Presentation

3 Comments

1. The group provided a professional introduction of themselves and the topic. Environmental scan incorporated worldwide and local context. Population, problems, and solutions were well integrated.
   Transportation: The solution was simple yet crucial to timely services for health care providers. A lot of different available programs were discussed; however, the information was missed on how those programs could be accessed in the local context. It might be beneficial to provide a blur about these services and then discuss how to access them in the local context. The resources and services challenges were discussed for feasibility purposes and why it is not a priority solution.
   Telehealth: The context regarding telehealth was provided clearly and succinctly. Success and rationale were evidence-informed. The solution did lack crucial information on how the community accesses the program, e.g., do you download an app or call a health center? Incorporation of accessing the services might have assisted in the feasibility of the solution in the local context. Health literacy and barriers to technology were discussed for not considering this solution a priority solution.
   Staffing: Different models were introduced to provide context regarding the priority solution of staffing. The solution-focused more on recruiting nurses by utilizing the internationally educated nurses model. Great details were provided about internationally educated nurses and the transformational staffing model during the presentation. Priority was discussed in the context of why staffing will be crucial with the analogy of zipline. It was a great analogy and visualization in this context; however, the priority solution lacked in-depth reflection and relevance on the feasibility and accessibility of recruiting more staff. Research on the feasibility of recruiting more staff and positive impact could have been discussed to provide more context to the priority solution.
   Time management was lacking in some manners, which could be normal human nature when presenting, i.e., speaking fast and in a low voice. I believe that it is okay to take a pause during the presentation and have a little silence to gain that confidence; however, the content presented was well organized, easy to understand, and flowed well. The presentation utilized various creative ways in professional and aesthetic manners, e.g., colour scheme, use of elements for images and visual purposes, layout, and font. The font and words were easy to read with less than two grammatical mistakes. The use of a bingo card was a well-thought-out idea for class engagement.
   For recency purposes, references were within 5 years except one reference within 10 years or more. The presentation did incorporate in-text citations by utilizing the APA style. Alphabetical order was not utilized in the references in alignment with the APA 7 style. Most of the references were peer-reviewed, within 5 years, and posted by well-known credited resources for credibility purposes. Most of the references were missing a year due to an unknown date of publication, which might be a barrier to checking the recency, however, the reports are well established within the government and policy level for credibility purposes.

   Reply

2. Hello team!
   First off, I wanted to say great job on your presentation, I could tell how much thought and effort was put into it. In regard to your physical presentation I found the graphics and overall aesthetics to be subtle enough to not be distracting but add to the overall pleasantness and engagement of the presentation. On the content I did find one grammar error on the fourth page so I would advise just doing a look over of the presentation for any errors prior to submission. I found the map on the sixth page to be such a great visual aid especially for some of us who are visual learners, so I really appreciated that in the understanding of your environmental scan. I liked that the slides were not cluttered with words and instead you kept them simple and relied on your speaking portion to add clarity and content to your presentation. I found that you didn’t rush your speech and kept a conversational tone that kept me engaged in your presentation. I also really enjoyed the zipline analogy and found it added a new perspective to the issues and solutions and aided in understanding of the topics. You had all your intext citations which is great for finding which sources were used for each portion of content. You had many references but a lot of them had no date, so it was hard to assess if they were within five years and one actually was from 2012. My last portion of feedback that I think would be beneficial is that I found there was more information and content spent on the two solutions that were not your priority and I think it would be more beneficial to have your priority solution be more defined and more detailed. For example, you had 11 slides for the transportation solution but only four slides for your priority solution of staffing. I think having more time spent on how you will increase staffing and how it was applicable to your priority issue would have been beneficial to your presentation. Overall, I found your presentation very engaging and the activities and creativity used was a great addition to the presentation, but I would have liked to hear a bit more about your priority solution.

   Reply

3. Hi everyone!
   To start off, I would like to commend you all of how excellently well you conducted your presentation, very well done! I liked how before the presentation started, we were all given the handout bingo challenge to keep ourselves on track with the presentation. I don’t recall there being a specific winner or winners for whoever completed theirs firs as it was never addressed at the end. This could have helped with the ambiguity most of us felt as we were unsure what its purpose was. Nevertheless, I thought it was a great use of tactile participation on our part to help us further in engage in our attention and presence during the presentation. I thought all of your slides were quite colourful as well as your incorporation of graphics/animations such as the GIFs which served as an great analogy of the “zipline”. Concerning the depth of knowledge with your presentation, I appreciated how you were using relevant & recent statistics , as well as pointing out the application of IH regional services and including the number of facilities within each region as I was unaware at the time. I liked how you acknowledged that you chose to exclude Indigenous statistics as it encompasses a broad range of information which may have thrown the presentation off topic as well exceeding the time constraint. For your environmental scan, I thought it was great that you incorporated data from four countries. This definitely helps balance things out as we were able to see that each country has its own way of addressing the issue of people living with chronic illnesses and each expressed its diversity in such a way that not one approach was the same across the four. As for your identified solutions, concerning transportation for the moment, I thought it was good of your group to point out one of the difficult challenges of transportation being the geography of B.C. as it is quite large and communities within the upper half of the province are rather sparse and distanced from each other making very difficult for patients/clients to be able to access healthcare hubs/facilities appropriate for their individual needs. I appreciated how you elaborated on the HopeAir and Travel assistance programs and made excellent points on identifying its usefulness for low-income Canadians, especially those living rurally in isolated communities. Despite the benefits of such programs, you made note that even though individuals would be able to transported to the specific locations based on their specific needs, some may be unable to meet criterion for treatment due to lack of economic supports, social supports, etc. Even if they are able to meet said criterion, there may not be enough staffing to provide adequate comprehensive and holistic care which will lead to more poor patient outcomes. As for your telehealth solution, I like how your group addressed the credibility of the service by stating that it decreases barriers to care, decreases patient apprehension, and increases family involvement. It was good that you noted that this would not be a suitable priority as it is highly dependent on the user being engaged as it relies on the health literacy, age, efficiency with technology etc. Lastly, for your chosen priority solution being staffing, I thought it was a really good idea that you incorporated that there should be a greater drive for education on the transformational staffing model along with the recruitment of internationally educated nurses who have the opportunity to apply for bridging programs to be recognized at a national level as an RN. With the influx of many internationally trained nurses coming to Canada to practice in recent years, I believe that this is a great step forward in resolving the critical nursing shortage we are seeing nationwide, however there is still much more work to be done. I thought your presentation was excellent overall, and the creative and interactive elements added a lot to it. However, I would have preferred to hear more about your top priority solution as it was lacking in detail as compared to your other two solutions.

   Reply