Academic year 2020 - 2021

•   Anatomy and pathophysiology SHV14AK02-3002 11.09.2020-31.03.2021  5 credits  (SHV20HD-V, ...) +-
  Competence objectives of the study unit

  The student:
  Is able to immerse her/his knowledge in anatomy and pathophysiology, and to connect the knowledge to clinical context

  Prerequisites

  The student:
  Has knowledge of the various tissue types and the structure of the musculosceletal system, as well as of the anatomy and physiology of the various organ systems.
  Has knowledge of and understands how blood, skin, circulation, lymph circulation, respiration, digestion and urinary excretion work
  Has knowledge of and understands how the endocrine system regulates metabolism and organ functions
  Has knowledge of and understands the reproduction
  Has knowledge of and understand how the nervous system regulates the physiological processes
  Have knowledge of and understands the structure and function of the sensory organs
  Has basic knowledge of pathophysiology

  Content of the study unit

  Anatomy
  Pathofysiology

  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 assignment:
  The student has followed the instructions and her/his 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' assignments
  The student has followed the instructions for the assignment. She/He 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 assignment:
  The student has followed the instructions for the written assignment and shows insufficient knowledge about the other students' written assignments
  The student has mastered the substance of her/his work, but the application is limited

  Assessment criteria – excellent (5)

  Criteria for evaluation of the exam:
  The student shows in her/his answer an in-depth knowledge and maturity beyond the traditional
  
  Criteria for evaluation of assignment individually or in groups:
  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)
  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 lead a discussion at the seminar

  ---

  Person(s) in charge

  Camilla Strandell-Laine

  Mode of delivery

  40% Face-to-face, 60% Distance learning

  Learning material

  Material on Moodle.
  A fundamental book in Human Physiology and Anatomy, for example one of these books:
  1) Aldskogius H. and Rydqvist B. (2018) Den friska människan, Anatomi och fysiologi. Liber, Stockholm
  2) Nicolaysen G. and Holck P. (2014) Anatomi och fysiologi. Studentlitteratur, Lund
  3) Sand, Sjaastad, Haug and Bjålie (2007). Människokroppen. Liber, Stockholm
  4) Henriksson O. and Rasmusson M. (2018) Fysiologi : med relevant anatomi. Studentlitteratur, Lund
  5) Tortora, G. and Derrickson B. Principles of Anatomy and Physiology, 15:de upplagan (2017 eller äldre upplagor), Wiley.
  Book in Patophysiology:
  Braun C. and Anderson C. (2012) Patofysiologi : om hur förändringar i kroppens funktioner påverkar vår hälsa. Studentlitteratur, Lund.

  Learning methods

  Lectures, self-studies and exercises.

  Objects, timing and methods of assessment

  The written assignments will be graded and based on these the course will be graded between 0-5

  Teaching language

  Swedish

  Timing

  11.09.2020 - 31.03.2021

  Enrollment date range

  01.08.2020 - 30.09.2020

  • 5 credits

  Group(s)

  • SHV20HD-V
  • SHV20HH-Å
  • SHV19H-V
  • SHV20HH-V
  • SHV20HD-Å
  • SHV19F-V

  Teachers and responsibilities

  Camilla Ribacka

  Additional information

  Mera information på kursens Moodle (not translated)

  Responsible unit

  Vaasa

  Degree Programme(s)

  Degree Programme in Social Services and Health Care

  Campus

  Vasa, Wolffskavägen 31

  Share of online studies

  3 credits

  Assessment scale

  H-5

  Exam dates and retake possibilities

  Written assignments Autumn 2020 - January 2021

  Student's schedule and workload

  Lectures 16 h
  Self-studies 119 h

  Assessment criteria

  Studerande har mycket svaga kunskaper i grundläggande anatomi och fysiologi, samt patofysiologi
  Studerande har inte lämnat in sina individuella arbeten (not translated)

  Assessment criteria – satisfactory (1-2)

  Studerande har nöjaktiga kunskaper i grundläggande anatomi och fysiologi, samt patofysiologi (not translated)

  Assessment criteria – good (3-4)

  Studerande har goda kunskaper i grundläggande anatomi och fysiologi, samt patofysiologi (not translated)

  Assessment criteria – excellent (5)

  Studerande har utmärkta kunskaper i grundläggande anatomi och fysiologi, samt patofysiologi (not translated)

•   Budgeting, strategic management and follow-up SHV20UL03-3001 22.04.2021-21.05.2021  5 credits  (SHV20HD-V, ...) +-
  Competence objectives of the study unit

  Student:
  Has advanced knowledge about legislation regarding social and health care
  Understands the economics of social and health care as part of the social economy and the organisation's activities
  Describes the basics of ​​budgeting and budget follow-up
  Explains the relationship between business and budget
  Has advanced knowledge about competition in public and private social and health care

  Prerequisites

  No prerequisites

  Content of the study unit

  Social and health care legislation
  Social and health care economics
  Budgeting
  Competition law

  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 assignment: The student has followed the instructions and her/his 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' assignments. The student has followed the instructions for the assignment. She/He 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 assignment:
  The student has followed the instructions for the written assignment and shows insufficient knowledge about the other students' written assignments. The student has mastered the substance of her/his work, but the application is limited
  
  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 lead a discussion at the seminar

  Assessment criteria – excellent (5)

  Criteria for evaluation of the exam:
  The student shows in her/his answer an in-depth knowledge and maturity beyond the traditional
  
  Criteria for evaluation of assignment individually or in groups:
  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

  Camilla Strandell-Laine

  Mode of delivery

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

  Learning material

  According to the lecturer's instructions

  Learning methods

  Lecture, seminar, independent studies

  Teaching language

  Swedish

  Timing

  22.04.2021 - 21.05.2021

  Enrollment date range

  15.11.2020 - 22.04.2021

  • 5 credits

  Group(s)

  • SHV20HD-V
  • SHV20HH-Å
  • SHV20HH-V
  • SHV20HD-Å

  Teachers and responsibilities

  Maria Westerlund

  Responsible unit

  Vaasa

  Degree Programme(s)

  Degree Programme in Social Services and Health Care

  Campus

  Vasa, Wolffskavägen 31

  Share of online studies

  4 credits

  Assessment scale

  H-5

  Student's schedule and workload

  5 ECTS = 135 hours of studies
  Lecture (4 h)
  Seminar (4 h)
  Independent studies (127 h)

  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 assignment:
  The student has followed the instructions and her/his 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' assignments. The student has followed the instructions for the assignment. She/he 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 assignment:
  The student has followed the instructions for the written assignment and shows insufficient knowledge about the other students' written assignments. The student has mastered the substance of her/his work, but the application is limited
  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 lead a discussion at the seminar

  Assessment criteria – excellent (5)

  Criteria for evaluation of the exam:
  The student shows in her/his answer an in-depth knowledge and maturity beyond the traditional
  
  Criteria for evaluation of assignment individually or in groups:
  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)
  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 lead a discussion at the seminar

•   Change management SHV20HL03-3002 01.01.2021-26.02.2021  5 credits  (SHV20HD-V, ...) +-
  Competence objectives of the study unit

  The student:
  Is able to evaluate different models of quality work within the welfare sector and knows how to handle and develop quality work
  Can critically examine the benefit and challenges that digitalisation process, especially in regards to ethical issues, now and in the future
  Is able to empower and guide individuals to use health welfare services in digital environment
  Knows the theories of change management and work security and is able to apply them to service development in welfare work
  Identifies and describes examples of social innovations and entrepreneurship in welfare work and is able to analyze the role of entrepreneurship in change management based on theories of social innovations

  Prerequisites

  No prerequisites

  Content of the study unit

  Quality-conscious working method (security)
  e-Health and e-Social (digitisation)
  Service development
  Change management
  Social innovations
  Entrepreneurship

  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 assignment:
  The student has followed the instructions and her/his 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' assignments.
  The student has followed the instructions for the assignment. She/He 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 assignment:
  The student has followed the instructions for the written assignment and shows insufficient knowledge about the other students' written assignments. The student has mastered the substance of her/his work, but the application is limited

  Assessment criteria – excellent (5)

  Criteria for evaluation of the exam:
  The student shows in her/his answer an in-depth knowledge and maturity beyond the traditional
  
  Criteria for evaluation of assignment individually or in groups:
  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)
  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 lead a discussion at the seminar.

