Abstract
Background
With the recognition that professional education has not kept pace with the challenges facing the health and human service system, there has been a move to transformative education and learning professional development designed to expand the number of enlightened and empowered change agents with the competence to implement changes at an individual, organisation and systems level.
Design and Methods
Since 2010, the Department of Health and Human Services in Victoria, Australia, in collaboration with The University of Melbourne's School of Population and Global Health, has delivered seven population health short courses aimed to catalyse participants’ transformation into population health change agents. This paper presents key learnings from a combination of evaluation data from six population health short courses using a transformative learning framework from a 2010 independent international commission for health professionals that was designed to support the goals of transformative and interdependent health professionals. Participatory realist evaluation approaches and qualitative methods were used.
Results
Evaluation findings reveal that there were mixed outcomes in facilitating participants’ implementation of population health approaches, and their transformation into population health agents upon their return to their workplaces. Core enablers, barriers and requirements, at individual, organisational and system levels influence the capability of participants to implement population health approaches. The iterative and systemic evolution of the population health short courses, from a
Conclusions
To leverage this commitment, recognising that professional development is not an event but part of an ongoing transformative process, suggestions to further align recognition of population health professional development programs are presented.
Keywords
Introduction
With the recognition that professional education has not kept pace with the challenges facing the health and human service system, there has been a move by health professional educators to transformative education and learning professional development.
1
Transformative learning is concerned with empowering the learner as a critical, reflective, lifelong learner, with the aim of facilitating change at the individual, organisational and wider system levels.
2
It is about developing leadership attributes to produce
Significance for public health
With decreasing health and wellbeing of whole populations, increasing inequities among specific population groups, health professional educators are increasingly turning their attention to population health. This has implications for implementing evidence into practice. Professional development short courses are being conducted to equip participants (health service managers, health promotion managers and coordinators, health planners, population health planners and senior executives) with knowledge, skills and tools to implement population health approaches and transform them into population health change agents. The findings of this study indicate there were mixed outcomes in facilitating participants’ implementation of population health approaches and their transformation into population health agents upon their return to their workplaces. The study findings informed the evolution of the short courses, from a
Converting evidence on transformative education into practice is challenging. Therefore, educators have also invested in building learners capability to act as
A social entrepreneurship lens
Social entrepreneurs act as agents of innovative organisational change act to connect the streams of policy, problem solving, and politics inherent in all organisations. 7 They work to create empowering organisational settings in which stakeholders can work together to identify innovative solutions to long-standing problems, develop opportunities for leadership, and build on organisational capacity to foster reflective action, or praxis.8,9
Successful social entrepreneurs need knowledge, skills and confidence to analyse, envision, communicate, empathize, mediate, enable and empower across individuals and organizations; to think holistically, proactively, reflectively; to seize opportunities to broker more effective political relations; to act as
Design and Methods
This paper reflects upon a current population health professional development short course opportunity that is striving to create population health
The short courses were specifcially aimed to: i) build a shared understanding among participants of key concepts in population health; ii) develop understanding of the key benefits and challenges in implementing a population health approach from a range of perspectives; and iii) develop a set of practical actions at an individual, organisational and inter-organisational level, that each participant could lead on their return to their workplace.
A population health short course for professionals working in the sector was believed to be an ideal medium for engaging with the regional workforce. 18 A total of seven short courses have been conducted from 2010-2015. Six of these short courses were commissioned to be evaluated by the University of Melbourne.
The 2010, 2011 and 2012 short course occurred over two days providing an intensive immersion experience for participants and were aimed i) at mid-level health service managers employed within the Departments’ of Health; and ii) service delivery organisations, local councils and other sectors that aims to engage, strengthen and serve communities across Victoria.
The 2013 two-day short course was held over two weeks, with the intention of providing participants with the opportunity to reflect upon course learning outcomes upon their return to their workplaces. In addition to mi-level health service mangers, the 2013 short course was also aimed at senior health sector executives to facilitate a supportive authorising environment for course participants upon returning to their workplace.
The 2014 short course occurred over two days and were aimed at both mid-level health service managers and senior health sector executives.
In 2015 two short courses were conducted in two separate metropolitan regions in Victoria. The short courses occurred over two days and were aimed at both mid-level health service managers and senior health sector executives.
Overall the short courses typically covered two main themes, such as: (Day 1) Definitions of population health and the role of population health in reducing inequality; and (Day 2) Implementing population health approaches and other regional initiatives supporting population health planning. The short courses involved presentations from academics, service providers, and service users. Group work was used to provide participants with an opportunity to consider and discuss the ideas raised in the course, build knowledge and skills, and facilitate cross-sectorial linkages among participants.
Over four consecutive years, an evaluation team from The University of Melbourne, Victoria, Australia, has been engaged to evaluate the implementation of the population health short courses held between 2011-2015. Each evaluation has been conducted as a project in and of itself and reported on separately. Overall evaluation questions have included: to what extent have the Population Health Short Courses built population health knowledge, mobilised population health leadership, and built capability to apply population health approaches amongst short course participants?
Specific evaluation questions have included: i) To what extent have the Population Health Short Course components been implemented as intended? ii) What contextual factors (enablers, barriers) have influenced the Population Health Short Course implementation? iii) What impact has the Population Health Short Course had on participants, organisations, and systems? iv) To what extent has the Population Health Short Course built capacity (knowledge, partnerships, infrastructure, leadership)? v) To what extent are the impacts and outcomes of the Population Health Short Course sustainable? vi) What contextual factors (enablers, barriers) will influence the sustainability of the Population Health Short Course achievements?
