Henry W W Potts1. 1. University College London, UK. h.potts@ucl.ac.uk
Abstract
BACKGROUND: User-generated content in an online environment has significant implications in both education and health. Instead of a model of knowledge being something transferred from the expert to the student or to the patient, Web 2.0 technologies offer the hope of making learning, and healthcare delivery, a more collaborative and participative process. However, some evidence suggests that this supposed democratisation of production is not entirely democratic and, in an educational context, many students are uncomfortable about sharing material they create with their peers. AIM: To understand students' affective and other experiences of generating content to be shared online with peers (e.g. in online discussions). METHODS: Online interviews, face-to-face focus groups and further methods with two student groups in medical education, one undergraduate and one postgraduate. RESULTS: Students were broadly positive about creating and sharing material online, but were also quite anxious about doing so. Many practical issues, including around course design, student workload and assessment pressures, were barriers to students creating and sharing material. Group size is also important, with self-sustaining activity less likely in small groups. CONCLUSION: Successfully introducing user-generated content into medical education requires attention to practical details and an awareness of the student anxiety that can arise.
BACKGROUND: User-generated content in an online environment has significant implications in both education and health. Instead of a model of knowledge being something transferred from the expert to the student or to the patient, Web 2.0 technologies offer the hope of making learning, and healthcare delivery, a more collaborative and participative process. However, some evidence suggests that this supposed democratisation of production is not entirely democratic and, in an educational context, many students are uncomfortable about sharing material they create with their peers. AIM: To understand students' affective and other experiences of generating content to be shared online with peers (e.g. in online discussions). METHODS: Online interviews, face-to-face focus groups and further methods with two student groups in medical education, one undergraduate and one postgraduate. RESULTS: Students were broadly positive about creating and sharing material online, but were also quite anxious about doing so. Many practical issues, including around course design, student workload and assessment pressures, were barriers to students creating and sharing material. Group size is also important, with self-sustaining activity less likely in small groups. CONCLUSION: Successfully introducing user-generated content into medical education requires attention to practical details and an awareness of the student anxiety that can arise.