  ---

  Mode of delivery

  Face-to-face

  Learning material

  Information can be found in Moodle.

  Learning methods

  Online studies , individual studies

  Teaching language

  English

  Timing

  01.01.2021 - 26.02.2021

  Enrollment date range

  02.12.2020 - 07.01.2021

  • 5 credits

  Group(s)

  • SHV20HD-V
  • SHV20HH-Å
  • SHV20HH-V
  • SHV20HD-Å

  Teachers and responsibilities

  Camilla Strandell-Laine, Rika Levy-Malmberg

  Responsible unit

  Vaasa

  Degree Programme(s)

  Degree Programme in Social Services and Health Care

  Campus

  Vasa, Wolffskavägen 31

  Assessment scale

  H-5

  Exam dates and retake possibilities

  3.1.2021 abstract
  17.2.2021 online conference (free)

  Pedagogic approaches

  The course is conducted in cooperation with Masters' degree programme at Arcada.

  Student's schedule and workload

  5 ECTS = 135 hours of studies.

  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 assignment:
  The student has followed the instructions and her/his 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' assignments.
  The student has followed the instructions for the assignment. She/He 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 assignment:
  The student has followed the instructions for the written assignment and shows insufficient knowledge about the other students' written assignments. The student has mastered the substance of her/his work, but the application is limited
  
  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 lead a discussion at the seminar.

  Assessment criteria – excellent (5)

  Criteria for evaluation of the exam:
  The student shows in her/his answer an in-depth knowledge and maturity beyond the traditional
  
  Criteria for evaluation of assignment individually or in groups:
  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)

•   Clinical assessment and nursing care SHV14AK03-3002 01.08.2020-31.07.2021  10 credits  (SHV18H-V) +-
  Competence objectives of the study unit

  The student:
  Has awareness to handle patients/clients' health and disease conditions, through adequate medical history, status assessment and treatment
  Can perform structured health history and critically analyse and evaluate the same
  Can perform a structured examination of the patient/client and critically analyse and evaluate her/his own intervention
  Master the key skills required for diagnostics and clinical decisions
  Can apply decision models to make differential diagnoses and then provide subsequent evidence-based care and critically analyse and evaluate the same
  Can take responsibility for the patient's/client's health and illness conditions
  Have ability to teach and supervise patients/clients

  Prerequisites

  SHV14AK02 Anatomy and pathophysiology

  Content of the study unit

  Physical assessment

  ---

  Person(s) in charge

  Camilla Strandell-Laine

  Mode of delivery

  Face-to-face

  Teaching language

  Swedish

  Timing

  01.08.2020 - 31.07.2021

  Enrollment date range

  01.08.2020 - 30.09.2020

  • 10 credits

  Group(s)

  • SHV18H-V

  Teachers and responsibilities

  Rika Levy-Malmberg

  Degree Programme(s)

  Degree Programme in Social Services and Health Care

  Campus

  Vasa, Wolffskavägen 31

  Assessment scale

  H-5

•   Clinical assessment and nursing care SHV14AK03-3003 28.01.2021-21.05.2021  10 credits  (SHV19F-V) +-
  Competence objectives of the study unit

  The student:
  Has awareness to handle patients/clients' health and disease conditions, through adequate medical history, status assessment and treatment
  Can perform structured health history and critically analyse and evaluate the same
  Can perform a structured examination of the patient/client and critically analyse and evaluate her/his own intervention
  Master the key skills required for diagnostics and clinical decisions
  Can apply decision models to make differential diagnoses and then provide subsequent evidence-based care and critically analyse and evaluate the same
  Can take responsibility for the patient's/client's health and illness conditions
  Have ability to teach and supervise patients/clients

  Prerequisites

  SHV14AK02 Anatomy and pathophysiology

  Content of the study unit

  Physical assessment

  ---

  Person(s) in charge

  Camilla Strandell-Laine

  Mode of delivery

  70% Face-to-face, 30% Distance learning

  Learning material

  For the subjects critical thinking and clinical judgment please attach the following reading materials:
  Clinical judgment- an essential tool in the nursing process
  http://www.infiressources.ca/fer/Depotdocument_anglais/Clinical_Judgement%E2%80%93An_Essential_Tool_in_the_Nursing_Profession.pdf
  What critical thinking, critical reasoning, and clinical judgment are?
  https://www.elsevier.com/books/critical-thinking-clinical-reasoning-and-clinical-judgment/alfaro-lefevre/978-0-323-35890-3
  Clinical reasoning instructor resourceshttp://web.ebscohost.com/ehost/pdfviewer/pdfviewer?vid=4&hid=113&sid=1d415f7a-433b-4674-a0a0-d28e4ee49a53%40sessionmgr115
  For the subject of critical thinking and EBP please find the following material
  Kitson, AL., Athlin, ÅM., Conroy, T Anything but Basic: Nursing’s Challenge in Meeting Patients’Fundamental Care Needs. Journal of Nursing Scholarship. 46(5), 2012. Pp 331-339
  Long, B.C& Phipps, W.J. & Cassmever, V. L. (1995). Adult Nursing A Nursing Process Approach, London U.K pp: 4-13
  Lunney, M. Use of Critical Thinking in the Diagnostic Process. International Journal of Nursing Terminologies and Classification.21 (2), 2010.pp82-88.
  Lynda, F., Snyder, CH.. Evidence-based practice for the busy nurse practitioner: Par three: Critical appraisal process. Journal of the Academy of Nurse Practitioner. 24, 2012. Pp704-715
  Robert, RR. Petersen S. Critical Thinking at the Bedside: Providing Safe Passage to Patients. MEDSURG Nursing.22 (2), 2013.pp 85-118.
  Smith, SA Nurse Competence: A Concept Analysis. International Journal of Nursing Knowledge. 23(3), 2012 pp. 172-182.
  Herdman, TH., ed NANDA International Nursing Diagnosis> Definitions & Classification 2012-2014. 2012 Wiley-Blackwell (this book can be found in Swedish)
  For the subject of history thanking physical assessment
  Hogan-Quigley, B., Palm, ML., Bickley, LS. Nursing Guide to Physical Examination and History Taking. 2012. Philadelphia, 11th ed. Wolther Kluwer Health Lippincott
  Timby, B. K. (2013). Fundamental Nursing Skills and Concept. 10th ed. Wolter Kluwer Health. Lippincott.
  Fagerstrom, L.M.( 2019), (red) Avanserat Klinisk Sykepleie. Oslo. Gylendal.

