al.  Team teaching. , 1963, Nursing outlook.

[6]  Michael Quinn Patton,et al.  Inquiry into appreciative evaluation , 2003 .

[7]  Bruce W. Speck,et al.  “Oh what a difference a team makes”: Why team teaching makes a difference , 1998 .

[8]  Bilge Mutlu,et al.  Qualitative Analysis , 1928, Nature.

[9]  Guy C. Colarulli,et al.  Interdisciplinary General Education: Five Ways It Promotes Good Freshman Teaching and Learning. , 1990 .

[10]  Anne Harvey,et al.  Team Teaching in Adult Higher Education Classrooms: Toward Collaborative Knowledge Construction , 2000 .

[11]  John Brooks,et al.  In Search of Understanding: The Case for Constructivist Classrooms , 1993 .

[12]  Ortrun Zuber-Skerritt,et al.  Eliciting personal constructs of research, teaching, and#shor professional development , 1991 .

[13]  J. Adair.  Effective Teambuilding: How to Make a Winning Team , 1986 .

[14]  K. Lewin.  Frontiers in Group Dynamics , 1947 .

[15]  J. Benjamin,et al.  The Scholarship of Teaching in Teams: What does it look like in practice? , 2000 .

[16]  J. Øvretveit.  Coordinating community care : multidisciplinary teams and care management , 1993 .

[17]  D. Pratt.  Personal Philosophies of Teaching: A False Promise?. , 2005 .

[18]  K. Lewin.  Frontiers in Group Dynamics , 1947 .

[19]  Marshall A. George,et al.  Team Teaching a Graduate Course: Case Study: A Clinical Research Course , 2000 .

[20]  Gaye Kyle,et al.  Using Anonymized Reflection To Teach Ethics: a Pilot Study , 2008, Nursing ethics.

[21]  Jovita M. Ross-Gordon.  New directions for adult and continuing education, no. 93, Spring 2002 , 2002 .

[22]  Sandra G. Behrens,et al.  Affective Strategies for Effective Learning. , 1992 .

[23]  M. J. Nead.  A Team-Taught Business Course: A Case Study of Its Effectiveness at a Comprehensive Community College. , 1995 .

[24]  D. Allen,et al.  What is Problem-Based Learning? , 2006 .

[25]  Felnőtt képzés.  University of Science and Arts of Oklahoma , 2011 .

[26]  R. Bogdan,et al.  Bogdan, Robert C., and Sari Knopp Biklen, Qualitative Reseach for Education: An Introduction to Theory and Methods, 2d Ed. Boston: Allyn & Bacon, 1992. , 1992 .