Academic year 2023 - 2024

•   AI in clinical radiography VAL23037-3001 01.08.2023-12.11.2023  3 credits +-
  Competence objectives of the study unit

  Känner till artificiell intelligens och kan beskriva situationen gällande AI lösningar inom radiografi.
  Kan beskriva situationen gällande mobila röntgenlösningar i respektive land
  Har insikt i och kan reflektera vad etik innebär gällande AI
  Har insikt i och kan reflektera över patientsäkerheten då det gäller AI lösningar
  Har förståelse för hållbarhetsaspekterna då det gäller AI
  Kan reflektera över röntgenskötarens framtid och kunskapsbehov i Norden
  Kan samverka med studerande från de andra Nordiska länderna (not translated)

  Prerequisites

  Förkunskaper: Klinisk radiografi 1 (not translated)

  Content of the study unit

  - Artificiell intelligens inom radiografi samt dess användningsområden inom Norden
  - Mobila lösningar inom branschen i Norden
  - Samarbete och samverkan med röntgenskötarstuderande från andra nordiska länder
  - Röntgenskötarens framtida funktioner i Norden
  - Etiska aspekter och hållbar utveckling inom radiografi och AI
  - Samverkan studerande emellan från de Nordiska länderna (not translated)

  ---

  Mode of delivery

  Face-to-face

  Learning material

  Enligt lärarnas anvisningar (not translated)

  Learning methods

  Intensivkurs
  - förberedande uppgifter
  - föreläsningar
  - workshops
  - seminarier (not translated)

  Teaching language

  Timing

  01.08.2023 - 12.11.2023

  Enrollment date range

  02.07.2023 - 31.07.2023

  • 3 credits

  Teachers and responsibilities

  Katarina Vironen

  Degree Programme(s)

  Degree Programme in Radiography and Radiotherapy

  Assessment scale

  Approved/Rejected

  Exam dates and retake possibilities

  Intensivkursen pågick 11-15.9.2023 (not translated)

  Internationa connections

  Nätverket NordRadiografi är ett samarbete mellan Novia, Umeå universitet, Luleå tekniska universitet och Universitet i Tromsö/ Röntgenskötarutbildningarna. Studerande samverkade och samarbetade med alla studerande från de nordiska länderna. (not translated)

  Student's schedule and workload

  3x 27t = 81t:
  Intensivkursen 50t
  Förberedande uppgift 20t
  Avslutande uppgift, rapportering 11t (not translated)

•   Alternative enhanced studies RA20SA03-3001 28.08.2023-15.12.2023  3 credits  (URS20D-V) +-
  Competence objectives of the study unit

  Student
  - immerses own knowledge in selected alternative by analyzing the latest research and actualities as well as describing the quality aspects in the field.
  
  The course runs parallel with the clinical course so the work can be anchored in practice.

  Prerequisites

  Clinical basic care, Clinical radiography 2, Clinical radiography 3- Nuclearmedicin, Clinical radiotherapy and Studiemodule Patient in clinical radiography

  Content of the study unit

  Selected area/ modality

  Assessment criteria

  Assessment criteria – satisfactory (1-2)

  Criteria for evaluation of the exam 
  The student has superficial knowledge of the subject (by heart reading) 
  
  Assessment criteria for written work 
  The student has followed instructions for the written task. The student shows limited substance knowledge and are not familiar nor knowledge about other students' written work.

  Assessment criteria – good (3-4)

  Criteria for evaluation of the exam 
  Student can account for the literature, reflect and motivate views 
  
  Assessment criteria for written work 
  Student has followed the instructions for the written work and master the substance of his work, but the application is limited. Shows insufficient knowledge about other students' written work

  Assessment criteria – excellent (5)

  Criteria for evaluation of the exam 
  Student shows in-depth knowledge and maturity in the subject 
  
  Criteria for evaluation of written work individually or in groups 
  Student has followed the instructions for the written work and master the substance. Shows good knowledge in the other participants' written work, ask relevant questions and have capacity to lead a seminar discussion. The written work and the possible opponentship shows excellent knowledge (technical execution, oral presentation, mature reflections, and independent working methods)

  ---

  Person(s) in charge

  Carina Gädda

  Mode of delivery

  67% Face-to-face, 33% Distance learning

  Learning material

  Relevant scientific articles
  Relevant literature based on the area of focus

  Learning methods

  Lectures
  Independent studies with supervision
  Discussions

  Objects, timing and methods of assessment

  Acceptable individual written assignment

  Teaching language

  Swedish

  Timing

  28.08.2023 - 15.12.2023

  Enrollment date range

  15.06.2023 - 11.09.2023

  • 3 credits

  Group(s)

  • URS20D-V

  Teachers and responsibilities

  Carina Gädda

  Responsible unit

  Faculty of Health and Welfare

  Degree Programme(s)

  Degree Programme in Radiography and Radiotherapy

  Share of online studies

  1 credits

  Assessment scale

  H-5

  Alternative methods of attainment for implementation

  Written assignment

  Exam dates and retake possibilities

  Autumn 2023

  Student's schedule and workload

  3 cr corresponds to 81 hours of work

  Assessment criteria

  The extent of the written assignment is not satisfactory
  The written assignment does not have enough scientific references
  The student did not follow the guidelines for written assignments

•   Clinical nursing care RBA22VG03-3002 04.09.2023-29.10.2023  3 credits  (UBA22D-V, ...) +-
  Competence objectives of the study unit

  The student
  -have a insight in the common internal medicin and surgical diseases and the care and treatment of these.
  -have basic knowledge about pre- and postoperative care, emergency care and intensive care and understand the special needs for the patients at this units.

  Prerequisites

  Basic nursing care
  Clinical basic nursing care internship

  Content of the study unit

  Internal medical illnesses
  Surgical obstacles and illnesses,
  Emergency care and intensive care

  Assessment criteria

  Assessment criteria – satisfactory (1-2)

  Exam
  answers depend heavily on words and expressions found in the literature
  has superficial knowledge of the subject, but shows a basic understanding of the subject
  
  Written assignment
  The student has partially followed the instructions for the written assignment. The student shows limited to a deficient knowledge of the knowledge of the substance.

  Assessment criteria – good (3-4)

  Exam
  can account for the literature, reflect and motivate his/her views
  can give an independent account of the literature
  understands most of the topic
  presents independent views and can apply ideas to analogous situations
  can motivate some of their claims and positions
  can give some own examples
  
  Written assignment
  The student has mostly followed the instructions for the written assignment and has mastered the substance of her/his work, but the application is limited. The student can ask relevant questions and can lead a discussion at the seminar

  Assessment criteria – excellent (5)

  Exam
  has in-depth knowledge of the subject
  can analyze and interpret subject facts
  master the subject versatile
  has a broad grasp of the subject
  presents original and apposite examples
  
  Written assignment
  The student has followed the instructions for the assignment and shows that she/he has mastered the substance. She/he have read the other participants' assignments and can ask relevant questions and can lead a discussion at the seminar. The assignment and the possible opponentship show something out of the ordinary (technical execution, oral presentation, mature reflections, independent working methods)

  ---

  Person(s) in charge

  Jannica Andtfolk

  Mode of delivery

  Face-to-face

  Learning material

  INREMEDICIN och KIRURGISK VÅRD
  Stubberud, D-G., Gronseth, R., Almås, H. (red). 2020. Klinisk Omvårdnad 1. Tredje upplagan. Liber AB, Stockholm.
  Kapitel 4 omvårdnad vid lungsjukdomar.
  Kapitel 7. Omvårdnad vid hjärtsjukdomar.
  Kapitel 8. Omvårdnad vid cirkulationssvikt.
  Kapitel 13. Omvårdnad vid sjukdomar i mag-tarmkanalen
  Kapitel: omvårdnad vid sjukdomar i gallvägar, bukspottskörtel och lever
  
  Almås H., Stubberud D-G & Grønseth R. (2021) Klinisk omvårdnad (red.). Del 2. Liber, Stockholm.
  Kapitel 17. Omvårdnad vid diabetes mellitus
  Kapitel 21. Omvårdnad vid skador och sjukdomar i rörelseapparaten
  Kapitel 25. Klinisk omvårdnad vid stroke
  
  Föreläsningsmaterial på moodle och annat som anges under lektionerna
  
  AKUT och INTENSIVVÅRD
  Wikström, J. 2018. Akutsjukvård. Omvårdnad och behandling vid akut sjukdom och skada. Studentlitteratur, AB, Lund.
  Föreläsningsmaterial på moodle.
  Aktuell forskning inom akut och intensivvård. (not translated)

  Learning methods

  Hybridundervisning
  Föreläsningar
  Demonstrationer
  Videor
  Grupparebten
  Individuella arbeten
  Praktiska övningar (OBLIGATORISKA) (not translated)

  Teaching language

  Swedish

  Timing

  04.09.2023 - 29.10.2023

  Enrollment date range

  15.06.2023 - 03.09.2023

  • 3 credits

  Group(s)

  • UBA22D-V
  • URS22D-V

  Teachers and responsibilities

  Jannica Andtfolk, Yvonne Sjöberg-Ehn

  Responsible unit

  Faculty of Health and Welfare

  Degree Programme(s)

  Degree Programme in Radiography and Radiotherapy, Degree Programme in Biomedical Laboratory Scientist

  Assessment scale

  H-5

  Alternative methods of attainment for implementation

  Förkunskapskrav
  Klinisk grundvård
  Klinisk grundvårdspraktik (not translated)

  Exam dates and retake possibilities

  AKUTVÅRD, INTENSIVVÅRD & INREMEDICIN OCH KIRURGISK VÅRD
  Skriftlig tentamen, 1 gången i klass,
  övriga gånger på allmänna omtentamenstillfällen. (not translated)