  Learning methods

  Lectures
  Clinical examination, decision making and implementation of nursing care

  Objects, timing and methods of assessment

  Objective structured clinical examination (OSCE)
  The OSCE Examination Form was developed in England in the late 1970s, and is used today in medicine and health education in several countries. OSCE assesses the student's clinical competence (knowledge and skills), problem-solving ability and interactivity. The arrangement means that there are different stations with patient cases (case)
  
  Students are assessed on the basis of an assessment form (checklist of criteria), the content of which varies depending on the patient case.
  All criteria are evaluated as follows:
  • 0 = Fail (asks/acts not)
  • 1 = Sufficiently approved (asks/acts but not correct / direct according to directive)
  • 2 = Competent (asks/acts correctly)

  Teaching language

  Swedish

  Timing

  28.01.2021 - 21.05.2021

  Enrollment date range

  15.11.2020 - 28.01.2021

  • 10 credits

  Group(s)

  • SHV19F-V

  Teachers and responsibilities

  Lisen Kullas-Nyman, Ann-Louise Glasberg, Rika Levy-Malmberg

  Additional information

  Each student is assessed on the basis of two clinical patient cases (case / station) at a time.
  Time is limited to 30 minutes per student per station.
  Students have 25 minutes to complete the three sections below.
  Then the observer / examiner has 5 minutes to discuss the performance.
  Students receive a brief description of the patient, as well as the instructions below.
  • This is your first time meeting the patient.
  • You have 25 minutes to go. Keep track of time! The observer then announces that it is 2 minutes left.
  When the time is up, you must finish even if all parts are not completed.
  • Information is provided by the "patient" or the observer during the examination, if asked / asked.

  Responsible unit

  Vaasa

  Degree Programme(s)

  Degree Programme in Social Services and Health Care

  Campus

  Vasa, Wolffskavägen 31

  Share of online studies

  3 credits

  Assessment scale

  H-5

  Exam dates and retake possibilities

  OSCE spring 2021

  Student's schedule and workload

  1 cu = 27 hours

  Assessment criteria

  < 49%

  Assessment criteria – satisfactory (1-2)

  50-69%

  Assessment criteria – good (3-4)

  70-89%

  Assessment criteria – excellent (5)

  > 90%

  Approved / Failed

  Students are assessed on the basis of an assessment form (checklist of criteria), the content of which varies depending on the patient case.
  All criteria are evaluated as follows:
  • 0 = Fail (asks/acts not)
  • 1 = Sufficiently approved (asks/acts but not correct / direct according to directive)
  • 2 = Competent (asks/acts correctly)

•   Clinical assessment and nursing care SHV14AK03-3004 28.01.2021-21.05.2021  10 credits  (SHV20HD-V, ...) +-
  Competence objectives of the study unit

  The student:
  Has awareness to handle patients/clients' health and disease conditions, through adequate medical history, status assessment and treatment
  Can perform structured health history and critically analyse and evaluate the same
  Can perform a structured examination of the patient/client and critically analyse and evaluate her/his own intervention
  Master the key skills required for diagnostics and clinical decisions
  Can apply decision models to make differential diagnoses and then provide subsequent evidence-based care and critically analyse and evaluate the same
  Can take responsibility for the patient's/client's health and illness conditions
  Have ability to teach and supervise patients/clients

  Prerequisites

  SHV14AK02 Anatomy and pathophysiology

  Content of the study unit

  Physical assessment

  ---

  Person(s) in charge

  Camilla Strandell-Laine

  Mode of delivery

  70% Face-to-face, 30% Distance learning

  Learning material

  For the subjects critical thinking and clinical judgment please attach the following reading materials:
  Clinical judgment- an essential tool in the nursing process
  http://www.infiressources.ca/fer/Depotdocument_anglais/Clinical_Judgement%E2%80%93An_Essential_Tool_in_the_Nursing_Profession.pdf
  What critical thinking, critical reasoning, and clinical judgment are?
  https://www.elsevier.com/books/critical-thinking-clinical-reasoning-and-clinical-judgment/alfaro-lefevre/978-0-323-35890-3
  Clinical reasoning instructor resourceshttp://web.ebscohost.com/ehost/pdfviewer/pdfviewer?vid=4&hid=113&sid=1d415f7a-433b-4674-a0a0-d28e4ee49a53%40sessionmgr115
  For the subject of critical thinking and EBP please find the following material
  Kitson, AL., Athlin, ÅM., Conroy, T Anything but Basic: Nursing’s Challenge in Meeting Patients’Fundamental Care Needs. Journal of Nursing Scholarship. 46(5), 2012. Pp 331-339
  Long, B.C& Phipps, W.J. & Cassmever, V. L. (1995). Adult Nursing A Nursing Process Approach, London U.K pp: 4-13
  Lunney, M. Use of Critical Thinking in the Diagnostic Process. International Journal of Nursing Terminologies and Classification.21 (2), 2010.pp82-88.
  Lynda, F., Snyder, CH.. Evidence-based practice for the busy nurse practitioner: Par three: Critical appraisal process. Journal of the Academy of Nurse Practitioner. 24, 2012. Pp704-715
  Robert, RR. Petersen S. Critical Thinking at the Bedside: Providing Safe Passage to Patients. MEDSURG Nursing.22 (2), 2013.pp 85-118.
  Smith, SA Nurse Competence: A Concept Analysis. International Journal of Nursing Knowledge. 23(3), 2012 pp. 172-182.
  Herdman, TH., ed NANDA International Nursing Diagnosis> Definitions & Classification 2012-2014. 2012 Wiley-Blackwell (this book can be found in Swedish)
  For the subject of history thanking physical assessment
  Hogan-Quigley, B., Palm, ML., Bickley, LS. Nursing Guide to Physical Examination and History Taking. 2012. Philadelphia, 11th ed. Wolther Kluwer Health Lippincott
  Timby, B. K. (2013). Fundamental Nursing Skills and Concept. 10th ed. Wolter Kluwer Health. Lippincott.
  Fagerstrom, L.M.( 2019), (red) Avanserat Klinisk Sykepleie. Oslo. Gylendal.

  Learning methods

  Lectures
  Clinical examination, decision making and implementation of nursing care

  Objects, timing and methods of assessment

  Objective structured clinical examination (OSCE)
  The OSCE Examination Form was developed in England in the late 1970s, and is used today in medicine and health education in several countries. OSCE assesses the student's clinical competence (knowledge and skills), problem-solving ability and interactivity. The arrangement means that there are different stations with patient cases (case)
  
  Students are assessed on the basis of an assessment form (checklist of criteria), the content of which varies depending on the patient case.
  All criteria are evaluated as follows:
  • 0 = Fail (asks/acts not)
  • 1 = Sufficiently approved (asks/acts but not correct / direct according to directive)
  • 2 = Competent (asks/acts correctly)

  Teaching language

  Swedish

  Timing

  28.01.2021 - 21.05.2021

  Enrollment date range

  15.11.2020 - 28.01.2021

  • 10 credits

  Group(s)

  • SHV20HD-V
  • SHV20HH-V

  Teachers and responsibilities

  Lisen Kullas-Nyman, Ann-Louise Glasberg, Rika Levy-Malmberg

  Additional information

  Each student is assessed on the basis of two clinical patient cases (case / station) at a time.
  Time is limited to 30 minutes per student per station.
  Students have 25 minutes to complete the three sections below.
  Then the observer / examiner has 5 minutes to discuss the performance.
  Students receive a brief description of the patient, as well as the instructions below.
  • This is your first time meeting the patient.
  • You have 25 minutes to go. Keep track of time! The observer then announces that it is 2 minutes left.
  When the time is up, you must finish even if all parts are not completed.
  • Information is provided by the "patient" or the observer during the examination, if asked / asked.

  Responsible unit

  Vaasa

  Degree Programme(s)

  Degree Programme in Social Services and Health Care

  Campus

  Vasa, Wolffskavägen 31

  Share of online studies

  3 credits

  Assessment scale

  H-5

  Exam dates and retake possibilities

  OSCE spring 2021

  Student's schedule and workload

  1 cu = 27 hours

  Assessment criteria

  < 49%

  Assessment criteria – satisfactory (1-2)

  50-69%

  Assessment criteria – good (3-4)

  70-89%

  Assessment criteria – excellent (5)

  > 90%

  Approved / Failed

  Students are assessed on the basis of an assessment form (checklist of criteria), the content of which varies depending on the patient case.
  All criteria are evaluated as follows:
  • 0 = Fail (asks/acts not)
  • 1 = Sufficiently approved (asks/acts but not correct / direct according to directive)
  • 2 = Competent (asks/acts correctly)

•   Continuous quality improvement in the clinical laboratory SHV16BA01-3002 01.08.2020-31.12.2020  5 credits  (SHV20HD-V, ...) +-
  Competence objectives of the study unit

  The student:
  Is able to evaluate and develop clinical laboratory work by using national and international quality guidelines, standards and evidence based knowledge

  Prerequisites

  No prerequisites

  Content of the study unit

  National quality guidelines
  International quality guidelines
  Evidence based biomedical laboratory science

  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 assignment:
  The student has followed the instructions and her/his 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' assignments. The student has followed the instructions for the assignment. She/He 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 assignment:
  The student has followed the instructions for the written assignment and shows insufficient knowledge about the other students' written assignments. The student has mastered the substance of her/his work, but the application is limited

  Assessment criteria – excellent (5)

  Criteria for evaluation of the exam:
  The student shows in her/his answer an in-depth knowledge and maturity beyond the traditional
  
  Criteria for evaluation of assignment individually or in groups:
  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)
  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 lead a discussion at the seminar

  ---

  Person(s) in charge

  Camilla Strandell-Laine

  Mode of delivery

  Distance learning

  Learning material

  Avalable on Moodle.

  Learning methods

  Lectures, self-study.

  Objects, timing and methods of assessment

  Available on Moodle.

  Teaching language

  English

  Timing

  01.08.2020 - 31.12.2020

  Enrollment date range

  02.07.2020 - 31.07.2020

  • 5 credits

  Group(s)

  • SHV20HD-V
  • SHV20HH-Å
  • SHV20HH-V
  • SHV20HD-Å

  Seats

  0 - 20

  Teachers and responsibilities

  Ulla Penttinen

  Responsible unit

  Vaasa

  Degree Programme(s)

  Degree Programme in Social Services and Health Care

  Campus

  Vasa, Wolffskavägen 31

  Share of online studies

  5 credits

  Assessment scale

  H-5

  Exam dates and retake possibilities

  Avalable on Moodle.

  Student's schedule and workload

  5 ECTS credits, 135 hours.
  Lectures 13 h
  Slef-study 122 h

  Assessment criteria

  Available on Moodle.

  Assessment criteria – satisfactory (1-2)

  Available on Moodle.

  Assessment criteria – good (3-4)

  Available on Moodle.

  Assessment criteria – excellent (5)

  Available on Moodle.

•   Degree Thesis NOV18EXA03-3014 01.08.2020-31.07.2021  30 credits  (SHV18H-V, ...) +-
  Competence objectives of the study unit

  The student:
  Can carry out work-life-related development work in the area of ​​social or health care in accordance with scientific requirements and ethical principles
  Can collaborate on a development work together with the representatives of the working life
  Develops a resource-enhancing and innovative approach in relation to development of operations
  Can act as an expert in her/his own professional field and actively participate in the results of their development work in a professional context

  Prerequisites

  SHV16FU, Research and development

  Content of the study unit

  Thesis idea
  Thesis work plan
  Master´s thesis presentation
  Maturity test

  Assessment criteria

  Assessment criteria – satisfactory (1-2)

  The introduction is short, bland and does not lead the reader on the subject. The purpose is unclear / not entirely relevant and the question positions do not relate to the purpose / or become incorrect. The motivation for the subject choice is weak. The introduction gives a partially misleading / unclear picture of the subject. The purpose is unclear described and the logical connection of the questions to the purpose is weak. Motivation of the subject choice unclear.
  The theoretical background and the starting point are based on preferably few sources and are very general and / or briefly described. An nonindependent referencing method is used. A certain source criticism can be perceived The theoretical background and the starting point is based on relevant literature but remains very general and / or briefly described. The sources are few and constitute a weak theoretical framework for the work. Source criticism is inadequate
  The method selection description, method discussion and ethical discussion are rudimentary and incomplete. The outcome and method discussion, including a critical examination of the study, is not relevant with regard to the work. The conclusions are undeveloped and trivial. Parts of the method description, the method discussion and / or the ethical discussion are deficient. The result, method discussion / critical review are very superficial. The conclusions are trivial.
  The result discussion is mainly referring, and is incomplete with regard to what is relevant for the purpose of the work. The presentation's logical rigor is weak. The feedback to the purpose is extremely weak in the conclusion, and a summary model / discussion is made The discussion of results is mainly referring to and some aspects that are central to the purpose of the work are treated incompletely or not at all. The presentation is, to some extent, not stringent. The feedback to the purpose is weak in the conclusion.
  The summary of the work is inadequate. There are errors in the list of references and references. The presentation is weak and disjointed, the opposition shows the inability to critically review a text. Partially immature, troubled and indecent working method. The summary of the study / study partially flawed. There are some inaccuracies in the list of references and references. The presentation is relatively unsystematic, the opposition is purely referring. The work process has been characterized by some problems and an nonindependent working method.

  Assessment criteria – good (3-4)

  The introduction gives a sufficiently good picture for the reader to understand the theme and purpose of the study. The purpose and issues are logically linked to each other. The motivation for the subject selection is clearly described. The introduction gives a clear background picture of how the work relates to previous research and thus to the purpose. The purpose and issues are logically linked to each other. The motivation of choice of topic is interesting
  There is a fundamental ability to synthesize and the theory forms a relevant background. The literature is relevant with regard to the theme and the theoretical starting point is appropriate. A good source criticism. The study is based on a good theoretical whole based on extensive and relevant literature, as well as a clear and adequate theoretical starting point. A good source of criticism.
  The method description gives a comprehensive picture of the study's implementation, but without in-depth discussion of different method choices. The study has an extent corresponding to a Master´s thesis and is well implemented. The ethical discussion is concise but presents the relevant ethical issues. The critical review is extensive but not reflective. The conclusions are reasonable and relate to the purpose, but do not show any ability to reflect on this. The method description gives a comprehensive picture of the study's implementation and shows awareness of the advantages and disadvantages of the choice of method. The scope of the study is sufficient with regard to materials to correspond to thesis at master level. The ethical discussion is extensive and exhaustive in relation to relevant ethical issues. The conclusions are comprehensive and well-founded.
  The results report is systematic but preferably referencing. The feedback to the purpose of the conclusion is clear, but brief and a clear reflection is lacking. The results report is correct, systematic and shows the ability for an independent reasoning. The feedback to the purpose of the conclusion is clear and comprehensive and demonstrates strengths and weaknesses in the implementation.
  Good summary of the survey. Layout, source list and references follow standard. Presentation and exposure follow the instructions The work process has been smooth and largely independent. Very good summary of the survey Source list and references follow standard. The presentation is systematic and the writer shows the ability to develop and clarify his theme. The opposition is critical and constructive and shows a good ability to familiarize themselves with the theme of the opposed work. The work process is mature and largely independent

  Assessment criteria – excellent (5)

  The introduction is able to discuss previous research and knowledge on the subject and therefore sets the purpose in a scientifically interesting context. The purpose and the issues are logically linked to each other and it is a clear link to the purpose throughout the work.
  The theoretical background and starting point are well-founded and well-written. A reflected approach to the theme can be seen in the work. The source usage is extensive and relevant, as well as showing a remarkable ability to source criticism.
  The method description gives a comprehensive picture of the study's implementation and shows awareness of the advantages and disadvantages of the choice of method, and shows the ability to consider different options. The ethical discussion is extensive and exhaustive in relation to relevant ethical issues. The conclusions are comprehensive and well-founded; The writer is also able to critically evaluate these and show new perspectives and questions for further research.
  The results report is well-structured, innovative and shows the ability for an independent reasoning. The feedback to the purpose of the conclusion is clear and comprehensive. Strengths and weaknesses in the implementation of the study / study are discussed. The work concludes with an interesting conclusion, well-founded synthesis and description of development opportunities.
  Excellent summary of the survey. The source list and references follow the standard. The presentation is systematic and the writer shows the ability to develop and clarify her/his theme. The opposition is critical and constructive, and also shows a good ability to discuss and critically reflect. The work process is smooth, mature and independent. The work has that little extra that gives light power.

