Oslo University College, Faculty of Nursing

Report from

CURRICULUM MEETING POINTS

AN INTERKULT SEMINAR AT

OSLO UNIVERSITY COLLEGE, FACULTY OF NURSING

September 20th – 24th, 2010

Contents

1.Background

2.Funding

3.Participants

4.Program

5.Results

6. Conclusion

Appendix

Declaration of Intent
Original invitation
Comparison table
José Carlos Gomes’ summary from Tuesday, September 21st, and Thursday’s group work

The report was prepared by Suzanne Bancel, Advisor. Faculty of Nursing, Oslo University College

Background

The faculty of nursing at Oslo University College has a relatively lng history of developing exchange programs in Europe, as well as sending bachelor students abroad to countries like China, Cuba and Namibia. The faculty has also engaged in consortiums like COHEHRE and networks like Nordannet. Despite all this experience, those of us working in internationalization are often confounded by a feeling of lack of progress. There seems to be a deeply imbedded opposition to the change that is needed on a personal, individual level as well as on an institutional and structural level. This opposition manifests itself in both quiet and outspoken ways: it can be rigid curriculum requirements that allow no room for exchanges, it can be one faculty’s strong belief that their pedagogical practice is superior to other faculties’, it can be a student or teacher’s reaction to a foreign colleague’s way of expressing him/herself without allowing for the rings of cultural context this expression represents.

In December, 2009, the international team decided that if international work on the post-bachelor level was really to take root at the faculty, we needed to address some of the deeper issues blocking internationalization. We felt that if we could get behind the labels we use on a daily basis: Master, Bachelor, ects, nursing research, etc., we would have a chance at better communication. By better communication we meant communication towards connecting with core values and visions, as opposed to communication that appears to promote understanding but rather, marks territory and status.

We were not sure how to go about this. However, we were sure that we would need a concentrated period of time, a group of people with whom we already had had some positive international experiences, and finally, that student perspectives would be important.

We developed a simple proposal for a week-long seminar with active partners from the USA and Europe. Included in the proposal was a planning meeting in April where we invited representatives from Columbia University, Trinity College, Dublin Ireland, and Escola Superior do Saudé, (Instituto Politecnico deLeiria) Portugal, to attend. It was important from the start that this week was a shared experience with equal stakes for everyone – it was not “Oslo’s program”.

Once our grant was approved, we sent out preliminary invitations (see appendix 1). The responses to this invitation were all positive, although it was difficult for some to understand what we were hoping to achieve. We were purposefully vague on this point. We did not want to predefine the outcome of the seminar, as we felt that would impede the quality of communication we were hoping to achieve.

It was difficult for colleagues to attend the meeting, but fortunately Sarah Sheets Cook, vice-dean from the Columbia School of nursing and midwifery could attend. At the meeting, the following objectives were laid out for the seminar:

OBJECTIVES:

1)Appreciate how degrees at advanced/master/doctoral levels have evolved in different participant countries

2) Explore new ways to value and understand various degrees including identifying what degree holders in different countries are sanctioned/qualified to do

3) Explore potential curriculum meeting points and describe various ways faculty and students can exchange and share learning experiences

Funding

The Faculty of Nursing used two funding sources for this seminar. The main source of funding was through Oslo University College’s INTERKULT grant program. Funding from the Project funds for higher education collaboration with North America provided additional funds for participants from the United States.

Funding from INTERKULT was used to achieve specific goals:

Information: We needed lecturers who could provide common information on European and American higher education processes – Bologna and EU actions, degree structures in the US, history of education in Europe and different grant possibilities.

Reflection: We also needed lecturers who could inspire to reflection about why and how degrees evolve, and why and how status connected to these degrees evolves and changes.

Feasibility: We knew it would be too expensive for our partners to sepnd a week “in discussion” in Oslo, so we needed to remove as many economic barriers as possible. At the same time, the idea of being equal stakeholders was important, and we did not feel it was HiO’s responsibility to cover all costs connected to participation.

Shared experiences: We knew the seminar would be intense, and we knew we were walking into areas with the potential for conflict. We wanted participants to be comfortable in their surroundings, have a private space, and have certain enjoyable experiences that could provide alternative topics for conversation.

