BibTex RIS Cite

Meslekler Arası Eğitimin Yükseköğretim Müfredatına Dâhil Edilmesinin Önemi

Year 2014, Volume: 4 Issue: 1, 9 - 13, 01.04.2014

Abstract

Meslekler arası eğitim tıp, sağlık ve sosyal hizmet alanları içerisinde iki veya daha fazla sayıda profesyonelin bir araya gelerek birlikte bir öğrenme sürecine girmesini ifade etmektedir. Meslekler arası eğitim için ilk girişimler Birleşik Krallıkta (İngiltere, Galler, İskoçya, Kuzey İrlanda), 1960'lı yıllarda başlamıştır. Dünyanın önde gelen üniversitelerınde meslekler arası eğitim, sağlık ve sosyal hizmet müfredatları içerisinde yerini almış, tıp, sağlık bilimleri ve sosyal hizmetler alanında lisans ve yüksek lisans seviyelerinde zorunlu ders olarak verilmeye başlamıştır. Türkiye'deki sağlık ve sosyal hizmet öğrencilerinin, meslekler arası eğitim programı çerçevesinde ortak dersler alarak yeterliliklerini, kabiliyetlerini ve farkındalıklarını artırarak daha etkin bir biçimde ekiple çalışma becerileri kazanabilecekleri öngörülmektedir. Üniversitelerin gelişimi, modernizasyonu ve güçlü Avrupa Meslekler Arası Eğitim Ağına (European Interprofessional Education Network, EIPEN) katılabilmeleri, sağlık ve sosyal hizmet alanlarındaki işbirliği uygulama prensiplerini içeren meslekler arası eğitimin müfredata dahil edilmesiyle mümkün olabilecektir. Meslekler arası eğitimin özünde sağlık ve sosyal hizmet alanlarında eğitim alan öğrencilerin probleme dayalı öğrenme becerilerinin kazanılması yatmaktadır. Bu çalışmanın amacı, meslekler arası eğitim prensiplerini gözden geçirmek, açıklamak ve üniversitelerin ilgili bölümlerinde bu eğitim anlayışını müfredata dahil etmenin önemi vurgulanmaktır.

References

  • Barr, H. (2000). New NHS, new collaboration, new agenda for education. Journal of Interprofessional Care, 14, 81-86.
  • Barr, H., Freeth, D., Hammick, M., Koppel, I., and Reeves, S. (2000). Evaluations of interprofessional education: A United Kingdom review of health and social care. London: CAIPE & the British Educational Research Association.
  • CAIPE (2012). The Centre for the Advancement of Interprofessional Education. 20 Ağustos 2013 tarihinde <http://www.caipe. org.uk> adresinden erişildi.
  • CIPW (2007). Creating an interprofessional workforce: An education and training framework for health and social care in England. In: Hughes L, (Ed). (2007). Department of Health Project. CAIPE. 12 Ocak 2011 tarihinde <http://www.cipw.org.uk> adresinden erişildi.
  • Curran, V. R., Deacon, D.R., and Fleet, L. (2005). Academic administra- tors’ attitudes towards interprofessional education in Canadian schools of health professional education. Journal of Interprofessional Care, 19(2 Supp 1), 76-86.
  • Department of Health (DoH). Birleşik Krallık Sağlık Bakanlığı (2001a). Working together, learning together: a framework for lifelong learning for the NHS. London: Department of Health.
  • Department of Health (DoH). Birleşik Krallık Sağlık Bakanlığı (2001b). Learning from Bristol: The Report of the Public Inquiry into Children’s Heart Surgery at the Bristol Royal Infirmary 1984-95. London: Department of Health.
  • Department of Health (DoH). Birleşik Krallık Sağlık Bakanlığı (2007). New ways of working in mental health. Creating capable teams approach (CCTA) best practice guidance to support the implementation of new ways of working (NWW) and new roles. London: Department of Health.
  • Domaç, S., and Anderson, E. S. (2012). Is this the right time to join Turkey to the European interprofessional education community? Journal of Interprofessional Care, 26(2), 83-84.
  • Domaç, S., and Dokuztuğ-Uçsular, F. (2011). New horizons for interprofes- sional education in Turkey. Uluslararası Yüksekögretim Kongresi (Turkish Higher Education Congress Book) Yeni Yönelişler ve Sorunlar (UYK-2011). 27-29 Mayıs 2011, İstanbul. Cilt 2, Bölüm XI, s. 1399-1404.
  • EIPEN (2012). European Interprofessional Education Network. 20 Ağustos 2013 tarihinde <http://eipen.org> adresinden erişildi.
  • Gilbert, H. V. J. (2005). Interprofessional learning and higher education structural barriers. Journal of Interprofessional Care, 19(Suppl 1), 87-106.
  • Hammick, M., Freeth, D., Koppel, I., Reeves, S., and Barr, H. (2007). A best evidence systematic review of interprofessional education. Medical Teacher, 29(8), 735-751.
  • Hargreaves, D., Beere, J., Swindells, M.., Wise, D., Desforges, and C., Goswami, U. (2005). About learning: Report of the Learning Working Group. Demos: London.
  • House of Commons Education and Skills Committee (2005). Every child matters. Ninth Report Session 2004-2005. Volume 1. Report, together with formal reports. House of Commons. London: The Stationery Office Limited.
  • Oandasan, I., and Reeves, S. (2005). Key elements for interprofessional education. Part 1: The learner, the educator and the learning context. Journal of Interprofessional Care, 19, 21-38.
  • Rice, K., Zwarenstein, M., Gotlib Conn, L., Kenaszchuk C., Russell A., and Reeves, S. (2010). An intervention to improve interprofessional collaboration and communications: A comparative qualitative study. Journal of Interprofessional Care, 24(4), 350-361.
  • World Health Organisation (WHO). Dünya Sağlık Örgütü (1973) Continuing education for physicians. Technical Report Series No. 534. Geneva: WHO.
  • World Health Organisation (WHO). Dünya Sağlık Örgütü (1979) Formulating strategies for health for all by the year 2000: guiding principles and essential issues. Geneva: WHO.
  • World Health Organization (WHO). Dünya Sağlık Örgütü (1988). Learning together to work together for health. Geneva: WHO.
  • World Health Organization (WHO). Dünya Sağlık Örgütü (2010). Framework for action on interprofessional education & collaborative practice. Geneva: Department of Human Resources for Health.

The importance of amalgamating interprofessional education to the higher education curriculum in Turkey

Year 2014, Volume: 4 Issue: 1, 9 - 13, 01.04.2014

Abstract

Interprofessional education (IPE) involves members of two or more health and social work professions engaged in learning with, from and about each other to improve collaboration and quality of care. In the 1960s, IPE has started to be taught in the United Kingdom (England, Scotlang, Wales and Northern Ireland). Over the world the majority of the prestigous universities had incorporated IPE into their health and social work curriculums and they have begun to teach IPE as compulsory course at graduate and postgraduate levels. It is predicted that if IPE programmes started in Turkey, health and social work students will learn side by side and will be able to use their abilities more effectively and work collaboratively by raising their awareness and capabilities. The possibility of joining the well established European Interprofessional Education Network and modernising Turkish universities further is closely linked with the implementation of IPE curriculum which consists of collaborative principles in social and health care. Intrinsically, IPE enables health and social care students to obtain problem solving skills. The aim of this study is to emphasize the importance of incorporating IPE into Turkish universities' curriculum by reviewing and explaining the principles of IPE.

References

  • Barr, H. (2000). New NHS, new collaboration, new agenda for education. Journal of Interprofessional Care, 14, 81-86.
  • Barr, H., Freeth, D., Hammick, M., Koppel, I., and Reeves, S. (2000). Evaluations of interprofessional education: A United Kingdom review of health and social care. London: CAIPE & the British Educational Research Association.
  • CAIPE (2012). The Centre for the Advancement of Interprofessional Education. 20 Ağustos 2013 tarihinde <http://www.caipe. org.uk> adresinden erişildi.
  • CIPW (2007). Creating an interprofessional workforce: An education and training framework for health and social care in England. In: Hughes L, (Ed). (2007). Department of Health Project. CAIPE. 12 Ocak 2011 tarihinde <http://www.cipw.org.uk> adresinden erişildi.
  • Curran, V. R., Deacon, D.R., and Fleet, L. (2005). Academic administra- tors’ attitudes towards interprofessional education in Canadian schools of health professional education. Journal of Interprofessional Care, 19(2 Supp 1), 76-86.
  • Department of Health (DoH). Birleşik Krallık Sağlık Bakanlığı (2001a). Working together, learning together: a framework for lifelong learning for the NHS. London: Department of Health.
  • Department of Health (DoH). Birleşik Krallık Sağlık Bakanlığı (2001b). Learning from Bristol: The Report of the Public Inquiry into Children’s Heart Surgery at the Bristol Royal Infirmary 1984-95. London: Department of Health.
  • Department of Health (DoH). Birleşik Krallık Sağlık Bakanlığı (2007). New ways of working in mental health. Creating capable teams approach (CCTA) best practice guidance to support the implementation of new ways of working (NWW) and new roles. London: Department of Health.
  • Domaç, S., and Anderson, E. S. (2012). Is this the right time to join Turkey to the European interprofessional education community? Journal of Interprofessional Care, 26(2), 83-84.
  • Domaç, S., and Dokuztuğ-Uçsular, F. (2011). New horizons for interprofes- sional education in Turkey. Uluslararası Yüksekögretim Kongresi (Turkish Higher Education Congress Book) Yeni Yönelişler ve Sorunlar (UYK-2011). 27-29 Mayıs 2011, İstanbul. Cilt 2, Bölüm XI, s. 1399-1404.
  • EIPEN (2012). European Interprofessional Education Network. 20 Ağustos 2013 tarihinde <http://eipen.org> adresinden erişildi.
  • Gilbert, H. V. J. (2005). Interprofessional learning and higher education structural barriers. Journal of Interprofessional Care, 19(Suppl 1), 87-106.
  • Hammick, M., Freeth, D., Koppel, I., Reeves, S., and Barr, H. (2007). A best evidence systematic review of interprofessional education. Medical Teacher, 29(8), 735-751.