Evaluation questions i) and v) are not specifically addressed in this paper. To increase rigour, the evaluations have used several approaches, multiple longitudinal data collection activities, and a transparent analysis and interpretation process. To enhance the use of the evaluation findings, participatory and realist evaluation approaches have been used.19,20 A participatory evaluation approach has enabled the engagement of short course developers and organisers,
19
as it was viewed necessary to generate useful information for informing future courses. This evaluation approach has enabled a working partnership to grow between the evaluation team and the short course developers and organisers to ensure all were engaged and involved within the evaluation processes and evaluation learnings. To understand how and why the short courses have (or have not) worked, a realist evaluation approach has been used because it strives to examine what works,20,21 for whom and in what circumstances. Realist evaluation is a theory-driven approach to understand how the outcomes (
The evaluation methodology has built upon traditional approaches to evaluating professional development courses, focusing on: participant learning outcomes, intentions and confidence to use their newly-acquired knowledge and skills; participant use of knowledge and skills gained; and participant perception of organisational support required to implement participant learning outcomes.22,23 The evaluation approach has also been designed to provide short course participants with additional opportunities to reflect upon their implementation of population health approaches within their workplaces over time. The data collection methodology is designed specifically to engage short course alumni in practice-oriented reflection, thereby offering an extension of each short course itself. Three data collection activities are being used: i) two-week post short course on-line survey of short course participants; i) three and six month post course interviews with short course participants; and iii) three months post course interviews with short course participant organisation Senior Managers. Each evaluation has informed the subsequent short courses. Ethics approval from the Melbourne University Melbourne School of Population and Global Health Human Ethics Advisory Group was obtained for each iteration. Surveys and interview transcripts have formed the primary data for the evaluation. Field notes taken during the courses have been used to supplement the interview data. All interviews have been transcribed verbatim by an independent transcribing organisation, to capture accurately the experiences of course participants. The data analysis occurred through an iterative coding process, using a three step coding process - open, axial and selective coding. 24
Results
A total of 165 people have participated in the course iterations (2011=26; 2012=31; 2013=39; 2014=20; 2015=49). Of these 67 participants completed post-course on-line surveys, and 50 have participated in semi-structured
Contextual implementation enablers and barriers
The evaluations show that there are a core set of enablers and barriers to implementing population health approaches. Table 1 provides a summary of the enablers and barriers mentioned by course participants at individual, organisational and systems levels to implementing population health approaches.
Summary of implementation enablers and barriers.
Capability to implement a population health approach
Population Health Short Course participants have been able to articulate clearly what they require at individual, organisational and systems levels to implement population health approaches. Table 2 provides a summary of requirements voiced by short course participants with illustrative quotes.
Individual, organisational and systems levels requirements.
Key evaluation recommendations and actions taken
Each course has been revised to build iteratively on evaluation findings. Table 3 provides a summary of consecutive short course evaluation recommendations and actions taken to revise the short course iterations.
Summary evaluation findings and actions taken (2011 to 2014).
Discussion
The evaluation findings suggest there were mixed outcomes in assisting participants’ implementation of population health approaches following their return to their workplaces. These findings require reflection for several reasons. Firstly, professional development courses are recognised as a means and not an endpoint and part of a transformative change process, involving a process of ongoing change, adoption, implementation, dissemination and sustainability of innovation into practice.22,23
Secondly, key ingredients of effectively designed professional development courses exist.25-28 These include, but are not limited to: occurring over an extended duration; having a clear purpose and carefully expressed strategies; providing collaborative learning experiences; having supportive leadership; adhering to a philosophy of continuous reflection and learning; providing multiple contacts which allow for trial of, and feedback on newly acquired knowledge; content that is responsive to participants’ concerns, contexts and requests; relying upon proven theories and are evidence-based; and the need for course participants to return to a supportive working environment that authorises the implementation of course learning outcomes. However, whilst vital, these ingredients are not a guaranteed recipe for successful professional development. We recognise that empowerment outcomes can manifest in behaviour across different times, places and contexts. While participants may not be able to utilise their training immediately, this does not mean that they will not use this new knowledge and skills in future – perhaps in their next job or outside of work.
Based upon the list of enablers and barriers (Table 1), and perceived requirements at individual, organisational and systems levels (Table 2), the short courses initially might appear not to be sufficiently based upon current professional development best practice. However, the actions taken by the short course developers (Table 3) demonstrate they have embraced, learnt from and utilised the consecutive evaluation findings. More broadly, the evaluation findings highlight the reality of conducting professional development courses, and their ability to equip participants with knowledge and skills to create changes in their work practices and workplaces, and to meet the individual, organisational and system challenges they face in performing their ongoing roles. We recognise that evidence is still required about: the specific changes made by course participants over time; the success of the short course modifications; and changes to course participants as enlightened and empowered change agents.
Based upon the Frenk
Instructional/curriculum reforms
Institutional reforms
Enabling actions
In 2014 a shift occurred from the population health course as a
Conclusions
This paper has provided reflections from an evaluation of a series of Population Health Short Courses designed to create transformative population health change agents. The iterative and systemic evolution of the Population Health Short Courses, from a
Footnotes
Conflict of interest: the authors declare no potential conflict of interest.
Acknowledgments
This evaluation was funded by the Victorian Department of Health and Human Services, North and West, Southern and Eastern Metropolitan Regions, Australia. We particularly thank Dr. Iain Butterworth (Manager Liveability and Sustainability, Eastern and Southern Metropolitan Health, Department of Health & Human Services). We also acknowledge the contributions of short course participants who participated in this evaluation, as without their cooperation this work would not have been possible. Contributions: LN, IB, TM have all contributed to drafting of the article and/or revising it for important intellectual content and final approval of the version to be published. LN was responsible for the initial evaluation concept, data collection, analysis and interpretation. IB and TM were responsible for short course concept, evaluation data interpretation and implications. LN, IB and TM all provided important content and gave final approval of the version to be published.