  Student's schedule and workload

  1 sp 27h. totalt 3sp 81h
  
  INREMEDICIN OCH KIRURGISK VÅRD
  Teori 4h + 4h + 3h+ 4h + 3h = 18h
  
  Studier på egen hand 17 h
  
  AKUTVÅRD
  Teori 4 h
  NEWS test (nätbaserad) 1 h
  
  INTENSIVVÅRD
  Teori 4h
  Lyssna på podd + inlämningsuppgift 3 h
  
  PRAKTISKA ÖVNINGAR
  Iv-kanylering övningar 4 h/ studerande (ändast rtg studeranden)
  
  Gemensam tentamen: 2 h
  
  27h för eget arbete och tentamens läsning (not translated)

  Assessment criteria

  Assessment criteria – satisfactory (1-2)

  Tentamen
  kan räkna upp och beskriva endast med litteraturens ord (utantill läsning),
  har ytlig kunskap i ämnet och förståelsen är bristfällig men visar en viss förståelse av ämnet
  
  Övningsarbete
  Den studerande har delvis följt anvisningarna. Den studerande visar begränsad till bristfällig substanskunskap. (not translated)

  Assessment criteria – good (3-4)

  Tentamen
  kan redogöra för ämnet utan att använda endast litteraturens ord
  förstår det mesta av ämnet
  har en del egna synpunkter och kan relatera en del av kunskapen till en liknande situation
  kan motivera en del av sina påståenden och ståndpunkter
  kan ge en del egna exempel
  
  Övningsarbete
  Den studerande har följt anvisningarna till största delen för det skriftliga arbetet och visar att hen behärskar det mesta av substansen. Tillämpningen är delvis begränsad.
  Hen kan ställa relevanta frågor och leda en diskussion vid seminarietillfället om det så krävs. (not translated)

  Assessment criteria – excellent (5)

  Tentamen
  har fördjupad kunskap i ämnet
  kan analysera och tolka ämnesfakta
  behärskar ämnet mångsidigt
  kommer med egna goda exempel
  
  Övningsarbete
  Den studerande har följt anvisningarna för det skriftliga arbetet och visar att hen behärskar substansen. Hen har läst de övriga deltagarnas skriftliga arbeten samt kan ställa relevanta frågor och leda en diskussion vid seminarietillfället om det så krävs. Det skriftliga arbetet och det eventuella opponentskapet visar på någonting utöver det vanliga (tekniskt utförande, muntligt framförande, mogna reflektioner, självständigt arbetssätt). (not translated)

•   Clinical radiography 2 RAD22KSR02-3001 01.11.2023-31.03.2024  16 credits  (URS22D-V) +-
  Competence objectives of the study unit

  Student:
  - has the ability to apply theoretical knowledge in practice
  - has the ability to independently, as a member of the work team, plan, perform and evaluate nativity studies , flouroscopy examinations, mammography examinations, computed tomography and easier MRI examinations.
  - can handle, care and treat the patient overall in examinations and interventions and have good readiness to care for patients at different situations / different circumstances / with varying needs and problems.
  - understands the meaning of patient-centered and safe patient care
  - can apply the principles of sustainable development in all
  dimensions and have developed the ability to collaborate and demonstrate responsibility in work with increased demands for independence and initiative
  - has ability to independently acquire new knowledge in the diagnostic radiography's sub-areas.

  Prerequisites

  Diagnostic Radiography 2, 2/4 approved courses in study modules Patient Care in Clinical Radiography Context and in Biosciences

  Content of the study unit

  -conventional x-ray
  -flouroscopy
  -mammography
  -computed tomography
  -MRI

  ---

  Person(s) in charge

  Katarina Vironen

  Mode of delivery

  Face-to-face

  Learning methods

  Clinical practice, written assignment, seminar

  Teaching language

  Swedish

  Timing

  01.11.2023 - 31.03.2024

  Enrollment date range

  15.06.2023 - 12.11.2023

  • 16 credits

  Group(s)

  • URS22D-V

  Teachers and responsibilities

  Katarina Vironen

  Responsible unit

  Faculty of Health and Welfare

  Degree Programme(s)

  Degree Programme in Radiography and Radiotherapy

  Assessment scale

  Approved/Rejected

  Practical training and working life co-operation

  Clinical practice at conventional radiography, flouroscopy, mammography,CT or MRI

  Student's schedule and workload

  27h/ ETCS

•   Clinical radiography 3 - Nuclearmedicin RAD22KSR03-3001 01.11.2023-31.03.2024  5 credits  (URS22D-V) +-
  Competence objectives of the study unit

  Student
  - has the ability to apply theoretical knowledge in nuclear medicine
  - has the ability to plan, perform and evaluate the most common surveys under supervision
  - can handle, care and treat the patient in general during the examination / treatment
  - has developed the ability to collaborate and shows responsibility in work
  - has the ability to independently acquire new knowledge in nuclear medicine radiography

  Prerequisites

  Diagnostik Radiography 3- Nuclearmedicin, Clinical Radiography 1 and study module Radiation in Medical Use 1

  Content of the study unit

  Nuclearmedicin

  ---

  Person(s) in charge

  Katarina Vironen

  Mode of delivery

  Face-to-face

  Learning methods

  Clinical practice, written assignment, seminar

  Teaching language

  Swedish

  Timing

  01.11.2023 - 31.03.2024

  Enrollment date range

  15.06.2023 - 31.03.2024

  • 5 credits

  Group(s)

  • URS22D-V

  Teachers and responsibilities

  Katarina Vironen, Carina Gädda

  Responsible unit

  Faculty of Health and Welfare

  Degree Programme(s)

  Degree Programme in Radiography and Radiotherapy

  Assessment scale

  Approved/Rejected

  Practical training and working life co-operation

  Nuclearmedicin department

  Student's schedule and workload

  27h/ETCS

•   Diagnostic Radiography 4 RAD22SA04-3001 01.04.2024-31.12.2024  4 credits  (URS22D-V) +-
  Competence objectives of the study unit

  Student
  - master the basic principles in angiography/interventional radiology
  - has insight into fluoroscopy technique and equipment
  - has in-depth knowledge of anatomy and basic knowledge in the pathology
  - has the ability to care and supervise the patient as a whole
  - radiation protection

  Prerequisites

  Clinical Radiography 2

  Content of the study unit

  Angiography/interventional radiology

  Assessment criteria

  Assessment criteria – satisfactory (1-2)

  Criteria for evaluation of the exam 
  The student has superficial knowledge of the subject (by heart reading) 
  
  Assessment criteria for written work 
  The student has followed instructions for the written task. The student shows limited substance knowledge and are not familiar nor knowledge about other students' written work

  Assessment criteria – good (3-4)

  Criteria for evaluation of the exam 
  Student can account for the literature, reflect and motivate views 
  
  Assessment criteria for written work 
  Student has followed the instructions for the written work and master the substance of his work, but the application is limited. Shows insufficient knowledge about other students' written work

  Assessment criteria – excellent (5)

  Criteria for evaluation of the exam 
  Student shows in-depth knowledge and maturity in the subject 
  
  Criteria for evaluation of written work individually or in groups 
  Student has followed the instructions for the written work and master the substance. Shows good knowledge in the other participants' written work, ask relevant questions and have capacity to lead a seminar discussion. The written work and the possible opponentship shows excellent knowledge (technical execution, oral presentation, mature reflections, and independent working methods)

  ---

  Mode of delivery

  Face-to-face

  Learning material

  Pathology and diagnostics:: According to teachers instructions

  Learning methods

  Pathology and diagnostics: lectures, workshop, demonstration

  Objects, timing and methods of assessment

  Pathology and diagnostics: approved written asignements

  Teaching language

  Swedish

  Timing

  01.04.2024 - 31.12.2024

  Enrollment date range

  01.12.2023 - 31.07.2024

  • 4 credits

  Group(s)

  • URS22D-V

  Teachers and responsibilities

  Katarina Vironen, Carina Gädda, Radiografi och strålbehandling 1

  Additional information

  Obligatorisk närvaro vid lektionerna i workshops och seminarie (not translated)

  Responsible unit

  Faculty of Health and Welfare

  Degree Programme(s)

  Degree Programme in Radiography and Radiotherapy

  Assessment scale

  H-5

  Exam dates and retake possibilities

  Pathology and diagnostics:: approved written assignements,
  The course continues in autumn-24

  Student's schedule and workload

  Pathology and diagnostics:: 27h x 1,5= 40,5h

•   Diagnostic radiography 2 RAD22SM01-3001 28.08.2023-10.11.2023  13 credits  (URS22D-V) +-
  Competence objectives of the study unit

  Student
  -should show good knowledge in X-ray, the imaging technology and native projections.
  -has basic knowledge of the flouroscopy technology and the most common screening studies
  -has basic knowledge of mammography examinations and photography techniques.
  -has basic knowledge of the computed tomography, the technology, examinations and work on computed tomography.
  -has basic insights into using contrast agents and first aid related to them.
  -has basic insights into the magnetic resonance imaging technology, in the use of MRI and deep-knowing in safety issues.
  -has in-depth knowledge of human anatomy
  -understands the importance of good patient care,patient-centered and safe patientcare
  -can take into account the principles of sustainable development regarding radiation
  - radiation protection in relevant area
  - measurements

  Prerequisites

  Diagnostic Radiography 1 and Clinical Radiography 1

  Content of the study unit

  -conventional x-ray
  -fluoroscopy
  -mammography
  -computed radiography
  -magnetic tomography
  -contrastmedia and first-aid
  -anatomy
  -patientcare
  - measurements
  - radiationprotection

  Assessment criteria

  Assessment criteria – satisfactory (1-2)

  Criteria for evaluation of the exam
  The student has superficial knowledge of the subject (by heart reading)
  
  Assessment criteria for written work
  The student has followed instructions for the written task. The student shows limited substance knowledge and are not familiar nor knowledge about other students' written work.

