Learning from lived experience: Outcomes associated with students' involvement in co-designed and co-delivered recovery-oriented practice workshops.
Justin Newton Scanlan, Bridget Berry, Karen Wells and 1 others
PMID 35983836WHAT IT FOUND
Occupational therapy students showed significant gains in recovery knowledge and capabilities after workshops co-delivered by three lived experience educators.
However, without a control group, it is impossible to know if these changes were caused by the educators or simply by the semester's teaching.
Key findings
01Students' scores on both the Recovery Knowledge Inventory and the Capabilities for Recovery Oriented Practice Questionnaire improved significantly from the beginning to the end of the semester.
02Qualitative feedback from students most frequently highlighted learning from real experiences, followed by learning how to be a better clinician and reducing stigma.
03The study design lacked a comparison group, so the observed improvements cannot be attributed specifically to the co-delivered workshops rather than standard instruction.
STILL TO COME
How it was doneWhat they foundWhat it means for OTs
Read the rest of this summary
You get three full summaries a month, free, and we do not ask for a card. Search, the TL;DRs and your library stay unlimited either way.
What it does not show
There was no control or comparison group, so it is not possible to determine if the improvements were due to the specific workshops or general semester progression. The CROP-Q is a newly developed instrument with limited psychometric testing, so results from this measure should be viewed with caution. The study was conducted with a single cohort of undergraduate students at one university, limiting generalisability.
Declared interests
The authors did not declare any specific conflicts of interest in the provided text, though the study was approved by the University of Sydney Human Research Ethics Committee.
The easy way to misread this
Do not assume that the observed improvements in student knowledge and capabilities were caused by the lived experience educators. Because there was no control group, standard teaching or normal student development over the semester could account for these changes.