  ---

  Person(s) in charge

  Camilla Strandell-Laine

  Mode of delivery

  Face-to-face

  Teaching language

  Swedish

  Timing

  01.08.2020 - 31.07.2021

  Enrollment date range

  01.08.2020 - 30.09.2020

  • 30 credits

  Group(s)

  • SHV18H-V
  • SHV19H-V

  Teachers and responsibilities

  Ann-Louise Glasberg

  Degree Programme(s)

  Degree Programme in Social Services and Health Care

  Campus

  Vasa, Wolffskavägen 31

  Assessment scale

  H-5

•   Developing patient centered and patient safe clinical radiography SHV20RS02-3001 01.08.2020-31.12.2020  5 credits  (SHV20HD-V, ...) +-
  Competence objectives of the study unit

  The student is:
  -able to assess and develop patient centred by literature review based on researches

  Prerequisites

  No prerequisites

  Content of the study unit

  Patient centred and patient safe clinical radiography according to ethical codes, law, guidelines and best practices.
  Literature review as a method for get research based evidence and as a tool to develop patient centred and patient safety clinical radiography

  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 assignment:
  The student has followed the instructions and her/his 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' assignments. The student has followed the instructions for the assignment

  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 assignment:
  The student has followed the instructions for the written assignment and shows insufficient knowledge about the other students' written assignments
  The student has mastered the substance of her/his work, but the application is limited

  Assessment criteria – excellent (5)

  Criteria for evaluation of the exam:
  The student shows in her/his answer an in-depth knowledge and maturity beyond the traditional
  
  Criteria for evaluation of assignment individually or in groups:
  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)
  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 lead a discussion at the seminar

  ---

  Person(s) in charge

  Camilla Strandell-Laine

  Mode of delivery

  Distance learning

  Learning material

  Available on Moodle.

  Learning methods

  Tutoring, self-study.

  Objects, timing and methods of assessment

  Available on Moodle.

  Teaching language

  English

  Timing

  01.08.2020 - 31.12.2020

  Enrollment date range

  02.07.2020 - 31.07.2020

  • 5 credits

  Group(s)

  • SHV20HD-V
  • SHV20HH-Å
  • SHV20HH-V
  • SHV20HD-Å

  Seats

  0 - 20

  Teachers and responsibilities

  Katarina Vironen

  Responsible unit

  Vaasa

  Degree Programme(s)

  Degree Programme in Social Services and Health Care

  Campus

  Vasa, Wolffskavägen 31

  Share of online studies

  5 credits

  Assessment scale

  H-5

  Exam dates and retake possibilities

  19.10.2020 Pre-task submission (deadline)
  9.12.2020 Final seminar 16.15pm-18.30pm (depending on numbers of presentations)

  Student's schedule and workload

  5 ECTS credits, 135 h.
  Tutoring 15 h (online)
  Self-study 120 h

  Assessment criteria

  Available on Moodle.

  Assessment criteria – satisfactory (1-2)

  Available on Moodle.

  Assessment criteria – good (3-4)

  Available on Moodle.

  Assessment criteria – excellent (5)

  Available on Moodle.

•   Economic governance and follow-up SHV19UL03-3001 22.04.2021-21.05.2021  5 credits  (SHV19H-Å, ...) +-
  Competence objectives of the study unit

  The student:
  Has advanced insights into legislation regarding social and health care
  Understands the social and health care economy as part of the economy and the organization's activities
  Has expanded insights into the competition in public and private social and health care
  Manages issues related to occupational safety, gender equality and equal treatment in working life

  Prerequisites

  SHV19HL02, Social and health economics, law and labor law

  Content of the study unit

  Social and health care legislation
  Social and health care economy
  Competition law
  Occupational safety, gender equality and equal treatment

  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 assignment: The student has followed the instructions and her/his 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' assignments. The student has followed the instructions for the assignment. She/He 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 assignment:
  The student has followed the instructions for the written assignment and shows insufficient knowledge about the other students' written assignments. The student has mastered the substance of her/his work, but the application is limited

  Assessment criteria – excellent (5)

  Criteria for evaluation of the exam:
  The student shows in her/his answer an in-depth knowledge and maturity beyond the traditional
  
  Criteria for evaluation of assignment individually or in groups:
  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)
  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 lead a discussion at the seminar

  ---

  Person(s) in charge

  Camilla Strandell-Laine

  Mode of delivery

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

  Learning material

  According to the lecturer's instructions

  Learning methods

  Lecture, seminar, independent studies

  Teaching language

  Swedish

  Timing

  22.04.2021 - 21.05.2021

  Enrollment date range

  15.11.2020 - 22.04.2021

  • 5 credits

  Group(s)

  • SHV19H-Å
  • SHV19H-V

  Teachers and responsibilities

  Maria Westerlund

  Responsible unit

  Vaasa

  Degree Programme(s)

  Degree Programme in Social Services and Health Care

  Campus

  Vasa, Wolffskavägen 31

  Share of online studies

  4 credits

  Assessment scale

  H-5

  Student's schedule and workload

  5 ECTS = 135 hours of studies
  Lecture (4 h)
  Seminar (4 h)
  Independent studies (127 h)

  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 assignment:
  The student has followed the instructions and her/his 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' assignments. The student has followed the instructions for the assignment. She/He 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 assignment:
  The student has followed the instructions for the written assignment and shows insufficient knowledge about the other students' written assignments. The student has mastered the substance of her/his work, but the application is limited
  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 lead a discussion at the seminar

  Assessment criteria – excellent (5)

  Criteria for evaluation of the exam:
  The student shows in her/his answer an in-depth knowledge and maturity beyond the traditional
  
  Criteria for evaluation of assignment individually or in groups:
  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)
  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 lead a discussion at the seminar

•   Financial and legal leadership SHV20HL02-3001 29.01.2021-12.03.2021  5 credits  (SHV20HD-V, ...) +-
  Competence objectives of the study unit

  The student can:
  Explain and evaluate basic concepts in health economics and health economic governance such as efficiency, productivity and economic thinking from different perspectives
  Assess the activities based on current legislation and documents that govern social and health care
  Critically analyse issues that concern work contracts and working conditions
  Master issues regarding occupational safety, equality and equal treatment in working life

  Prerequisites

  No prerequisites

  Content of the study unit

  Health economics and health economic governance
  Current legislation
  Work contracts and working conditions
  Occupational safety, equality and equal treatment

  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 assignment:
  The student has followed the instructions and her/his 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' assignments. The student has followed the instructions for the assignment. She/He 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 assignment:
  The student has followed the instructions for the written assignment and shows insufficient knowledge about the other students' written assignments. The student has mastered the substance of her/his work, but the application is limited
  
  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 lead a discussion at the seminar

  Assessment criteria – excellent (5)

  Criteria for evaluation of the exam:
  The student shows in her/his answer an in-depth knowledge and maturity beyond the traditional
  
  Criteria for evaluation of assignment individually or in groups:
  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

  Camilla Strandell-Laine

  Mode of delivery

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

  Learning material

  According to the lecturer's instructions

  Learning methods

  Lecture, seminar, independent studies

  Teaching language

  Swedish

  Timing

  29.01.2021 - 12.03.2021

  Enrollment date range

  15.11.2020 - 29.01.2021

  • 5 credits

  Group(s)

  • SHV20HD-V
  • SHV20HH-Å
  • SHV20HH-V
  • SHV20HD-Å

  Teachers and responsibilities

  Maria Westerlund

  Responsible unit

  Vaasa

  Degree Programme(s)

  Degree Programme in Social Services and Health Care

  Campus

  Vasa, Wolffskavägen 31

  Share of online studies

  4 credits

  Assessment scale

  H-5

  Student's schedule and workload

  5 ECTS = 135 hours studies
  Lecture (4 h)
  Seminar (4 h)
  Independent studies (127 h)

  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 assignment:
  The student has followed the instructions and her/his 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' assignments. The student has followed the instructions for the assignment. She/He 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 assignment:
  The student has followed the instructions for the written assignment and shows insufficient knowledge about the other students' written assignments. The student has mastered the substance of her/his work, but the application is limited
  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 lead a discussion at the seminar

  Assessment criteria – excellent (5)

  Criteria for evaluation of the exam:
  The student shows in her/his answer an in-depth knowledge and maturity beyond the traditional
  
  Criteria for evaluation of assignment individually or in groups:
  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)
  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 lead a discussion at the seminar

•   Operational leadership SHV20HL01-3001 23.11.2020-31.01.2021  5 credits  (SHV20HD-V, ...) +-
  Competence objectives of the study unit

  The student:
  Is able to account for an ethical leadership and knows how to analyze, critically evaluate and develop her/his personal leadership
  Has the ability to analyze, apply and combine modern theories of leadership - health promoting, transformative, resource strengthening, positive and shared leadership - within a sustainable transformational leadership
  Is able to recognize a well-functioning and healthy community and has the ability to analyze, apply and plan methods for development of responsible leadership and a collaborative working environment
  Has the ability to relate to and function according to gender and generational awareness in leadership

  Prerequisites

  No prerequisites

  Content of the study unit

  Personal leadership
  Ethically conscious leadership
  Gender and generation conscious leadership
  Health-promoting leadership in both a leadership and employee perspective
  Working communities and social development
  Modern transformative leadership theories

  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 assignment:
  The student has followed the instructions and his/hers 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' assignments. The student has followed the instructions for assignment. She/he 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 explain the literature, reflect and motivate his/her views
  
  Assessment criteria for written assignment:
  The student has followed the instructions for the written assignment and shows insufficient knowledge about the other students' written assignments. The student has mastered the substance of his work, but the application is limited

  Assessment criteria – excellent (5)

  Criteria for evaluation of the exam:
  The student shows in her/his answer an in-depth knowledge and maturity beyond the traditional
  
  Criteria for evaluation of assignment individually or in groups:
  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)
  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 lead a discussion at the seminar

  ---

  Person(s) in charge

  Camilla Strandell-Laine

  Mode of delivery

  Distance learning

  Learning material

  Material on Moodle.

  Learning methods

  Self-study and written assignments/exercises.

  Objects, timing and methods of assessment

  The written assignments/exercises will be graded and based on these the course will be graded between 0-5

  Teaching language

  Swedish

  Timing

  23.11.2020 - 31.01.2021

  Enrollment date range

  02.07.2020 - 30.11.2020

  • 5 credits

  Group(s)

  • SHV20HD-V
  • SHV20HH-Å
  • SHV20HH-V
  • SHV20HD-Å

  Seats

  0 - 70

  Teachers and responsibilities

  Camilla Strandell-Laine

  Additional information

  More information in the Moodle.

  Responsible unit

  Vaasa

  Degree Programme(s)

  Degree Programme in Social Services and Health Care

  Campus

  Åbo, Henriksgatan 7

  Share of online studies

  5 credits

  Assessment scale

  H-5

  Exam dates and retake possibilities

  The course can be taken between 23.11-31.12.2020.

  Student's schedule and workload

  5 ECTS credits, self-study 135 h.

  Assessment criteria

  - Kriterierna för vitsord 1 uppfylls inte
  - Frågorna besvaras vagt och smalt
  - Litteraturen refereras inte
  - Reflektioner framförs inte
  - Den tekniska utformningen brister
  - Studerande har inte lämnat in sina individuella arbeten. (not translated)

  Assessment criteria – satisfactory (1-2)

  - Frågorna besvaras vagt och smalt
  - Litteraturen refereras
  - Reflektioner framförs endast i begränsad utsträckning
  - Den tekniska utformningen är nöjaktig. (not translated)

  Assessment criteria – good (3-4)

  - Frågorna besvaras
  - Litteraturen tillämpas
  - Texten är reflekterande och kritiska synpunkter finns
  - Den tekniska utformningen är god
  - Uppgiften lämnas in i rätt form inom utsatt tid. (not translated)

  Assessment criteria – excellent (5)

  - Frågorna besvaras uttömmande och mångsidigt
  - Litteraturen analyseras och tillämpas
  - Reflektionen är vetenskapligt analytisk
  - Den tekniska utformningen är berömlig
  - Uppgiften lämnas in i rätt form inom utsatt tid. (not translated)

•   Organisational theory and strategic leadership SHV20UL01-3001 08.10.2020-31.01.2021  5 credits  (SHV20HD-V, ...) +-
  Competence objectives of the study unit

  Student:
  Can analyse social and health care organisations and consider social development
  Is well acquainted with the main principles of organisational activities and leadership
  Has the ability to analyse and interpret the organisation from a stakeholder perspective
  Can critically examine the relationship between ethics, values ​​and leadership at different levels in the organisation
  Can apply and analyse current, interdisciplinary research within the leadership area

  Prerequisites

  SHV20HL03 Change management

  Content of the study unit

  Organisational theories and their development related to social development
  Modern organisational theories in today's social and health care
  Strategic management and strategic thinking in the organisation
  Creative organisations
  LEAN
  Organisational culture
  Ethics and values ​​in organisations
  Current interdisciplinary research in the field

  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 assignment:
  The student has followed the instructions and her/his 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' assignments. The student has followed the instructions for the assignment. She/He 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 assignment:
  The student has followed the instructions for the written assignment and shows insufficient knowledge about the other students' written assignments. The student has mastered the substance of her/his work, but the application is limited

  Assessment criteria – excellent (5)

  Criteria for evaluation of the exam:
  The student shows in her/his answer an in-depth knowledge and maturity beyond the traditional
  
  Criteria for evaluation of assignment individually or in groups:
  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)
  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 lead a discussion at the seminar

  ---

  Person(s) in charge

  Camilla Strandell-Laine

  Mode of delivery

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

  Learning material

  Material on Moodle.
  Fundamental books, for example one of these books:
  
  Alvesson m., Sveningsson S. (red) 2013. Organisationer, ledning och processer. Andra upplagan. Kap 2 Strategi - analyser, processer och identiteter, Kap 6 Styrning - beteenden, resultat och normer, Kap 7 Företagskultur och organisationsidentitet - stödjande normsystem eller hjärntvätt?, Kap 12 Motivation I organisationer -personalkoncept och drivkrafter, Kap 14 HRM-arbete. Studentlitteratur.
  
  Ahrenfelt B. 2014. Förändring som tillstånd. Att leda förändrings- och utvecklingsarbete i företag och organisationer. Studentlitteratur
  
  Berlin J., Kastberg G. 2015. Styrning av hälso- och sjukvård. Liber
  
  Heide.M., Johansson. C., Simonsson. C. 2012. Kommunikation i organisationer
  
  Heide.,M.2011. Strategisk kommunikation : Forskning och praktik.
  