  Assessment criteria – good (3-4)

  Criteria for evaluation of the exam
  Student can account for the literature, reflect and motivate views
  
  Assessment criteria for written work
  Student has followed the instructions for the written work and master the substance of his work, but the application is limited. Shows insufficient knowledge about other students' written work

  Assessment criteria – excellent (5)

  Criteria for evaluation of the exam
  Student shows in-depth knowledge and maturity in the subject
  
  Criteria for evaluation of written work individually or in groups
  Student has followed the instructions for the written work and master the substance. Shows good knowledge in the other participants' written work, ask relevant questions and have capacity to lead a seminar discussion. The written work and the possible opponentship shows excellent knowledge (technical execution, oral presentation, mature reflections, and independent working methods)

  ---

  Person(s) in charge

  Carina Gädda

  Mode of delivery

  85% Face-to-face, 15% Distance learning

  Learning material

  Study material on Moodle
  Additional material according to the lecturer

  Learning methods

  Lectures, discussions, demonstrations and tasks.
  Selfstudies.

  Teaching language

  Swedish

  Timing

  28.08.2023 - 10.11.2023

  Enrollment date range

  15.06.2023 - 03.09.2023

  • 13 credits

  Group(s)

  • URS22D-V

  Seats

  0 - 15

  Teachers and responsibilities

  Carina Gädda, Katarina Vironen, Radiografi och strålbehandling 1

  Additional information

  Additional information on Moodle

  Responsible unit

  Faculty of Health and Welfare

  Degree Programme(s)

  Degree Programme in Radiography and Radiotherapy

  Share of online studies

  2 credits

  Assessment scale

  H-5

  Alternative methods of attainment for implementation

  Examination

  Exam dates and retake possibilities

  Course examination
  Part 1
  Part 2

  Internationa connections

  13 cr corresponds to 351 hours of studies

  Student's schedule and workload

  13 cr corresponds to 351 hours of studies

•   Diagnostic radiography 3 - Nuclear medicine RAD22SM02-3001 18.09.2023-08.11.2023  3 credits  (URS22D-V) +-
  Competence objectives of the study unit

  Student
  - has insight into the basic principles for the use of gamma camera and know all the imaging methods in nuclear medicine
  - has knowledge of radioactive substances and radiopharmaceuticals and basic skills for safe use of these
  - has knowledge of nuclear medicine pathology
  - has basic preparedness to plan, perform and evaluate the most common nuclear medicine studies under supervision.
  - are able to take care of the patient overall in examination/treatment
  - can work according to sustainable development principles in nuclear medicine.

  Prerequisites

  Clinical radiography 1

  Content of the study unit

  - the basic principles of nuclear medicine; radioactive isotopes, decay, gamma radiation, radio-pharmaceutics, half-life and activity
  - activity accounts
  - different methods
  - most common assessments
  - respond and inform the patient at skeletal scintigraphy and others methods
  - radiation protection in the isotope ward: patient and staff radiation protection

  Assessment criteria

  Assessment criteria – satisfactory (1-2)

  Criteria for evaluation of the exam
  The student has superficial knowledge of the subject (by heart reading)
  
  Assessment criteria for written work
  The student has followed instructions for the written task. The student shows limited substance knowledge and are not familiar nor knowledge about other students' written work.

  Assessment criteria – good (3-4)

  Criteria for evaluation of the exam
  Student can account for the literature, reflect and motivate views
  
  Assessment criteria for written work
  Student has followed the instructions for the written work and master the substance of his work, but the application is limited. Shows insufficient knowledge about other students' written work

  Assessment criteria – excellent (5)

  Criteria for evaluation of the exam
  Student shows in-depth knowledge and maturity in the subject
  
  Criteria for evaluation of written work individually or in groups
  Student has followed the instructions for the written work and master the substance. Shows good knowledge in the other participants' written work, ask relevant questions and have capacity to lead a seminar discussion. The written work and the possible opponentship shows excellent knowledge (technical execution, oral presentation, mature reflections, and independent working methods)

  ---

  Person(s) in charge

  Carina Gädda

  Mode of delivery

  67% Face-to-face, 33% Distance learning

  Learning material

  According to the lecturer

  Learning methods

  Lectures and group assignment

  Objects, timing and methods of assessment

  The course is graded 0-5 based on results in the exam. The calculation test is graded passed or failed. In order to pass the course both exam and the calculation test need to be passed

  Teaching language

  Swedish

  Timing

  18.09.2023 - 08.11.2023

  Enrollment date range

  15.06.2023 - 30.09.2023

  • 3 credits

  Group(s)

  • URS22D-V

  Seats

  0 - 15

  Teachers and responsibilities

  Carina Gädda, Radiografi och strålbehandling 1

  Additional information

  More information is found in Moodle

  Responsible unit

  Faculty of Health and Welfare

  Degree Programme(s)

  Degree Programme in Radiography and Radiotherapy

  Share of online studies

  1 credits

  Assessment scale

  H-5

  Alternative methods of attainment for implementation

  Examination

  Exam dates and retake possibilities

  Course examination the 3rd of November 2023.
  Re-take on Friday the 8.12. 2023 and Friday the 19.01.2024

  Student's schedule and workload

  Lectures, self studies and digital teaching methods 81 h

  Assessment criteria

  Inadequate knowledge of the subject.
  Calculation test failed

  Assessment criteria – satisfactory (1-2)

  Weak knowledge of the subject

  Assessment criteria – good (3-4)

  Good knowledge of the subject

  Assessment criteria – excellent (5)

  Excellent knowledge of the subject

•   Enhanced clinical studies RA20KSR06-3001 04.09.2023-29.10.2023  11 credits  (URS20D-V) +-
  Competence objectives of the study unit

  Student
  - has in-depth theoretical knowledge in the chosen field of study and skills to utilize them in clinical work
  - demonstrate self-esteem planning, execution and evaluation of frequent investigations and treatments in the choosen area of encanced clinical field
  - controls the treatment, overall care and supervision of the patient.
  - has good ability to cooperate and shows responsibility in the work with increased demands for independence and initiative
  - has ability to independently acquire new knowledge and to also, in new situations, pay attention to, analyze, structure and solve problems related to the deepening option

  Prerequisites

  Basic Nursing care, Clinical Radiography 2, Clinical Radiography 3- Nuclearmedicine, Clinical Radiotherapy and Patient Safety in Radiotherapy and Intervention Radiology. Course Clinical radiography 4 at minimum 1/2 approved.

  Content of the study unit

  Selected area in clinical radiography

  ---

  Person(s) in charge

  Carina Gädda

  Mode of delivery

  Face-to-face

  Learning material

  See Moodle for more information:
  About any health checks, tests and vaccinations
  About internships

  Learning methods

  Supervised internship in an optional enhanced clinical context
  Written internships in different contexts

  Objects, timing and methods of assessment

  Approved internship
  Approved written assignment
  Participation in seminar

  Teaching language

  Swedish

  Timing

  04.09.2023 - 29.10.2023

  Enrollment date range

  15.06.2023 - 10.09.2023

  • 11 credits

  Group(s)

  • URS20D-V

  Seats

  0 - 10

  Teachers and responsibilities

  Carina Gädda

  Additional information

  Students have the opportunity to get some of the practice validated through summer jobs in acceptable modality during the summer of 2023

  Responsible unit

  Faculty of Health and Welfare

  Degree Programme(s)

  Degree Programme in Radiography and Radiotherapy

  Assessment scale

  Approved/Rejected

  Alternative methods of attainment for implementation

  Approved internship
  Approved assignments
  Participation in internship seminar

  Exam dates and retake possibilities

  Praktik 40h/vecka
  Obligatorisk närvaro 100 %
  Godkända uppgifter och seminarie (not translated)

  Internationa connections

  Students can complete the internship abroad

  Student's schedule and workload

  1 cr = 27 h
  1 week = 40 h, of which 38 h per week mandatory attendance at the internship
  2 h / week for internships on your own.
  Mandatory attendance at the internship info before the internship and the internship seminar after the end of the internship

  Assessment criteria

  Approved / Failed

  Can receive feedback and show willingness to develop professional skills
  follows the work list and holds agreed times
  Can ask questions that are relevant for learning a work
  For the most part, it works in a planned manner and has a basic accuracy at important work moments
  Can perform tasks under supervision
  Has basic knowledge and can ask questions that are relevant to learning a work
  Can follow directives and instructions and take responsibility for tasks
  Can make decisions concerning tasks at the basic level
  Know the values ​​and consider the ethical principles
  Can communicate and respond to patients / clients / customers
  Can work with others in the work team

•   Medical Treatment RBA22BV05-3001 04.09.2023-22.10.2023  3 credits  (UBA22D-V, ...) +-
  Competence objectives of the study unit

  The students
  - are familiar with the ethical aspects and statutes of medication administration.
  - are familiar with different forms of medication and administration.
  - are familiar with different medication groups, indications, interactions and the most common side-effects. They are also able to observe and assess the effect of the medication.
  - command the fundamental rules of arithmetic needed for medication dosage, and are able to administer medication flawlessly in exercises (pill dispensers/medicin tray, subcutant, intramuscular)
  - are aware of their responsabilities when administering medication.
  - are familiar with the concepts and terminology of pharmacology, and are knowledgeable of pharmacokinetics and pharmacodynamics
  - know clinical pharmacology in a biomedical context
  - have knowledge of drug therapy among the most common endemic diseases
  - know various types of pain medication
  - know medication used as anticoagulant therapy

  Prerequisites

  None

  Content of the study unit

  Medication administration and different medication groups
  Pharmacology

  Assessment criteria

  Assessment criteria – satisfactory (1-2)

  Exam
  answers depend heavily on words and expressions found in the literature
  has superficial knowledge of the subject, but shows a basic understanding of the subject
  
  
  Written assignment
  The student has partially followed the instructions for the written assignment. The student shows limited to a deficient knowledge of the knowledge of the substance.