  • Hargreaves, D., Beere, J., Swindells, M.., Wise, D., Desforges, and C., Goswami, U. (2005). About learning: Report of the Learning Working Group. Demos: London.
  • House of Commons Education and Skills Committee (2005). Every child matters. Ninth Report Session 2004-2005. Volume 1. Report, together with formal reports. House of Commons. London: The Stationery Office Limited.
  • Oandasan, I., and Reeves, S. (2005). Key elements for interprofessional education. Part 1: The learner, the educator and the learning context. Journal of Interprofessional Care, 19, 21-38.
  • Rice, K., Zwarenstein, M., Gotlib Conn, L., Kenaszchuk C., Russell A., and Reeves, S. (2010). An intervention to improve interprofessional collaboration and communications: A comparative qualitative study. Journal of Interprofessional Care, 24(4), 350-361.
  • World Health Organisation (WHO). Dünya Sağlık Örgütü (1973) Continuing education for physicians. Technical Report Series No. 534. Geneva: WHO.
  • World Health Organisation (WHO). Dünya Sağlık Örgütü (1979) Formulating strategies for health for all by the year 2000: guiding principles and essential issues. Geneva: WHO.
  • World Health Organization (WHO). Dünya Sağlık Örgütü (1988). Learning together to work together for health. Geneva: WHO.
  • World Health Organization (WHO). Dünya Sağlık Örgütü (2010). Framework for action on interprofessional education & collaborative practice. Geneva: Department of Human Resources for Health.
There are 21 citations in total.

Details

Other ID JA97YU73UK
Journal Section Original Empirical Research
Authors

Türkiye Meslekler Arası Eğitim Tipe Grubu; Sezer Domaç This is me

Merih Bektaş Fidan This is me

Fatih Sobacı This is me

Ali Yıldırım This is me

Pınar Soydaş This is me

Türkan Özkent This is me

Publication Date April 1, 2014
Published in Issue Year 2014 Volume: 4 Issue: 1

Cite

APA Domaç, T. M. A. E. T. G. S., Fidan, M. B., Sobacı, F., Yıldırım, A., et al. (2014). Meslekler Arası Eğitimin Yükseköğretim Müfredatına Dâhil Edilmesinin Önemi. Yükseköğretim Dergisi, 4(1), 9-13.

TÜBA Higher Education Research / Review (TÜBA-HER) is indexed in ESCI, TR Dizin, EBSCO, and Google Scholar.

Publisher
34633
112 Vedat Dalokay Street, Çankaya , 06700 Ankara, Türkiye

3415434156  34153 34146 34148 34155 34157 3415834160

TÜBA-HER Turkish Academy of Sciences Journal of Higher Education Research/Review (TÜBA-HER) does not officially endorse the views expressed in the articles published in the journal, nor does it guarantee any product or service advertisements that may appear in the print or online versions. The scientific and legal responsibility for the published articles belongs solely to the authors.

Images, figures, tables, and other materials submitted with manuscripts must be original. If previously published, written permission from the copyright holder must be provided for reproduction in both print and online versions. Authors retain the copyright of their works; however, upon publication in the journal, the economic rights and rights of public communication— including adaptation, reproduction, representation, printing, publishing, and distribution rights—are transferred to the Turkish Academy of Sciences (TÜBA), the publisher of the journal. Copyright of all published content (text and visual materials) belongs to the journal in terms of usage and distribution. No payment is made to the authors under the name of copyright or any other title, and no article processing charges are requested. However, the cost of reprints, if requested, is the responsibility of the authors.

In order to promote global open access to scientific knowledge and research, TÜBA allows all content published online (unless otherwise stated) to be freely used by readers, researchers, and institutions. Such use (including linking, downloading, distribution, printing, copying, or reproduction in any medium) is permitted under the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International (CC BY-NC-ND 4.0) License, provided that the original work is properly cited, not modified, and not used for commercial purposes. For permission regarding commercial use, please contact the publisher.