I am also currently taking EME 6059 Blended Learning Environments and I originally designed the course in clinical decision-making for the final project requirement of that course. When I looked at the course I designed, I felt that it reflected effective science instruction. This is evidenced by the "Course Assessment Using the C-U-E Framework" (click on the button below). This is when I decided to make that project a significant portion (PART 3) of this project.


The strength of the course / curriculum I designed is that every learning activity was designed to stimulate the student to think. The nature of the course (i.e. inductive reasoning in clinical decision-making) and its delivery (i.e. in a blended learning environment) creates a climate conducive to thinking, analyzing and collaborating. None of the activities were designed to “spoon-feed” students with factual knowledge. The online videos with embedded formative questions and related research articles provided are used primarily to prime students to actively engage and participate during the small group F2F clinical decision-making (CDM) session. They are also designed and expected to draw on students’ prior knowledge. It is meant to engage the student in assessing sufficiency of their knowledge, identifying gaps, and mitigating these gaps so that they could robustly participate during the F2F session. During the F2F session, the vignette with guide questions facilitates thinking, analyzing and collaborating during the activity. Students are given the opportunity to develop their own conclusions, to recognize variations in their conclusions with other groups, and to appreciate these differences as acceptable variations in clinical decision-making. They do this while supporting each other, asking each other questions, and debating the merits of their perspectives and their decisions.

None of the content is intended to tell students what they have to know. Success in the course is not based on what they know, but more on how they use what they know.