  Assessment criteria – good (3-4)

  Exam
  can account for the literature, reflect and motivate his/her views
  can give an independent account of the literature
  understands most of the topic
  presents independent views and can apply ideas to analogous situations
  can motivate some of their claims and positions
  can give some own examples
  
  Written assignment
  The student has mostly followed the instructions for the written assignment and has mastered the substance of her/his work, but the application is limited. The student can ask relevant questions and can lead a discussion at the seminar.

  Assessment criteria – excellent (5)

  Exam
  has in-depth knowledge of the subject
  can analyze and interpret subject facts
  master the subject versatile
  has a broad grasp of the subject
  presents original and apposite examples
  
  Written assignment
  The student has followed the instructions for the assignment and shows that she/he has mastered the substance. She/he have read the other participants' assignments and can ask relevant questions and can lead a discussion at the seminar. The assignment and the possible opponentship show something out of the ordinary (technical execution, oral presentation, mature reflections, independent working methods)

  ---

  Person(s) in charge

  Pia Nygårdas

  Mode of delivery

  Face-to-face

  Learning material

  Nordeng och Spigset (2018) Farmakologi och farmakologisk omvårdnad
  SHM.2021. Handbok i säker läkemedelsbehandling https://julkaisut.valtioneuvosto.fi/handle/10024/162848
  
  Läkemedelsräkning och -behandling:
  Envall, S., Pulli, A. & Salonen, A-M. 2006. Läkemedelsräkning. Sarijärven Offset Oy, Saarijärvi.
  Läkemedelsberäkningskommendium
  Rekommenderad litteratur:
  Björkman, E. & Hagberg, M. 2005. Läkemedelsberäkning för sjuksköterskor. Studentlitteratur, Lund.
  Björkman, A-M. 2009. Läkemedelsberäkning och läkemedelshantering. Studentlitteratur, Lund.
  Artlkar/material enl föreläsarens anvisningar
  armacology distributed by the teacher

  Learning methods

  lectures and seminars
  tasks and tests

  Objects, timing and methods of assessment

  Task passed not approved
  test 0-5 scale

  Teaching language

  Swedish

  Timing

  04.09.2023 - 22.10.2023

  Enrollment date range

  15.06.2023 - 05.09.2023

  • 3 credits

  Group(s)

  • UBA22D-V
  • URS22D-V

  Teachers and responsibilities

  Maria Berg, Pia Nygårdas

  Responsible unit

  Faculty of Health and Welfare

  Degree Programme(s)

  Degree Programme in Radiography and Radiotherapy, Degree Programme in Biomedical Laboratory Scientist

  Assessment scale

  H-5

•   Patient safety in clinical radiography RAD22SM03-3001 01.04.2024-02.06.2024  3 credits +-
  Competence objectives of the study unit

  Student
  - has insight in patient safety in the own workfield
  - understand the meaning of quality accurance, quality system and development
  - Approved result in Patientsafetyportal (webcourse) 1 cp

  Prerequisites

  Diagnsotic Radiography 2

  Content of the study unit

  Patientsafety

  Assessment criteria

  Assessment criteria – satisfactory (1-2)

  Criteria for evaluation of the exam
  The student has a superficial knowledge of the subject (by heart reading)
  
  Assessment criteria for written work
  The student has followed the instructions and their knowledge of the other students' work is inadequate. The student shows limited substance knowledge, it can be essential.
  
  The student shows insufficient knowledge about the other students' written work. The student has followed the instructions for the written work. They have a deficient knowledge of the substance also touching the essential.

  Assessment criteria – good (3-4)

  Criteria for evaluation of the exam
  The student can account for the literature, reflect and motivate his / her views
  
  Assessment criteria for written work
  The student has followed the instructions for the written work and shows insufficient knowledge about the other students' written work. The student master the substance of his work, but the application is limited

  Assessment criteria – excellent (5)

  Criteria for evaluation of the exam
  The student shows in his answer an in-depth knowledge and maturity beyond the traditional
  
  Criteria for evaluation of written work individually or in groups
  The student has followed the instructions for the written work and shows that she has mastered the substance. They have read the other participants' written work and can ask relevant questions and lead a discussion at the seminar. The written work and the possible opponentship show something out of the ordinary (technical execution, oral presentation, mature reflections, and independent working methods)
  
  The student has followed the instructions for the written work and shows that she has mastered the substance. They have read the other participants' work and can ask relevant questions and lead a discussion at the seminar.

  ---

  Mode of delivery

  Face-to-face

  Teaching language

  Swedish

  Timing

  01.04.2024 - 02.06.2024

  Enrollment date range

  02.07.2023 - 31.07.2023

  • 3 credits

  Degree Programme(s)

  Degree Programme in Radiography and Radiotherapy

  Assessment scale

  H-5

•   Patient safety in clinical radiography RAD22SM03-3002 01.04.2024-31.05.2024  3 credits  (URS22D-V) +-
  Competence objectives of the study unit

  Student
  - has insight in patient safety in the own workfield
  - understand the meaning of quality accurance, quality system and development
  - Approved result in Patientsafetyportal (webcourse) 1 cp

  Prerequisites

  Diagnsotic Radiography 2

  Content of the study unit

  Patientsafety

  Assessment criteria

  Assessment criteria – satisfactory (1-2)

  Criteria for evaluation of the exam
  The student has a superficial knowledge of the subject (by heart reading)
  
  Assessment criteria for written work
  The student has followed the instructions and their knowledge of the other students' work is inadequate. The student shows limited substance knowledge, it can be essential.
  
  The student shows insufficient knowledge about the other students' written work. The student has followed the instructions for the written work. They have a deficient knowledge of the substance also touching the essential.

  Assessment criteria – good (3-4)

  Criteria for evaluation of the exam
  The student can account for the literature, reflect and motivate his / her views
  
  Assessment criteria for written work
  The student has followed the instructions for the written work and shows insufficient knowledge about the other students' written work. The student master the substance of his work, but the application is limited

  Assessment criteria – excellent (5)

  Criteria for evaluation of the exam
  The student shows in his answer an in-depth knowledge and maturity beyond the traditional
  
  Criteria for evaluation of written work individually or in groups
  The student has followed the instructions for the written work and shows that she has mastered the substance. They have read the other participants' written work and can ask relevant questions and lead a discussion at the seminar. The written work and the possible opponentship show something out of the ordinary (technical execution, oral presentation, mature reflections, and independent working methods)
  
  The student has followed the instructions for the written work and shows that she has mastered the substance. They have read the other participants' work and can ask relevant questions and lead a discussion at the seminar.

  ---

  Person(s) in charge

  Katarina Vironen

  Mode of delivery

  Face-to-face

  Teaching language

  Swedish

  Timing

  01.04.2024 - 31.05.2024

  Enrollment date range

  01.01.2024 - 05.04.2024

  • 3 credits

  Group(s)

  • URS22D-V

  Teachers and responsibilities

  Katarina Vironen

  Responsible unit

  Faculty of Health and Welfare

  Degree Programme(s)

  Degree Programme in Radiography and Radiotherapy

  Assessment scale

  H-5

•   Patient-centered care in clinical radiography RAD22SM04-3001 01.01.2024-30.04.2024  7 credits  (URS22D-V) +-
  Competence objectives of the study unit

  Student
  - has ability to meet and take care of patients in all ages, with any cultural background in her/his own context
  -can handle different kind of patient situations and has the ability to guide the patient
  - have knowledge of welfare technology solutions and the use of AI in clinical radiography

  Prerequisites

  None

  Content of the study unit

  - Geriatric
  - Pediatric
  - Social psychology
  - Cultural competence
  - Pedagogy
  - Welfare technology
  - AI
  - Sustainable Development

  Assessment criteria

  Assessment criteria – satisfactory (1-2)

  Criteria for evaluation of the exam 
  The student has superficial knowledge of the subject (by heart reading) 
  
  Assessment criteria for written work 
  The student has followed instructions for the written task. The student shows limited substance knowledge and are not familiar nor knowledge about other students' written work.

  Assessment criteria – good (3-4)

  Criteria for evaluation of the exam 
  Student can account for the literature, reflect and motivate views 
  
  Assessment criteria for written work 
  Student has followed the instructions for the written work and master the substance of his work, but the application is limited. Shows insufficient knowledge about other students' written work

  Assessment criteria – excellent (5)

  Criteria for evaluation of the exam 
  Student shows in-depth knowledge and maturity in the subject 
  
  Criteria for evaluation of written work individually or in groups 
  Student has followed the instructions for the written work and master the substance. Shows good knowledge in the other participants' written work, ask relevant questions and have capacity to lead a seminar discussion. The written work and the possible opponentship shows excellent knowledge (technical execution, oral presentation, mature reflections, and independent working methods)

  ---

  Person(s) in charge

  Carina Gädda

  Mode of delivery

  Face-to-face

  Learning material

  Literature is presented in Moodle

  Learning methods

  Lectures
  Problem solving
  Self studies
  Individual work
  Groupwork

  Objects, timing and methods of assessment

  Socialpsycology (u/gk)
  Geriatric 2 cr (0-5)
  Multicultural work 1,3 cr (0-5)
  Pediatric 1,5 cr
  Nursing Pedagogy 0,5
  Health Technology and AI 1 cr

  Teaching language

  English

  Timing

  01.01.2024 - 30.04.2024

  Enrollment date range

  01.12.2023 - 31.12.2023

  • 7 credits

  Group(s)

  • URS22D-V

  Teachers and responsibilities

  Carina Gädda

  Additional information

  Mandatory attendance at lessons in workshops and seminars
  
  In this course Moodle is the platform where al the material is.
  
  Verval or written feedback

  Responsible unit

  Faculty of Health and Welfare

  Degree Programme(s)

  Degree Programme in Radiography and Radiotherapy

  Assessment scale

  H-5

  Exam dates and retake possibilities

  The course is examined through smaller written assignments/group work. All information is submitted no later than the end of the course.
  Written Examination 7.5.2024
  Retake 24.5, 13.9

  Student's schedule and workload

  1 cr = 27 h
  7 cr = 189 h

  Assessment criteria

  Assessment criteria – satisfactory (1-2)

  Criteria for evaluation of the exam (1-2)
  The student has superficial knowledge of the subject (by heart reading) 
  
  Assessment criteria for written work 
  The student has followed instructions for the written task. The student shows limited substance knowledge and are not familiar nor knowledge about other students' written work.

  Assessment criteria – good (3-4)

  Criteria for evaluation of the exam  (3-4)
  Student can account for the literature, reflect and motivate views 
  
  Assessment criteria for written work 
  Student has followed the instructions for the written work and master the substance of his work, but the application is limited. Shows insufficient knowledge about other students' written work

  Assessment criteria – excellent (5)

  Criteria for evaluation of the exam (5)
  Student shows in-depth knowledge and maturity in the subject 
  
  Criteria for evaluation of written work individually or in groups 
  Student has followed the instructions for the written work and master the substance. Shows good knowledge in the other participants' written work, ask relevant questions and have capacity to lead a seminar discussion. The written work and the possible opponentship shows excellent knowledge (technical execution, oral presentation, mature reflections, and independent working methods)

•   Pharmacology RBA22BV06-3001 15.09.2023-10.11.2023  2 credits  (UBA22D-V, ...) +-
  Competence objectives of the study unit

  The student:
  - is familiar with concepts and terminology in pharmacology and has knowledge of pharmacokinetics and pharmacodynamics
  - has insights about different groups of drugs; knows indications, interactions and the most common side effects and can observe and evaluate the effect of the drugs

  Prerequisites

  None

  Content of the study unit

  Basic pharmacodynamics and pharmacokinetics, with concepts.
  Drug interactions, drug side effects and drug use in the elderly.
  Common drug groups such as analgesics, antibiotics, drugs for cardiovascular disease, drugs for diabetes, drugs for gastrointestinal diseases and drugs for mental disorders.

  Assessment criteria

  Assessment criteria – satisfactory (1-2)

  Exam
  answers depend heavily on words and expressions found in the literature
  has superficial knowledge of the subject, but shows a basic understanding of the subject
  
  Written assignment
  The student has partially followed the instructions for the written assignment. The student shows limited to a deficient knowledge of the knowledge of the substance.

  Assessment criteria – good (3-4)

  Exam
  can account for the literature, reflect and motivate his/her views
  can give an independent account of the literature
  understands most of the topic
  presents independent views and can apply ideas to analogous situations
  can motivate some of their claims and positions
  can give some own examples
  
  Written assignment
  The student has mostly followed the instructions for the written assignment and has mastered the substance of her/his work, but the application is limited. The student can ask relevant questions and can lead a discussion at the seminar.

  Assessment criteria – excellent (5)

  Exam
  has in-depth knowledge of the subject
  can analyze and interpret subject facts
  master the subject versatile
  has a broad grasp of the subject
  presents original and apposite examples
  
  Written assignment
  The student has followed the instructions for the assignment and shows that she/he has mastered the substance. She/he have read the other participants' assignments and can ask relevant questions and can lead a discussion at the seminar. The assignment and the possible opponentship show something out of the ordinary (technical execution, oral presentation, mature reflections, independent working methods)

  ---

  Person(s) in charge

  Carina Gädda

  Mode of delivery

  50% Face-to-face, 50% Distance learning

  Learning material

  Course literature:
  Nordeng och Spigset (2009) Farmakologi och farmakologisk omvårdnad
  Lecture material on Moodle

  Learning methods

  Lectures, tasks and discussions.
  Selfstudies.

  Teaching language

  Swedish

  Timing

  15.09.2023 - 10.11.2023

  Enrollment date range

  15.06.2023 - 14.09.2023

  • 2 credits

  Group(s)

  • UBA22D-V
  • URS22D-V

  Seats

  0 - 25

  Teachers and responsibilities

  Carina Gädda, Maria Berg

  Responsible unit

  Faculty of Health and Welfare

  Degree Programme(s)

  Degree Programme in Radiography and Radiotherapy, Degree Programme in Biomedical Laboratory Scientist

  Share of online studies

  1 credits

  Assessment scale

  H-5

  Alternative methods of attainment for implementation

  Examination

  Exam dates and retake possibilities

  Course examination x.x 2023
  Re-examination x.x.2023 and x.x.2024

  Student's schedule and workload

  Lectures and examination x h, self studies and digital teaching methods x h

•   Responsible for radiation safety RA20SA04-3002 28.08.2023-24.11.2023  5 credits  (URS20D-V) +-
  Competence objectives of the study unit

  Students can
  - define and apply the concepts and principles of radiation protection in native X-ray, dental care and animal imaging.
  - identifying, evaluating and minimising the risks of using radiation and preparing and responsible for radiation safety incidents
  - justify their decisions on the basis of existing laws and regulations in nativity, dental and animal x-ray operations, and implement and monitor radiation protection arrangements in their area of ​​expertise, including radiation protection for workers and the public,
  - to guide the safe use of radiation, in the introduction of new methods and its optimisation, in quality assurance and to contribute to the development of a good safety culture regarding radiation in collaboration with the radiation safety expert

  Prerequisites

  The student has completed all diagnostic and therapeutic radiography courses with approved results

  Content of the study unit

  1. Introduction to radiation physics for native, dental, and animal X-rays
  2. Measurement techniques and calculation methods in native x-ray, dental and animal x-ray
  - Methods for determining patient dose (ESAK, KAP, MGD, effective dose)
  - Radiation scattering at native x-ray, dental and animal x-ray
  - The role of delimitation and tube voltage for scattered radiation
  - Radiation dosimeter
  - Radiation protection design (HVL, material)
  3. Radiation protection in native x-ray, dental and animal x-ray
  - Radiation Biology
  - Legislation and international recommendations
  - Radiation safety in the workplace
  - Radiation safety deviations
  - Safety culture, radiation protection training and quality assurance
  4. Requirements, purchases and maintenance of X-ray equipment for native, dental and animal X-rays

  Assessment criteria

  Assessment criteria – satisfactory (1-2)

  Criteria for evaluation of the exam 
  The student has superficial knowledge of the subject (by heart reading) 
  
  Assessment criteria for written work 
  The student has followed instructions for the written task. The student shows limited substance knowledge and are not familiar nor knowledge about other students' written work.

  Assessment criteria – good (3-4)

  Criteria for evaluation of the exam 
  Student can account for the literature, reflect and motivate views 
  
  Assessment criteria for written work 
  Student has followed the instructions for the written work and master the substance of his work, but the application is limited. Shows insufficient knowledge about other students' written work

  Assessment criteria – excellent (5)

  Criteria for evaluation of the exam 
  Student shows in-depth knowledge and maturity in the subject 
  
  Criteria for evaluation of written work individually or in groups 
  Student has followed the instructions for the written work and master the substance. Shows good knowledge in the other participants' written work, ask relevant questions and have capacity to lead a seminar discussion. The written work and the possible opponentship shows excellent knowledge (technical execution, oral presentation, mature reflections, and independent working methods)

  Further information

  Collaboration with radiographer educations at OAMK, Metropolia, TAMK, Turku AMK and Savonia

  ---

  Person(s) in charge

  Katarina Vironen

  Mode of delivery

  Distance learning

  Learning material

  Information will be found at the Moodle page

  Learning methods

  On-line,
  Seminaries
  Written examination

  Teaching language

  Swedish

  Timing

  28.08.2023 - 24.11.2023

  Enrollment date range

  15.06.2023 - 31.08.2023

  • 5 credits

  Group(s)

  • URS20D-V

  Seats

  0 - 15

  Teachers and responsibilities

  Carina Gädda, Katarina Vironen

  Additional information

  The course is national, participants from all radiography educations in Finland.

  Responsible unit

  Faculty of Health and Welfare

  Degree Programme(s)

  Degree Programme in Radiography and Radiotherapy

  Share of online studies

  5 credits

  Assessment scale

  Approved/Rejected

  Exam dates and retake possibilities

  31.10.2023
  7.11.2023
  4.11.2023

  Student's schedule and workload

  5 x 27h

•   The theoretical basics in nursing care RBA22VG04-3002 02.10.2023-03.11.2023  2 credits  (UBA22D-V, ...) +-
  Competence objectives of the study unit

  Student
  - has knowledge of different health sciences and occupational history and development
  - has knowledge of and can apply the basic principles of health and well-being, human, patient, life-world, suffering and caring
  - has the basic ability to work in accordance with ethical guidelines in their future profession and by respecting and respecting the values and life views of other people, without violating human rights

  Prerequisites

  None

  Content of the study unit

  Fundamental components of caring science

  Assessment criteria

  Assessment criteria – satisfactory (1-2)

  Criteria for evaluation of the exam 
  The student has superficial knowledge of the subject (by heart reading) 
  
  Assessment criteria for written work 
  The student has followed instructions for the written task. The student shows limited substance knowledge and are not familiar nor knowledge about other students' written work.

  Assessment criteria – good (3-4)

  Criteria for evaluation of the exam 
  Student can account for the literature, reflect and motivate views 
  
  Assessment criteria for written work 
  Student has followed the instructions for the written work and master the substance of his work, but the application is limited. Shows insufficient knowledge about other students' written work

  Assessment criteria – excellent (5)

  Criteria for evaluation of the exam 
  Student shows in-depth knowledge and maturity in the subject 
  
  Criteria for evaluation of written work individually or in groups 
  Student has followed the instructions for the written work and master the substance. Shows good knowledge in the other participants' written work, ask relevant questions and have capacity to lead a seminar discussion. The written work and the possible opponentship shows excellent knowledge (technical execution, oral presentation, mature reflections, and independent working methods)

  ---

  Person(s) in charge

  Anna-Lena Nieminen

  Mode of delivery

  50% Face-to-face, 50% Distance learning

  Learning material

  VÅRDVETENSKAP
  Arman, M., Dahlberg, K. & Ekebergh, M., red. 2015. Teoretiska grunder för vårdande. Stockholm: Liber.
  kapitel 1-3, 5
  Erikssson, K. m.fl. 2012. Hoitotiede, Helsinki: Sanoma pro OY.
  Eriksson, K. 2018. Vårdvetenskap. Vetenskapen om vårdandet - om dettidlösa i tiden. (Samlingsverk.) Stockhom: Liber AB.
  Rehnsfeldt, A. & Arman, M. (red.). 2020. Klinisk vårdvetenskap. Vårdande på teoretisk grund. Stockholm: Liber Ab.
  Wiklund, L. 2003. Vårdvetenskap i klinisk praxis. Stockholm: Natur och kultur.
  
  VÅRDETIK
  Sandman.L. & Kjellström.S. 2013. Etikboken. Etik för vårdande yrken. Lund: Studentlitteratur.
  Arman, M., Dahlberg, K. & Ekebergh, M., red. 2015. Teoretiska grunder för vårdande. Stockholm: Liber.
  kapitel 4. (not translated)

  Learning methods

  Föreläsning, grupparbeten och självstudier. (not translated)

  Teaching language

  Swedish

  Timing

  02.10.2023 - 03.11.2023

  Enrollment date range

  15.06.2023 - 03.10.2023

  • 2 credits

  Group(s)

  • UBA22D-V
  • URS22D-V

  Seats

  6 - 30

  Teachers and responsibilities

  Anna-Lena Nieminen

  Additional information

  Obligatorisk närvaro på introduktionsföreläsning och seminarier (not translated)

  Responsible unit

  Faculty of Health and Welfare

  Degree Programme(s)

  Degree Programme in Radiography and Radiotherapy, Degree Programme in Biomedical Laboratory Scientist

  Share of online studies

  1 credits

  Assessment scale

  H-5

  Exam dates and retake possibilities

  Godkänt grupparbete (not translated)

  Student's schedule and workload

  2 sp
  1 sp = 27 timmar (not translated)

•   Thesis, presentation and maturity test RA16EX03-3003 04.09.2023-15.12.2023  3 credits  (URS20D-V) +-
  Competence objectives of the study unit

  Student
  - can present their thesis and act as an opponent for another degree project
  - can describe the most important results of the thesis in a maturity test, which also demonstrates the ability to express themselves in writing

  Prerequisites

  Study module Research process

  Content of the study unit

  The research process
  Presentation of thesis and acting as opponent
  Maturity exam

  Assessment criteria

  Assessment criteria – satisfactory (1-2)

  Criteria for evaluation of the exam 
  The student has superficial knowledge of the subject (by heart reading) 
  
  Assessment criteria for written work 
  The student has followed instructions for the written task. The student shows limited substance knowledge and are not familiar nor knowledge about other students' written work.

  Assessment criteria – good (3-4)

  Criteria for evaluation of the exam 
  Student can account for the literature, reflect and motivate views 
  
  Assessment criteria for written work 
  Student has followed the instructions for the written work and master the substance of his work, but the application is limited. Shows insufficient knowledge about other students' written work

  Assessment criteria – excellent (5)

  Criteria for evaluation of the exam 
  Student shows in-depth knowledge and maturity in the subject 
  
  Criteria for evaluation of written work individually or in groups 
  Student has followed the instructions for the written work and master the substance. Shows good knowledge in the other participants' written work, ask relevant questions and have capacity to lead a seminar discussion. The written work and the possible opponentship shows excellent knowledge (technical execution, oral presentation, mature reflections, and independent working methods)

  ---

  Person(s) in charge

  Camilla Ribacka

  Mode of delivery

  Face-to-face

  Learning methods

  Eget arbete
  Seminarium (not translated)

  Objects, timing and methods of assessment

  Examensarbete bedöms med vitsordet 0-5
  Mognadsprov bedöms GK/UK (not translated)

  Teaching language

  Swedish

  Timing

  04.09.2023 - 15.12.2023

  Enrollment date range

  15.06.2023 - 03.09.2023

  • 3 credits

  Group(s)

  • URS20D-V

  Teachers and responsibilities

  Camilla Ribacka, Katarina Vironen, Anita Kvist

  Responsible unit

  Faculty of Health and Welfare

  Degree Programme(s)

  Degree Programme in Radiography and Radiotherapy

  Assessment scale

  H-5

  Alternative methods of attainment for implementation

  Examensarbete
  Godkänt mognadsprov (not translated)

  Exam dates and retake possibilities

  Hösten 2023, vecka (not translated)

  Assessment criteria

  Teoretisk grund:
  Den teoretiska bakgrunden och utgångspunkten för studien är irrelevant och källkritik saknas.
  Metod:
  Metodvalet beskrivs inte eller beskrivningen är bristfällig och irrelevant.
  Samstämmigheten med metodbeskrivningen och hur studien har genomförts är mycket bristfällig/felaktig.
  Den etiska diskussionen är inte relevant/saknas.
  Studien/undersökningen är inte tillräckligt omfattande för ett EA.
  Slutsatserna ologiska och följer inte på en analys av ett datamaterial Presentationen av resultatet är bristfällig/felaktig/ inte baserad på en analys av datamaterial.
  Resultat:
  Presentationen av resultatet är bristfällig/felaktig/ inte baserad på en analys av datamaterial.
  Den logiska strukturen saknas och resultatdiskussionen är okritisk och intetsägande
  Inledningen inte relaterad till innehållet, syftet är oklart och frågeställningen/arna följer inte syftet.
  Presentation:
  Sammanfattningen av arbetet är bristfällig (abstrakt).
  Inledningen inte relaterad till innehållet, syftet är oklart och frågeställningen/arna följer inte syftet.
  Slarvig layout och källförteckningen är bristfällig/felaktig.
  Presentationen är ostrukturerad, oförberedd och inte relevant, opponeringen är inte relevant utan baseras på ett subjektivt tyckande.
  Omoget, osjälvständigt och problemfyllt arbetssätt. (not translated)

  Assessment criteria – satisfactory (1-2)

  Teoretisk grund:
  Den teoretiska bakgrunden och utgångspunkten är uppbyggd av företrädesvis irrelevant litteratur och förblir mycket allmänt och/eller kortfattat beskriven
  Ett osjälvständigt refererande skrivsätt används.
  En viss källkritik kan uppfattas.
  Den teoretiska bakgrunden och utgångspunkten är uppbyggd av företrädesvis relevant litteratur men förblir mycket allmänt och/eller kortfattat beskriven. Källorna är få, endast delvis relevanta och utgör en svag teoretisk ram för arbetet.
  Förmågan att presentera en översikt av relevant forskning är svag.
  Källkritiken är bristfällig.
  Metod:
  Metodbeskrivningen, metoddiskussionen och den etiska diskussionen är rudimentär och ofullständig. Resultat- och metoddiskussionen, innefattande en kritisk granskning av undersökningen/studien, är inte relevant med avseende på arbetet. Slutsatserna är outvecklade och triviala.
  Delar av metodbeskrivningen, metoddiskussionen och/eller den etiska diskussionen är bristfällig. Resultat-, metoddiskussionen/den kritiska granskningen är mycket ytlig.
  Slutsatserna är triviala.
  Resultat:
  Resultatdiskussionen är huvudsakligen refererande, samt är ofullständig med avseende på vad som är relevant för arbetets syfte.
  Presentationens logiska stringens är svag.
  Återkopplingen till syftet är synnerligen svag i slutledningen.
  Resultatdiskussionen är huvudsakligen refererande och vissa aspekter som är centrala med avseende på arbetets syfte behandlas ofullständigt eller inte alls.
  Presentationen är till vissa delar inte stringent. Återkopplingen till syftet är svag i slutledningen.
  Presentation:
  Sammanfattningen av arbetet är bristfällig (abstrakt).
  Inledningen är kort, intetsägande och leder inte in läsaren på ämnet.
  Syftet är otydligt/inte relevant och frågeställningarna relaterar inte till syftet/eller blir felaktiga.
  Det finns felaktigheter i källförteckning och referenser.
  Presentationen är svag och osammanhängande, opponeringen visar oförmåga att kritiskt granska en text.
  Delvis omoget, problemfyllt och osjälvständigt arbetssätt.
  Sammanfattningen av studien/undersökningen delvis bristfällig.
  Inledningen ger en delvis missvisande/otydlig bild av ämnet.
  Syftet är otydligt beskrivet eller är oändamålsenligt för ett examensarbete. Frågeställningarnas logiska koppling till syftet är synnerligen svag.
  Det finns vissa felaktigheter i källförteckning och referenser.
  Presentationen är relativt osystematisk, opponeringen är enbart refererande.
  Arbetsprocessen har präglats av vissa problem och ett osjälvständigt arbetssätt (not translated)

  Assessment criteria – good (3-4)