3.Participants

The following institutions were invited to participate, with one faculty member teaching on the master or DNP level and one student from a master or DNP program:

Columbia University, NYC USA

Fairfield University, Fairfield, USA

Lunds Universitet, Lund Sweden

Escola Superior do Saudé, Leiria Portugal

Trinity College, Dublin Ireland

Bournemouth University, Bournemouth England

College of Nursing, Jesenice, Jesenice Slovenia

Viborg sygeplejeskole, Viborg Denmark

Riga Stradins University, Riga Latvia

It soon became clear that it was difficult for students to attend, since many had jobs alongside their studies, as well as family obligations. Lunds University and Bournemouth University which at first accepted the invitation had to withdraw. It was then decided to invite the University of Malta, an institution with which we had had some contact, but no agreement. By August 20th, the final list, including external lectures included:

Faculty

Birte Hedegaard Larsen, associate professor Via University College, Denmark

Sarah Cook, Vice Dean, School of Nursing Columbia University, USA

Jeanne Novotny, Dean, School of Nursing Fairfield University, USA

Carole Pomorico, Assistant Professor, School of Nursing Fairfield University, USA

Fintan Sheerin, Director of Teaching and Learning School of Nursing and Midwifery, Trinity College, Dublin, Ireland

Jose Carlos Gomes, Vice Dean, Escola Superior de Saúde, Instituto Politecnico de Leiria, Porturgal

Joca Zurc, Senior lecturer, Jesenice College of Nursing, Jesenice Slovenia

Roberta Sammut, Head of Department of Nursing, University of Malta

Kari Toverud Jensen, Dean Faculty of Nursing, Oslo University College, Norway

Georg Schjelderup, Associate Professor, Faculty of Nursing Oslo University College, Norway

Kari O. Jensen, Head of International Unit, Faculty of Nursing, Oslo University College,Norway

Finn Nortvedt, Head of Studies (Master in Clinical Nursing Science) Faculty of Nursing, Oslo University College, Norway

Liv Hovelsrud, Head of Studies (Master in Mental Health Work) Faculty of Nursing, Oslo University College, Norway

Dag Karterud, Head of Studies (Advanced practice programs in specialist health services) Faculty of Nursing, Oslo University College, Norway

Suzanne Bancel, Adviser, International Unit, Faculty of Nursing, Oslo University College, Norway

Representatives from Oslo University College (Monday only)

Per Arne Olsen, Vice Rector, Oslo University College

Dagrun Kvammen, Head of International Office, Oslo University College

Students

Anne Bendix, Via University College, Denmark

Ron Castillo, School of Nursing Fairfield University, USA

Sofia E. Olsen, Faculty of Nursing, Oslo University College, Norway

Sanela Pivač, Jesenice College of Nursing, Slovenia

External

Berit Karseth, Professor, Faculty of Education, University of Oslo

Peter Maassen, Professor, Faculty om Education, University of Oslo

Frank Moe, Adviser, Norwegian Center for Cooperation in Higher Education (SiU)

Catherine Schrumpf Nordahl, Program Officer for the Norwegian Program/Student Advisor,

U.S.-Norway Fulbright Foundation for Educational Exchange

Rena Levin, Program Officer for the US Program/Student Advisor,

U.S.-Norway Fulbright Foundation for Educational Exchange

Participants were asked to complete a table that aimed to illuminate how their degree fit into their own society: historically, in relation to status and also career possibilities. The table was developed by the international team at Oslo’s Faculty of Nursing based on categories used by Robert Walker[1] and the European Qualification Framework. The table was sent to Fintan Sheerin and Sarah Sheets Cook for comments before it was sent to the participants. The table is presented in appendix 2.

Faculty participants were asked to provide a 20 minute presentation of their degree (s) based on the table. Student participants were asked to provide 15 minute presentations about their reasons and motivation for pursuing a higher degree in Nursing.

In addition, responsibility for moderating the different sessions was divided as equally as possible among the seminar participants in an effort to strengthen the idea of equal stakeholding.

4.Program

Monday

The main focus of Monday’s program was to give the participants a common background for understanding historical and cultural differences in the development and current status of European master programs and American master and DNP programs. EU and Bologna goals and their varied success were discussed as well as different understandings, implementation and contents in both the European master and the American DNP.

Tuesday

The goal for Tuesday was an exchange of information about each university’s programs. Jose Carlos Gomes summary from this day and Thursday will be discussed in 5. Results.

Wednesday

Wednesday morning was devoted to information about funding opportunities through the Fulbright and Erasmus programs. Following lunch, discussions began about how and if the participants could collaborate. Sarah Sheets Cook moderated this session and presented a power point. Main points are:

Nursing means different things to different people, depending on perception

Nurses don’t agree amongst themselves

 Physicians often don’t understand differences in level of ability and education

 Administrators tend to wrap nursing care costs into room rates, food and janitorial service costs [at least in the US]

 Patients trust nurses to care for them

 Are there any international commonalities??

How does the ICN scope of practice compare to that in your own country?

Are levels of nursing recognized?

What is the perception of nursing in your country?

Who defines and controls education and practice for nurses in your country?

Are there multiple educational pathways?

Is international collaboration really worthwhile??

Is globalization positive or negative?

Thursday

Faculty worked in groups to arrive at specific suggestions for collaboration. Students attended an informal presentation by two of HiOs PhD fellows. The students then discussed their own suggestions for how participating faculties could collaborate. At the end of the day, students and faculty met to share their ideas. Two faculty groups and one student group each arrived at similar conclusions.

