In the third module of my technology enhanced learning studies I have been reading:
Henry, B., & Ueda, R. (2005). Learning model and curriculum designs for international health in nursing. Japan Journal of Nursing Science, 2(1), 17-24.
The aim of the paper is:
Nursing’s domain of inquiry for international health is unclear. A learning model to frame this specialty is unavailable. The goal of this analysis was to open debate worldwide on the nature of concepts, relationships, and analytic constructs that can serve as a foundational blueprint for international nursing curriculums. The aim was to define and operationalize international health in nursing by constructing a learning model.The results included the identification of five main concepts:
INTERPERSONAL : SCIENCES
|environment, technology, demographics|
Using Hodges' model above I have mapped these concepts to the model's domains. The influence of context looms large of course, so we can also for example consider the sociological aspects of the environment and the politics of the environment which is currently newsworthy on a global scale.
I've placed the concepts in the primary domain. We can extend them in many ways. Diagonally, technology can be extended to what is (should be?) socio-technical. Usability brings in the interpersonal domain and subjective experience. Funding and access politicizes many concepts and no-less here.
I'm being deliberately contrary with research. Usually I'd split research between the sciences and sociology. My doing so equates to the dated, but still significant distinction between quantitative and qualitative forms of research respectively. Basically this means that using Hodges' model we can replace the humanistic (subjective) and mechanistic (objective) labels above with 'research'.
We can take 'environment' and be person centered looking at the individual experience. We can do the same but for a group, or population.
As I investigate culture, nursing, Hodges' model and educational technology I do wonder what progress has been made since 2005: where these concepts sit within the care domains (and why), and what about the gaps? Back to the literature...!