  Teoretisk grund:
  Det finns en grundläggande förmåga att syntetisera och den teoretiska bakgrunden och utgångspunkterna bilda en fungerande teoretisk helhet.
  Litteraturen är relevant med avseende på temat och den teoretiska utgångspunkten lämplig.
  En god källkritik.
  Studien/undersökningen utgår från en god teoretisk helhet baserad på omfattande och relevant litteratur, samt en klar och adekvat teoretisk utgångspunkt.
  Källkritiken är god.
  Metod:
  Metodbeskrivningen ger en heltäckande bild av studiens genomförande, dock utan ingående diskussion av olika metodval.
  Undersökningen/studien har en omfattning motsvarande ett EA och är väl genomförd.
  Den etiska diskussionen är kortfattad men redovisar de relevanta etiska frågorna.
  Den kritiska granskningen är omfattande men inte reflekterande.
  Slutsatserna är rimliga och återknyter till syftet men påvisar ingen förmåga att reflektera utöver detta.
  Metodbeskrivningen ger en heltäckande bild av studiens genomförande och visar på medvetenhet om för- och nackdelar ifråga om metodvalet.
  Den etiska diskussionen är omfattande och uttömmande ifråga om relevanta etiska frågor. Slutsatserna är omfattande och välgrundade.
  Resultat:
  Resultatredovisningen är systematisk men resonemanget trevande och företrädesvis refererande.
  Återkopplingen till syftet i slutledningen är klar, men kortfattad och outvecklad, avsaknad av reflektion.
  Resultatredovisningen är korrekt, systematisk och visar på förmåga till ett självständigt resonemang.
  Återkopplingen till syftet i slutledningen är tydlig och omfattande och påvisar styrkor och svagheter i genomförandet.
  Presentation:
  Bra sammanfattning av undersökningen (Abstrakt).
  Inledningen ger en tillräckligt god bild för att läsaren ska förstå temat och syftet med studien/undersökningen. Syftet och frågeställningarna är logiskt kopplade till varandra.
  Layout, källförteckning och referenser följer standard. Presentation och opponering följer anvisningarna.
  Arbetsprocessen har varit smidig och till stor del självständig.
  Mycket bra sammanfattning av undersökningen.
  Inledningen ger en klar bakgrundsbild av hur arbetet förhåller sig till tidigare forskning och därmed till syftet. Syftet och frågeställningarna är logiskt kopplade till varandra. Källförteckning och referenser följer standard. Presentationen är systematisk och skribenten visar förmåga att utveckla och förtydliga sitt tema. Opponeringen är kritiskt och konstruktivt samt visar på en god förmåga att sätta sig in det opponerade arbetets tema. Arbetsprocessen är mogen och till största del självständig. (not translated)

  Assessment criteria – excellent (5)

  Teoretisk grund:
  Bakgrunden och utgångspunkten är mycket välgrundad och välskriven samt visar en förmåga att förstå temat ur olika perspektiv. Ett reflekterade förhållningssätt beträffande temat är synligt i arbetet. Den teoretiska utgångs-punkten är väl vald och skribenten förmår att kritiskt utvärdera dess förtjänster och begränsningar.
  Källorna är omfattande och relevanta, samt visar på en påfallande förmåga till källkritik.
  Metod:
  Metodbeskrivningen ger en heltäckande bild av studiens genomförande och visar på medvetenhet om för- och nackdelar ifråga om metodvalet, samt visar förmåga att överväga olika alternativ.
  Den etiska diskussionen är omfattande och uttömmande ifråga om relevanta etiska frågor.
  Slutsatserna är omfattande och välgrundade; skribenten förmår också kritiskt värdera dessa och visa på nya perspektiv och frågor för fortsatt forskning.
  Resultat:
  Resultatredovisningen är välstrukturerad, innovativ och visar på förmåga till ett självständigt resonemang.
  Återkopplingen till syftet i slutledningen är tydlig och omfattande. Styrkor och svagheter i genomförandet av studien/undersökningen diskuteras. Arbetet avslutas med en intresseväckande avslutning, välgrundad syntes och utvecklingsmöjligheter.
  Presentation:
  Utmärkt sammanfattning av undersökningen (Abstrakt).
  Inledningen förmår problematisera tidigare forskning och kunskap i ämnet och sätter därför syftet i en vetenskapligt intressant kontext. Syftet och frågeställningarna är logiskt kopplade till varandra. Källförteckning och referenser följer standard.
  Presentationen är systematisk och skribenten visar förmåga att utveckla och förtydliga sitt tema. Opponeringen är kritiskt och konstruktivt samt visar även på en god förmåga att problematisera och kritiskt reflektera över skribentens tema.
  Arbetsprocessen är smidig, mogen och självständig.
  Arbetet har det lilla extra som ger lyskraft. (not translated)

Academic year 2024 - 2025

•   Advanced studies in Radiography RAD22VAL01-3001 01.04.2025-31.05.2025  5 credits  (URS22D-V) +-
  Competence objectives of the study unit

  The student
  - have obtained knowledge that support them in their personal development and/or professionalism.
  - have obtained specific qualifications according to chosen course

  Prerequisites

  None

  Content of the study unit

  Subjects that support professional development

  ---

  Person(s) in charge

  Katarina Vironen

  Mode of delivery

  80% Face-to-face, 20% Distance learning

  Learning methods

  Can be one or more of this alternatives:
  Lecturers
  Conferences
  Studyvisits
  Seminars
  Individual written assignment
  Written report, article

  Teaching language

  Swedish

  Timing

  01.04.2025 - 31.05.2025

  Enrollment date range

  02.12.2024 - 31.12.2024

  • 5 credits

  Group(s)

  • URS22D-V

  Teachers and responsibilities

  Katarina Vironen

  Additional information

  The course can look different for students, it can be built according to students needs and earlier experiences

  Responsible unit

  Faculty of Health and Welfare

  Degree Programme(s)

  Degree Programme in Radiography and Radiotherapy

  Share of online studies

  1 credits

  Assessment scale

  Approved/Rejected

  Student's schedule and workload

  1sp= 27h, 5x 27=135h

  Assessment criteria

  Approved / Failed

  Can receive feedback and show willingness to develop professional skills
  Follows the worklist and keeps agreed times
  Can ask questions that are relevant for learning a work
  For the most part, it works in a planned manner and has a basic accuracy at important work moments
  Can perform tasks under supervision
  Has basic knowledge and can ask questions that are relevant to learning a work
  Can follow directives and instructions and take responsibility for tasks
  Can make decisions concerning tasks at the basic level
  Know the values ​​and consider the ethical principles
  Can communicate and respond to patients / clients / customers
  Can work with others in the work team

•   Basic Nursing Care RBA22VG02-3003 16.09.2024-01.12.2024  3 credits  (UBA24D-V, ...) +-
  Competence objectives of the study unit

  The students
  - have fundamental skills in clinical nursing and its main methods.
  - are familiar with good ergonomics and realize the importance of acting according to aseptic principles.
  - are able to apply interactive skills, and embrace a comprehensive and process-oriented perspective in the caring profession.

  Prerequisites

  None

  Content of the study unit

  Clinical nursing methods
  Ergonomics in the work
  Aseptic manners
  Nursing process

  Assessment criteria

  Assessment criteria – satisfactory (1-2)

  Exam
  answers depend heavily on words and expressions found in the literature
  has superficial knowledge of the subject, but shows a basic understanding of the subject
  
  Written assignment
  The student has partially followed the instructions for the written assignment. The student shows limited to a deficient knowledge of the knowledge of the substance.

  Assessment criteria – good (3-4)

  Exam
  can account for the literature, reflect and motivate his/her views
  can give an independent account of the literature
  understands most of the topic
  presents independent views and can apply ideas to analogous situations
  can motivate some of their claims and positions
  can give some own examples
  
  Written assignment
  The student has mostly followed the instructions for the written assignment and has mastered the substance of her/his work, but the application is limited. The student can ask relevant questions and can lead a discussion at the seminar

  Assessment criteria – excellent (5)

  Exam
  has in-depth knowledge of the subject
  can analyze and interpret subject facts
  master the subject versatile
  has a broad grasp of the subject
  presents original and apposite examples
  
  Written assignment
  The student has followed the instructions for the assignment and shows that she/he has mastered the substance. She/he have read the other participants' assignments and can ask relevant questions and can lead a discussion at the seminar. The assignment and the possible opponentship show something out of the ordinary (technical execution, oral presentation, mature reflections, independent working methods)

  ---

  Person(s) in charge

  Yvonne Sjöberg-Ehn

  Mode of delivery

  67% Face-to-face, 33% Distance learning

  Learning material

  Terveysportti
  Vårdhandboken
  Moodle material
  
  Övrig aktuell litteratur eller forskning enligt lärares anvisningar

  Learning methods

  Self-study
  On-campus teaching
  Individual works
  practical exercises at KTC - Compulsory attendance

  Objects, timing and methods of assessment

  The examination is graded 0-5
  Written exercises are assessed UK/GK
  Clinical exercises are assessed UK/GK

  Teaching language

  Swedish

  Timing

  16.09.2024 - 01.12.2024

  Enrollment date range

  02.07.2024 - 31.07.2024

  • 3 credits

  Group(s)

  • UBA24D-V
  • URS24D-V

  Teachers and responsibilities

  Yvonne Sjöberg-Ehn

  Responsible unit

  Faculty of Health and Welfare

  Degree Programme(s)

  Degree Programme in Radiography and Radiotherapy, Degree Programme in Biomedical Laboratory Scientist

  Share of online studies

  1 credits

  Assessment scale

  H-5

  Alternative methods of attainment for implementation

  Examination
  Mandatory attendance 100% for practical exercises
  Approved exercises in training classes
  Approved submissions.

