Dataset Information

Transformative instruction or old wine in new skins? Exploring how and why educators use HyperDocs

ABSTRACT: HyperDocs are interactive, digital teaching and learning materials created, disseminated, and remixed by educators. To date, HyperDocs have not been the subject of published, peer-reviewed research. To address this research gap, we engaged in exploratory, primarily qualitative research to systematically examine how and why teachers use HyperDocs. We used an online survey to gather data on educators’ (N = 261) uses of and perceptions regarding HyperDocs. Analysis suggested a wide range of definitions of, purposes for, and approaches to HyperDoc use, indicating that educators are adapting HyperDocs to their practice in myriad ways. Consistent with the openness and flexibility in finding, remixing, and using HyperDocs, educators identified a number of benefits of using these tools in their practice, including changes in student engagement and learning, shifts in instructional design and delivery, and changes in their own support and dispositions. Analysis of examples of HyperDocs shared by a subset of participants suggested some mismatch between rhetoric about HyperDocs and what was actually incorporated into them. We discuss these findings in relation to the work of educators and the future of research on HyperDocs and other crowdsourced teaching and learning initiatives. Highlights • HyperDocs are a popular form of interactive, digital teaching and learning materials.• 261 educators completed an online survey on their uses and perceptions of HyperDocs.• Participants suggested varied definitions of and purposes for HyperDocs.• Use of HyperDocs supported student, pedagogy, and educator change.• Student choice and collaboration were limited in HyperDocs shared by participants.

SUBMITTER: Carpenter J

PROVIDER: S-EPMC7373012 | biostudies-literature | 2020 Jul

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Similar Datasets

Project description:BackgroundAn estimand defines the target of estimation for a clinical trial through specification of the treatment, target population, variable, population-level summary and of the strategies for intercurrent events. A carefully defined estimand aligns the clinical trial design and analysis with the scientific question of interest and adequately accounts for so-called intercurrent events. The ICH E9(R1) addendum suggests five estimand strategies. We evaluated to what extent current practice in drug development and regulatory assessment fits in the estimand framework.MethodsWe systematically evaluated what estimands, especially what strategies for intercurrent events are advised in European Medicines Agency disease guidelines, used in sponsors' trials and additionally requested by the European Medicines Agency in assessment dossiers. We selected four therapeutic areas: nervous system, oncology, cardiovascular diseases and respiratory diseases. For each, we evaluated all disease guidelines with approved drugs, the dossiers of the most recently approved drugs matching the guidelines and corresponding regulatory questions.ResultsStrategies for intercurrent events were present in 18 (53%) of 34 guidelines, in all 34 sponsor documentations and in 15 (44%) of 34 sets of regulatory questions. Treatment policy was advised in 13 (38%) guidelines and was applied in 9 corresponding sponsor documentations. Of these 9, it was the sole strategy in 4 cases and accompanied by another strategy in 5 cases. Hypothetical strategy was not advised in guidelines. However, it was the leading strategy applied in 25 (74%) sponsor documentations. Composite strategy was advised in 3 (9%) guidelines and applied accompanied by another strategy in 2 corresponding sponsor documentations. While on treatment strategy was not advised in guidelines, but was applied in 2 sponsor documentations. Principal stratum strategy was advised in 2 guidelines but not applied in corresponding sponsor documentations. Of the regulatory questions, treatment policy was present in 2 cases (6%), hypothetical in 6 cases (18%), composite in 6 cases (18%) and while on treatment in 1 case (3%).ConclusionsEstimand attributes are present in guidelines, sponsor documentations and regulatory questions, but not described as estimands. Treatment policy was most often advised in guidelines, but hypothetical was the leading strategy applied in sponsor documentations. Thus, results indicate not a full concordance between the regulatory target of estimation and what is actually estimated. The lack of concordance was mostly due to limitations in collection of intercurrent events data to enable a treatment policy strategy. There is, therefore, a need to better define estimands at the design stage and throughout the applications dossiers and assessment reports.

Dataset Information

Transformative instruction or old wine in new skins? Exploring how and why educators use HyperDocs

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets