1. Developing Open Educational Resources for Interprofessional Education Ming Nie, TIGER Evaluator, The University of Leicester Gemma Towle, TIGER Copyright Officer, De Montfort University Alejandro Armellini, TIGER Advisor, The University of Leicester Rob Howe, TIGER Project Manager, The University of Northampton Dr Liz Anderson, TIGER Academic Lead, The University of Leicester Ali Ewing, TIGER Academic Lead, The University of Northampton Jacqui Williams, TIGER Academic Lead, De Montfort University

2. Our Regional IPE Strategy - for 10 years

4. TIGER collects, develops and shares reusable, customisable Open Educational Resources (OERs) designed for Interprofessional Education (IPE) in Health and Social Care between the three institutions, academics, their existing communities of practice, employers and the wider community.

5. Developing interprofessional competencies, before and beyond registration Learning beyond registration Strand One First year Strand Two Middle years Strand Three Pre registration In practice, workshops and e-learning In practice, workshops and e- learning Our Strategy: The Three-Strand Model Class-room

6. Students in IPE events

7. TIGER repository TIGER OERs Leicester Model (and applications) Theory and early concepts on team working Team working and collaborative practice Patient safety Service improvement Leading public health Interprofessional care planning/discharge TOSCE: Team Objective Structured Clinical Examination Postgraduate certificate in practice education Disability Mental health Dementia Prescribing Stroke Diabetes Diabetes in the young Neuro rehabilitation Listening Police, paramedic and midwifery IPE Interviews with IPE experts Total: 1960 learning hours

8. TIGER evaluation Key stakeholders No. of participant Evaluation angles Data collection methods Staff 13 Considerations in pedagogical design; challenges and problems in the process Semi-structured interviews Students 36 Use of the repository and OERs; potential benefits to learning; problems in use Focus group Questionnaire survey Reflective notes Practitioners In Sept 2011 Wider and open access in work-based settings Problems and difficulties in use Semi-structured interviews

10. Student views The repository ‘ easy to navigate ’, ‘ user-friendly ’, ‘ attractive ’, ‘ flexible ’, ‘ visually very appealing ’, ‘ clear and easy to follow ’, ‘ visual aids ’, ‘ responds well to different learning needs ’ The OERs informative ’, ‘ very easy to use , follow and understand ’, ‘ well categorised ’, ‘ nicely divided up ’, ‘ well structured , organised , and presented ’ Potential benefits The resources are useful for both learning and work : Before : additional readings before seminars After : refreshing memory, enhancement, reflection, assignment, revision In practice : self-directed learning, professional development, sharing practice with health professionals internationally “ It’s good resource, much better than the handbook .” “ Overall, I feel the site with its sections gives more structure to the IPE Strand One event .” Criticisms The purpose of the repository and resources could be explained further. More information about the topics/types of the resources and more guidance on how to use them. Organising the resources under the ‘4-level’ theoretical framework (on the TIGER homepage) is found confusing.

12. Contact us Email: Website: Blog: Twitter: http://www.northampton.ac.uk/tiger Ming Nie (ming.nie@le.ac.uk)