Friday

Participants attended the National Science Festival; some participants attended previously scheduled meetings concerning other collaborative efforts.

5. Results

During the week the participants became more aware of deeply rooted differences in approaches to nursing education on the Master and DNP level. Participants also increased their understanding of the external factors that may promote and sustain these differences. At the same time, there was strong feeling of common struggles, visions, shared passion and determination.

José Carlos Gomes’ summary from Tuesday can be viewed as a starting point for the collaboration proposal created by the participants on Thursday.

Proposal

The participants propose a consortium arrangement that will provide maximum flexibility for each faculty and hopefully promote an entrepreneurial spirit in future collaboration.

The proposal addresses the following concerns:

Unstable financial situations
Changes in university organization
Time and financial restraints for students
Institutional control of resources

A Declaration of Intent will be sent to each institution. The declaration will be a standard formulation about participating in collaborative activities with one or more of the partners based on what each institution itself can provide of resources from year to year. Institutions will be expected to provide some opportunity for master student(s) from at least one other institution within a three year period in order to remain a part of the consortium.

Suzanne Bancel from the international team at the Faculty of Nursing, Oslo University College will create a website for information about the consortium, information about student options and other relevant information will be posted. Both students and faculty are interested in a website that provides opportunity for discussion (chat and/or discussion boards), access to lectures and blogs, and more.

6. Conclusion

The Curriculum Meeting Points seminar met and surpassed its objectives, as is evidence in the consortium proposal. Although a follow-up meeting was not discussed at the seminar, it seems reasonable to plan now for a follow up meeting in one year. In keeping with the “equal stake holder” approach, an institution other than Oslo University College should take initiative in this, and all institutions should look for funding sources that would make this possible. The principle of including students should not be forgotten.

Curriculum Meeting Points Consortium

Declaration of Intent

The following institutions agree to explore and develop collaborative initiatives aimed at increasing Master, Phd and DNP students contact with partner institutions, curriculum innovation and strengthening the role of post-bachelor education in advance practice nursing and nursing research and development.

Via University College, Denmark

School of Nursing,Columbia University, , NYC USA

School of Nursing, Fairfield University, Ct, USA

Faculty of Nursing, Oslo University College

Department of Nursing, University of Malta

School of Nursing and Midwifery, Trinity College, Dublin, Ireland

Escola Superior de Saúde, Instituto Politecnico de Leiria, Porturgal

Jesenice College of Nursing, Jesenice Slovenia

Commitment to the agreement

Participants in the consortium agree to publish possibilities for student collaboration on a website run by the international team at the Faculty of Nursing, Oslo University College. Institutions themselves determine what they can offer. The information must be updated each June for the coming academic year (academic year beginning between August and October and ending between June and August).

Possibilities can include, but are not limited to: student exchanges, priority access to online courses, co-advisors for thesis or capstone projects, pairing students from different institutions for joint writing projects.

Participants agree to at least one possibility must be offered in a 3 year period of time in order to be part of the network.

Information about possibilities must be as specific and detailed as possible.

Routines

Institutions must send information to Suzanne Bancel for publication on the website.

Institutions must direct their students to the website for information about possibilities. Once a student has found a possibility on the website the student must ask his/her adviser to contact the institution of interest. All exchanges, co-advising agreements, etc. must then be organized and agreed on between the two (or more) involved institutions, and are not under the “authority” of the consortium. This also includes agreements concerning payment /waiving of student fees, tuition, etc. Students themselves are responsible for securing housing if the agreement involves an exchange.

The website includes links to information about possible funding sources for students, but the consortium does not provide additional assistance in finding funding sources.

By signing the Declaration of Intent, the institution agrees to the above terms and has the proper authority to represent the institution in this agreement.

Printed name

Signature

Place Date Institution’s seal

Curriculum meeting points – Understanding the European Master and the American Doctor of Nursing Practice

A seminar hosted by the Faculty of Nursing, Oslo University College, September 20th – 24th, 2010

We are pleased to invite a faculty member involved in curriculum development and one master or DNP student from your institution to participate in a seminar designed to explore the development and status of; and similarities and differences between European and American higher nursing degrees. We plan a week with lectures, workshops and cultural activities that we hope will lead to a deeper understanding of approaches to higher education in nursing as well as strengthening existing partnerships and finding new partners. The main content of the program will depend on the active participation of all attendees. Guest speakers from the Norwegian center for Internationalization in Education (SIU), the Fulbright Office and the Center for Professional Studies, Oslo University College will also participate. A detailed program will follow.

As our guests, your room will be covered for six nights, and we will provide all lunches and three dinners. We ask that you organize your own travel arrangements.

Cordially,

Kari Toverud Jensen

Dean of the Faculty of Nursing

Please reply as soon as possible, and no later than May 30th to Suzanne Bancel:

The following institutions have been invited: