The Partnered Learning Project

• Section 2 (page 17) of the manual includes an evaluation for clinical faculty (preceptors)

• Only minor, site-specific adaptations were made to these materials, the content was maintained.
  (see IPE Program Eval – Preceptor or Clinical Faculty)
  
  

to top

• The evaluations completed by preceptors revealed that, in general, clinical preceptors thought the students involved in the IPE placements learned a lot about other disciplines and roles, and increased their awareness and confidence in engaging in interprofessional collaboration. Some preceptors also indicated that having students enrolled in the IPE program prompted them to personally reflect more on their own roles and collaborative practices.
  
  
• Preceptors indicated that the communications they received about the IPE placement process could have been enhanced. They also noted that the students may benefit more from the program if they have reached the point in their training where they have developed a clear sense of their own professional role and had an opportunity to become somewhat familiar with the hospital/clinical setting before they undertake the expanded learning of an IPE placement.

to top

• The challenge for the PLP was to establish effective communication linkages with the clinical preceptors. With effective linkages, the clinical preceptors would have developed a clear understanding of the goals of the IPE program, the distinctions between their own role and the roles of the IPE Lead and facilitators, and would be able to provide insightful feedback and evaluation responses. In our PLP experience, the communications with clinical preceptors produced mixed results. Future IPE projects at the PLP sites would benefit from enhanced communication linkages with the preceptors.
  
  
• In this study, clinical team members were not included in the feedback process. In future IPE projects at the PLP sites, it would be preferable to include feedback from the clinical team members.

to top