Interdisciplinary project-led education: The coaching role of the tutor

Professionals are increasingly expected to collaborate in interdisciplinary settings. Higher education institutes offer students opportunities to develop necessary skills, often in the context of project-led education. In such types of education, the role of the tutor is changing, from a focus on teacher-oriented teaching towards learner-oriented coaching, facilitating students’ knowledge construction. Hardly any research focuses on how teachers apply this new didactical approach and how it impacts student learning.  In our research, we study how tutors in interdisciplinary engineering education take on the coaching role; how tutors and students value this coaching behavior as beneficial for student learning; and what support (new) tutors need to develop the coaching role

Het coachen van leraren in opleiding

Overgenomen uit Velon, maart 2019 Meer studentgestuurde onderwijsvormen worden in het hbo steeds vaker ingezet, onder meer om leraren in opleiding op een breder vlak vaardigheden aan te leren. Denk aan het belang van vaardigheden zoals kritisch denken, zelfregulatie en reflectie, maar ook het ontwikkelen van een 'persoonlijke professionaliteit ' oftewel professionele identiteit als leraar. Dit alles heeft gevolgen voor lerarenopleiders en hun rol als begeleider van aanstaande leraren: het coachen van leraren in opleiding zal steeds belangrijker worden. Dit hoofdstuk gaat over de achtergrond van deze veranderingen, de contexten waarin het coachen van leraren in opleiding een plek heeft en welke coachingsvaardigheden voor lerarenopleiders van belang zijn

De gevolgen van aanpassingen in onderwijs en toetsing op leeropbrengsten, studiehouding en betrokkenheid van studenten in het HBO

De eindrapportage van een exploratieve studie naar de gevolgen van aanpassingen in het onderwijs tijdens de Coronapandemie

Concurrent validity and reliability of suicide risk assessment instruments: a meta-analysis of 20 instruments across 27 international cohorts.

OBJECTIVE\nMETHOD\nRESULTS\nCONCLUSIONS\nA major limitation of current suicide research is the lack of power to identify robust correlates of suicidal thoughts or behavior. Variation in suicide risk assessment instruments used across cohorts may represent a limitation to pooling data in international consortia.\nHere, we examine this issue through two approaches: (a) an extensive literature search on the reliability and concurrent validity of the most commonly used instruments and (b) by pooling data (N ∼ 6,000 participants) from cohorts from the Enhancing NeuroImaging Genetics Through Meta-Analysis (ENIGMA) Major Depressive Disorder and ENIGMA-Suicidal Thoughts and Behaviour working groups, to assess the concurrent validity of instruments currently used for assessing suicidal thoughts or behavior.\nWe observed moderate-to-high correlations between measures, consistent with the wide range (κ range: 0.15-0.97; r range: 0.21-0.94) reported in the literature. Two common multi-item instruments, the Columbia Suicide Severity Rating Scale and the Beck Scale for Suicidal Ideation were highly correlated with each other (r = 0.83). Sensitivity analyses identified sources of heterogeneity such as the time frame of the instrument and whether it relies on self-report or a clinical interview. Finally, construct-specific analyses suggest that suicide ideation items from common psychiatric questionnaires are most concordant with the suicide ideation construct of multi-item instruments.\nOur findings suggest that multi-item instruments provide valuable information on different aspects of suicidal thoughts or behavior but share a modest core factor with single suicidal ideation items. Retrospective, multisite collaborations including distinct instruments should be feasible provided they harmonize across instruments or focus on specific constructs of suicidality. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2023 APA, all rights reserved).Education and Child Studie

Concurrent Validity and Reliability of Suicide Risk Assessment Instruments: A Meta-Analysis of 20 Instruments Across 27 International Cohorts

Objective: A major limitation of current suicide research is the lack of power to identify robust correlates of suicidal thoughts or behavior. Variation in suicide risk assessment instruments used across cohorts may represent a limitation to pooling data in international consortia. Method: Here, we examine this issue through two approaches: (a) an extensive literature search on the reliability and concurrent validity of the most commonly used instruments and (b) by pooling data (N ∼ 6,000 participants) from cohorts from the Enhancing NeuroImaging Genetics Through Meta-Analysis (ENIGMA) Major Depressive Disorder and ENIGMA–Suicidal Thoughts and Behaviour working groups, to assess the concurrent validity of instruments currently used for assessing suicidal thoughts or behavior. Results: We observed moderate-to-high correlations between measures, consistent with the wide range (κ range: 0.15–0.97; r range: 0.21–0.94) reported in the literature. Two common multi-item instruments, the Columbia Suicide Severity Rating Scale and the Beck Scale for Suicidal Ideation were highly correlated with each other (r = 0.83). Sensitivity analyses identified sources of heterogeneity such as the time frame of the instrument and whether it relies on self-report or a clinical interview. Finally, construct-specific analyses suggest that suicide ideation items from common psychiatric questionnaires are most concordant with the suicide ideation construct of multi-item instruments. Conclusions: Our findings suggest that multi-item instruments provide valuable information on different aspects of suicidal thoughts or behavior but share a modest core factor with single suicidal ideation items. Retrospective, multisite collaborations including distinct instruments should be feasible provided they harmonize across instruments or focus on specific constructs of suicidality