  Exam dates and retake possibilities

  Autumn 2024

  Student's schedule and workload

  27h/ECT

•   Clinical Radiography 1 RAD24KSR01-3001 14.04.2025-25.05.2025  12 credits  (URS24D-V) +-
  Competence objectives of the study unit

  Student
  - has the ability to plan, perform and evaluate the most common conventional x-ray examinations under supervision
  - has the ability to act as a caretaker in ultrasound and biopsies, punctures
  - can plan, perform and evaluate dental examinations
  - can apply an aseptic way of working
  - has basic insights into the patient's overall care and can apply theoretical knowledge in diagnostic radiography
  - understands and works in accordance with principles for safe and safe patient care

  Prerequisites

  Diagnostic Radiography 1

  Content of the study unit

  Clinical training
  Conventional examinations
  US
  Dental examinations

  ---

  Person(s) in charge

  Carina Gädda

  Mode of delivery

  Face-to-face

  Teaching language

  Swedish

  Timing

  14.04.2025 - 25.05.2025

  Enrollment date range

  02.12.2024 - 31.12.2024

  • 12 credits

  Group(s)

  • URS24D-V

  Teachers and responsibilities

  Carina Gädda

  Responsible unit

  Faculty of Health and Welfare

  Degree Programme(s)

  Degree Programme in Radiography and Radiotherapy

  Assessment scale

  H-5

•   Introduction to Academic Studies and Communication RBA22IN01-3003 02.09.2024-17.11.2024  4 credits  (UBA24D-V, ...) +-
  Competence objectives of the study unit

  The student:
  - is familiar with his own university, its teaching methods and the use of different platforms
  - reflects on the studies and is aware of the importance of personal development in relation to lifelong learning
  - can communicate both orally and in writing in a structured and linguistically well-functioning way
  - knows the work process for scientific writing and can use reference systems
  - is familiar with literature search and has a critical thinking

  Prerequisites

  No prior knowledge required

  Content of the study unit

  Study information and information retrieval
  Learning in an academic context
  Data protection and data security
  Swedish 3 credits:
  Scientific writing in Swedish and literature search both manually and in databases
  Reliable source material and source criticism
  Oral and written presentation
  Email management and the use of social media in nursing care

  Assessment criteria

  Assessment criteria – satisfactory (1-2)

  Criteria for evaluation of the exam
  The student has a superficial knowledge of the subject (by heart reading)
  
  Assessment criteria for written work
  The student has followed the instructions and their knowledge of the other students' work is inadequate. The student shows limited substance knowledge, it can be essential.
  
  The student shows insufficient knowledge about the other students' written work. The student has followed the instructions for the written work. They have a deficient knowledge of the substance also touching the essential.

  Assessment criteria – good (3-4)

  Criteria for evaluation of the exam
  The student can account for the literature, reflect and motivate his / her views
  
  Assessment criteria for written work
  The student has followed the instructions for the written work and shows insufficient knowledge about the other students' written work. The student master the substance of his work, but the application is limited

  Assessment criteria – excellent (5)

  Criteria for evaluation of the exam
  The student shows in his answer an in-depth knowledge and maturity beyond the traditional
  
  Criteria for evaluation of written work individually or in groups
  The student has followed the instructions for the written work and shows that she has mastered the substance. They have read the other participants' written work and can ask relevant questions and lead a discussion at the seminar. The written work and the possible opponentship show something out of the ordinary (technical execution, oral presentation, mature reflections, independent working methods)
  
  The student has followed the instructions for the written work and shows that she has mastered the substance. They have read the other participants' work and can ask relevant questions and lead a discussion at the seminar.

  Further information

  Students with Finnish as prior educational language have to show such skills in the Swedish language as are in accordance with the Act on the Knowledge of Languages Required of Personnel in Public Bodies (424/2003). This means that these students must show satisfactory (grade 1, 2 or 3) or good (grade 4 or 5) skills in speaking and writing Swedish. Written and oral skills are assessed separately.

  ---

  Person(s) in charge

  Carina Gädda

  Mode of delivery

  Face-to-face

  Learning material

  Kommunikation
  Novias anvisningar för examensarbeten.
  Material på Moodle. (not translated)

  Learning methods

  Introduction to academic studies: Lecturers, presentations, virtual test ( library/ informationservice)

  Objects, timing and methods of assessment

  Kommunikation
  
  Studerande
  - kan kommunicera både muntligt och skriftligt på ett strukturerat och språkligt välfungerande sätt, i enlighet med arbetslivets och samhällslivets krav.
  känner till arbetsprocessen för vetenskapligt skrivande och kan använda referenssystem.
  - är medveten om olika vägar att söka information och kan rapportera enligt reglerna för standarduppställning.
  Studeranden med finska som skolbildningsspråk ska uppvisa sådana kunskaper i svenska som enligt lagen (424/2003) krävs av offentligt anställda. Detta innebär att dessa studerande bör visa nöjaktig (vitsord 1-3) eller god (vitsord 4-5) förmåga att använda svenska i tal och skrift. Muntlig och skriftlig förmåga bedöms separat.
  Förkunskapskrav
  Inga förkunskapskrav (not translated)

  Teaching language

  Swedish

  Timing

  02.09.2024 - 17.11.2024

  Enrollment date range

  02.07.2024 - 29.09.2024

  • 4 credits

  Group(s)

  • UBA24D-V
  • URS24D-V

  Teachers and responsibilities

  Mikaela Engvall, Katarina Vironen, Språkservice 1, Carina Gädda

  Responsible unit

  Faculty of Health and Welfare

  Degree Programme(s)

  Degree Programme in Radiography and Radiotherapy, Degree Programme in Biomedical Laboratory Scientist

  Assessment scale

  H-5

  Exam dates and retake possibilities

  Kommunikation: Bedömt grupparbete och bedömd muntlig presentationen i slutet av kursen.
  Introduktion: On-line tent i informationssökning samt i inroduktionskursens material (not translated)

  Assessment criteria

  Kommunikation:Underkänd
  Studerande innehar en grundläggande kompetens i ämnet / Studerande visar inte tillräcklig kompetens i ämnet. (not translated)

  Assessment criteria – satisfactory (1-2)

  Kommunikation: Bedömningskriterier - tillfredsställande-synnerligen tillfredsställande (1-2)
  Studerande påvisar en ytlig kompetens och grundläggande förståelse för ämnet (not translated)

  Assessment criteria – good (3-4)

  Kommunikation:
  Bedömningskriterier - goda-synnerligen goda (3-4)
  • Studerande påvisar en kompetens som relateras och kopplas till litteraturen
  • Studerande kan reflektera och motivera egna synpunkter (not translated)

  Assessment criteria – excellent (5)

  Kommunikation: Bedömningskriterier - berömliga (5)
  • Studerande har en fördjupad kompetens och visar en djupare förståelse för ämnet i relation till det kommande yrket (not translated)

•   Thesis, Idea and Framework RAD22EX01-3001 21.10.2024-17.11.2024  3 credits  (URS22D-V) +-
  Competence objectives of the study unit

  Student
  - has the ability to produce an idea for his thesis and can perform and argue for choices she/he have done

  Prerequisites

  Studymodule Researchprocess

  Content of the study unit

  Thesis idea
  The research process including presentation of an idea

  Assessment criteria

  Assessment criteria – satisfactory (1-2)

  Criteria for evaluation of the exam 
  The student has superficial knowledge of the subject (by heart reading) 
  
  Assessment criteria for written work 
  The student has followed instructions for the written task. The student shows limited substance knowledge and are not familiar nor knowledge about other students' written work.

  Assessment criteria – good (3-4)

  Criteria for evaluation of the exam 
  Student can account for the literature, reflect and motivate views 
  
  Assessment criteria for written work 
  Student has followed the instructions for the written work and master the substance of his work, but the application is limited. Shows insufficient knowledge about other students' written work

  Assessment criteria – excellent (5)

  Criteria for evaluation of the exam 
  Student shows in-depth knowledge and maturity in the subject 
  
  Criteria for evaluation of written work individually or in groups 
  Student has followed the instructions for the written work and master the substance. Shows good knowledge in the other participants' written work, ask relevant questions and have capacity to lead a seminar discussion. The written work and the possible opponentship shows excellent knowledge (technical execution, oral presentation, mature reflections, and independent working methods)

  ---

  Mode of delivery

  Face-to-face

  Teaching language

  Swedish

  Timing

  21.10.2024 - 17.11.2024

  Enrollment date range

  02.07.2024 - 31.07.2024

  • 3 credits

  Group(s)

  • URS22D-V

  Teachers and responsibilities

  Camilla Ribacka

  Responsible unit

  Faculty of Health and Welfare

  Degree Programme(s)

  Degree Programme in Radiography and Radiotherapy

  Assessment scale

  H-5

•   Thesis, Plan and Execution RAD22EX02-3001 01.01.2025-30.05.2025  6 credits  (URS22D-V) +-
  Competence objectives of the study unit

  The student
  - has capacity to independently write a thesis according to college rules
  - can work systematic and purposefully according to scientific and ethical rules

  Prerequisites

  Studymodule Researchprocess

  Content of the study unit

  Thesis plan
  The research process including presentation of an plan

  Assessment criteria

  Assessment criteria – satisfactory (1-2)

  Criteria for evaluation of the exam 
  The student has superficial knowledge of the subject (by heart reading) 
  
  Assessment criteria for written work 
  The student has followed instructions for the written task. The student shows limited substance knowledge and are not familiar nor knowledge about other students' written work.

  Assessment criteria – good (3-4)

  Criteria for evaluation of the exam 
  Student can account for the literature, reflect and motivate views 
  
  Assessment criteria for written work 
  Student has followed the instructions for the written work and master the substance of his work, but the application is limited. Shows insufficient knowledge about other students' written work

  Assessment criteria – excellent (5)

  Criteria for evaluation of the exam 
  Student shows in-depth knowledge and maturity in the subject 
  
  Criteria for evaluation of written work individually or in groups 
  Student has followed the instructions for the written work and master the substance. Shows good knowledge in the other participants' written work, ask relevant questions and have capacity to lead a seminar discussion. The written work and the possible opponentship shows excellent knowledge (technical execution, oral presentation, mature reflections, and independent working methods)

  ---

  Mode of delivery

  Face-to-face

  Teaching language

  Swedish

  Timing

  01.01.2025 - 30.05.2025

  Enrollment date range

  02.12.2024 - 31.12.2024

  • 6 credits

  Group(s)

  • URS22D-V

  Teachers and responsibilities

  Carina Gädda, Camilla Ribacka

  Responsible unit

  Faculty of Health and Welfare

  Degree Programme(s)

  Degree Programme in Radiography and Radiotherapy

  Assessment scale

  H-5