  Jacobsen D.I. 2015. Hur moderna organisationer fungerar. Studentlitteratur
  
  Jalava.U., Matilainen.R.2010. Dynaaminen johtaminen- kohti yhteisöllistä ja näkemyksellistä johtamista. PRO-Tammi
  
  Juuti, P. 2013. Jaetun johtajuuden taito. Juva: PS-Kustannus. ISBN: 978-952-451-602-0
  
  Laloux F. 2017. Reinventing organizations. En guide till att skapa kreativa organisationer. Liber
  
  Mintzberg H., Ahlstrand B., Lampel J. 2009. Strategy safari. Your complete guide through the wilds of strategic management. seced.
  
  Olofsson R. 2010. Bteendeanalys i organisationer. handbok i OBM. Studentlitteratur.
  
  Olofsson R., Nilsoon K. 2015. OBM i praktiken. Förändra beteenden och nå resultat i organisationer. Natur och Kultur
  
  Schein. E. 1992. Organizational culture and leadership. Jossey-Bass Publishers, San Francisco.
  
  Sydänmaanlakka P. 2015 Älykäs julkinen johtaminen. Talentum pro
  
  Vartiainen P., Ollila S., Raisio H & Lindell J. 2014. Johtajana kaaoksen reunalla. Kuinka selviytyä pirullisista ongelmista? Gaudeamus
  
  Yukl. G. 2006. Ethical leadership and Diversity: Yukl. G. Leadership in organizations. Sixt edition, pp 417-439. Pearsson Education Inc., New Jersey.
  
  Mckeown M. 2014, Strategiboken. Studentlitteratur
  
  
  Annat material:
  
  Alvesson, M. Vad är ledarskap. http://www.digitalmedia.st/webbtv/news/17.html
  (Nätfilm 60 min. Se särskilt avsnittet om ledarskap)
  
  Shein
  https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6wJaNKIALLw
  Edgar Schein's model of organisational culture | Organizational Behavior av Jakov Fabinger
  https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=E_WpUBynuXc
  Edgar Schein on Helping: How to Offer, Give, and Receive Help
  https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_VPl3sdNmGU&list=RDE_WpUBynuXc&index=30
  
  Mintzberg's Managerial Roles
  https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NgkQYRqxKTs&index=23&list=RDE_WpUBynuXc
  Henry Mintzberg's Managerial Roles
  https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XFShUgphzHU&list=RDE_WpUBynuXc&index=43
  
  
  KOTTER'S 8 STEP ORGANIZATIONAL CHANGE MODEL FC
  Steven Thomsen
  https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LxtF4OXzhyI&index=33&list=RDE_WpUBynuXc

  Learning methods

  Lectures, self-studies and exercises.

  Objects, timing and methods of assessment

  The written assignments will be graded and based on these the course will be graded between 0-5

  Teaching language

  Swedish

  Timing

  08.10.2020 - 31.01.2021

  Enrollment date range

  01.08.2020 - 09.10.2020

  • 5 credits

  Group(s)

  • SHV20HD-V
  • SHV20HH-Å
  • SHV19H-Å
  • SHV19H-V
  • SHV20HH-V
  • SHV20HD-Å

  Teachers and responsibilities

  Camilla Strandell-Laine

  Responsible unit

  Vaasa

  Degree Programme(s)

  Degree Programme in Social Services and Health Care

  Campus

  Vasa, Wolffskavägen 31

  Share of online studies

  4 credits

  Assessment scale

  H-5

  Exam dates and retake possibilities

  Written assignment, deadline in January 2021.

  Student's schedule and workload

  5 ECTS credits, total of 135 hours.
  Lectures 12 h
  Self-study 123 h

  Assessment criteria

  - Kriterierna för vitsord 1 uppfylls inte
  - Frågorna besvaras vagt och smalt
  - Litteraturen refereras inte
  - Reflektioner framförs inte
  - Den tekniska utformningen brister
  - Studerande har inte lämnat in sina individuella arbeten. (not translated)

  Assessment criteria – satisfactory (1-2)

  - Frågorna besvaras vagt och smalt
  - Litteraturen refereras
  - Reflektioner framförs endast i begränsad utsträckning
  - Den tekniska utformningen är nöjaktig. (not translated)

  Assessment criteria – good (3-4)

  - Frågorna besvaras
  - Litteraturen tillämpas
  - Texten är reflekterande och kritiska synpunkter finns
  - Den tekniska utformningen är god
  - Uppgiften lämnas in i rätt form inom utsatt tid. (not translated)

  Assessment criteria – excellent (5)

  - Frågorna besvaras uttömmande och mångsidigt
  - Litteraturen analyseras och tillämpas
  - Reflektionen är vetenskapligt analytisk
  - Den tekniska utformningen är berömlig
  - Uppgiften lämnas in i rätt form inom utsatt tid. (not translated)

•   Quality management and evaluation SHV16UL05-3004 28.01.2021-31.05.2021  5 credits  (SHV19H-Å, ...) +-
  Competence objectives of the study unit

  The student is able to:
  Define structure, service and outcome quality and meaning of quality assurance from the different perspectives
  Identify and apply prevailing quality assessment methods and quality standards within social and health care
  Describe the most central quality management systems within social- and health care
  Integrate quality assurance and quality improvement to her/his professional duties
  Plan and implement evaluation of ones work field/activity/operation

  Prerequisites

  No prerequisites

  Content of the study unit

  Different perspective on on quality management, quality policy, quality system
  Quality standards within social and health care organisation
  Quality assurance, quality improvement and control as well as methods for constant quality improvement
  Central quality management systems in Finland within social and health 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 assignment: The student has followed the instructions and her/his 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' assignments.
  The student has followed the instructions for the assignment. She/He 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 assignment:
  The student has followed the instructions for the written assignment and shows insufficient knowledge about the other students' written assignments
  The student has mastered the substance of her/his work, but the application is limited

  Assessment criteria – excellent (5)

  Criteria for evaluation of the exam:
  The student shows in her/his answer an in-depth knowledge and maturity beyond the traditional
  
  Criteria for evaluation of assignment individually or in groups:
  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)
  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 lead a discussion at the seminar

  ---

  Person(s) in charge

  Camilla Strandell-Laine

  Mode of delivery

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

  Learning material

  References:
  
  Overall: All the assignment can be found on Moodle page instruction will be given in class during the first lecture
  Books in Ebrary:
  
  Bhat, K.S. 2010. Total Quality Management.
  
  Bolman & Teal T.E 2008: Reframing organization, artistry and leadership.
  
  Christensen, E.H. 2013. Certified Quality Process: an analyst handbook.
  
  Guinane, C. & Davis, N. 2011. Improving quality in outpatient services.
  
  Other:
  
  
  https://www.valvira.fi/web/sv/-/en-effektiv-styrning-av-social-och-halsovarden-forutsatter-tydliga-roller-och-nationella-indikatorer
  
  Buus, N. et al. 2013. Developing a Manual for Strengthening Mental Health Nurses' Clinical Supervision. Issues in Mental Health Nursing 34 (5), 344-9.
  
  Campbell, S. M. (2002): Research methods used in developing and applying quality indicators in primary care. Quality and Safety in Health Care 11 (4), 358–364.
  
  Conti, T. 2002. A road map through the fog of quality and organizational assessments. Total Quality Management 13 (8).
  
  Crofts, J. et al. 2014. Adaptation and implementation of local maternity dashboards in a Zimbabwean hospital to drive clinical improvement. Bulletin of the World Health Organization 92 (2), 146-52.
  
  Donabedian, A. 2003. An Intoduction to Quality Assurance in Health Care.
  Grol et al. 2013. Improving patient care. The implementation of change in health care.
  
  Haines, ST. et al. 2010. Protected professional practice evaluation: A continuous quality-improvement process. American Journal of Health-System Pharmacy 67 (22), 1933-1940.
  Hallock, A. B. (2019). A Case for Leadership Development in Nursing Practice. Nephrology Nursing Journal, 46(3), 325–328. Retrieved from http://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=afh&AN=137025803&site=ehost-live
  
  Hughes, R. 2008. Patient safety and quality. An evidence-based handbook for nurses.
  Kelly, P., Vottero, B.A., Christie-McAuliffe, C. 2014. Introduction to Quality and Safety Education for Nurses: Core Competencies.
  
  Lillrank, P. et al. 2001. Continuous improvement: Exploring alternative organizational designs. Total Quality Management 12 (1), 41-55.
  Mannix, J., Wilken, L., Daly, J. (2015). ‘Good ethics and moral standing': a qualitative study of aesthetic leadership in clinical nursing practice. Journal of Clinical Nursing. 24(11/12)pp 1603-1610
  
  Pun, KF. & Hui, I.K. Integrating the safety dimension into quality management systems: a process model. Total Quality Management 13 (3), 373-391.
  
  Selladurai, R. 2002. An organizational profitability, productivity, performance (PPP) model: going beyond TQM and BPR. Total Quality Management 13 (5), 613-619.
  
  Sureshchandar, G. S. 2001. A Conceptual model for total quality management in service organizations. Total Quality Management 12 (3), 343-363.
  
  World Health Organization 2002. A background for national quality policies in health systems. http://www.euro.who.int/__data/assets/pdf_file/0019/142066/E77983.pdf
  
  Wisniewski, M. 2001. Assessing customer satisfaction with local authority services using SERVQUAL. Total Quality Management 12(7), 995-1002.
  
  Zairi, M. 2002. Beyond TQM implementation: the new paradigm of TQM sustainability. Total Quality Management 13 (8).

  Learning methods

  lectures and group discussion

  Objects, timing and methods of assessment

  0-5

  Teaching language

  English

  Timing

  28.01.2021 - 31.05.2021

  Enrollment date range

  15.11.2020 - 28.01.2021

  • 5 credits

  Group(s)

  • SHV19H-Å
  • SHV19H-V

  Teachers and responsibilities

  Rika Levy-Malmberg

  Responsible unit

  Vaasa

  Degree Programme(s)

  Degree Programme in Social Services and Health Care

  Campus

  Vasa, Wolffskavägen 31

  Share of online studies

  1 credits

  Assessment scale

  H-5

  Exam dates and retake possibilities

  3 writen assignments and forum discussion

  Student's schedule and workload

  1 sp= 27 hours

  Assessment criteria

  The student has not followed the instructions and their knowledge of the other students' work is missing. The student shows limited substantive knowledge, cannot be essential

  Assessment criteria – satisfactory (1-2)

  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.

  Assessment criteria – good (3-4)

  The student has followed the instructions for the written work and shows insufficient knowledge about the other students' written work. The student has mastered the substance of his work, but the application is limited.

  Assessment criteria – excellent (5)

  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.

•   Research methods SHV16FU02-3007 01.08.2020-31.12.2020  10 credits  (SHV20HD-V, ...) +-
  Competence objectives of the study unit

  The student:
  Has advanced theoretical and practical knowledge in qualitative and quantitative research and development processes and methods
  Has acquired a scientific and ethical approach in research and development activities
  Can carry out a current work life-related development project

  Prerequisites

  No prerequisites

  Content of the study unit

  Qualitative research methods
  Quantitative research methods
  Seminars

  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 assignment:
  The student has followed the instructions and her/his 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' assignments. The student has followed the instructions for the assignment. She/He 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 assignment:
  The student has followed the instructions for the written assignment and shows insufficient knowledge about the other students' written assignments. The student has mastered the substance of her/his work, but the application is limited

  Assessment criteria – excellent (5)

  Criteria for evaluation of the exam:
  The student shows in her/his answer an in-depth knowledge and maturity beyond the traditional
  
  Criteria for evaluation of assignment individually or in groups:
  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)
  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 lead a discussion at the seminar

  ---

  Person(s) in charge

  Camilla Strandell-Laine

  Mode of delivery

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

  Learning material

  .

  Learning methods

  VAASA: The course is divided into three separate parts; qualitative methods, quantitative methods and seminars. Qualitative methods, 5 cu, take as digital course in autumn 2020, and quantitative methods 3 cu with lectures in spring 2021.
  
  TURKU: The course is divided into two separate parts; qualitative methods and quantitative methods. Qualitative methods, 5 cu, as digital course in autumn 2020, and quantitative methods 5 cu with lectures in spring 2021.
  -------------------------------------------------- -------------------------------------------------- -
  QUALITATIVE METHODS:
  The qualitative part of the course is completely virtual and is available at Moodle.
  The course at Moodle is divided into 5 modules.
  Module 1 introduces the course and students make a diagnostic test.
  Module 2 is about data collection methods
  In modules 2 and 3, students will work in pairs or in groups of 3 people. It is optimal to have 3 people in the group
  Module 3 is about data analysis methods
  When the student starts the course, he / she enters the discussion forum in module two. The first one to enter starts a discussion thread, the following (1-2 students) answer it and thus form a group. The third or fourth who enters starts a new discussion and the following students answer it, etc. The same groups continue to work together in module 3. This means that one of the group members starts a discussion in module 3 and the other group members answer that thread.
  In the group you choose each data collection method (in module 2) and the data analysis method (in module 3) in which you immerse yourself, do a small survey where you use the chosen method and present it to each other according to the instructions on Moodle. In addition, you give feedback to each other regarding the details according to the instructions on Moodle.
  Module 4 is about reliability and ethics and is done as individual literature studies that are examined through the home exam which is submitted via Moodle.
  Module 5, students choose a higher YH degree thesis within their own profiling in Theseus (https://www.theseus.fi/). NOTE the programs are slightly different in different UAS. Students read and assess the thesis according to instructions and documents found on moodle.
  
  QUANTITATIVE METHODS/Turku
  This part of the course will be realized during the spring semester 2021, and information on the quantitative part of the course will be published later.
  
  QUANTITATIVE METHODS/Vaasa:
  lectures, exercises in computer class, as well as a home exam or an individual written assignment related to the student's thesis

  Objects, timing and methods of assessment

  .

  Teaching language

  Swedish

  Timing

  01.08.2020 - 31.12.2020

  Enrollment date range

  02.07.2020 - 30.09.2020

  • 10 credits

  Group(s)

  • SHV20HD-V
  • SHV20HH-Å
  • SHV20HH-V
  • SHV20HD-Å

  Teachers and responsibilities

  Ann-Louise Glasberg, Ralf Lillbacka, Pia Liljeroth, Susanne Jungerstam, Camilla Strandell-Laine, Ulla Penttinen, Maj-Helen Nyback

  Additional information

  .

  Responsible unit

  Vaasa

  Degree Programme(s)

  Degree Programme in Social Services and Health Care

  Campus

  Vasa, Wolffskavägen 31

  Share of online studies

  5 credits

  Assessment scale

  H-5

  Alternative methods of attainment for implementation

  .

  Practical training and working life co-operation

  .

  Exam dates and retake possibilities

  .

  Pedagogic approaches

  .

  Student's schedule and workload

  .

  Content scheduling

  .

  Assessment criteria

  .

  Assessment criteria – satisfactory (1-2)

  .

  Assessment criteria – good (3-4)

  .

  Assessment criteria – excellent (5)

  .

•   The professional paradigm of a Nurse practitioner SHV18AK01-3003 11.09.2020-31.01.2021  5 credits  (SHV20HD-V, ...) +-
  Competence objectives of the study unit

  The student
  Can map and develop a professional paradigm as an advanced clinical nurse
  Have readiness to critically analyse and evaluate advanced communication skills with patients/clients and employees
  Can apply models for the reflection that shows complex overall needs of patients, family and environment in order to be able to practice the ability for critical analysis and evaluation

  Prerequisites

  No prerequisites

  Content of the study unit

  Advanced clinical nursing care
  Critical thinking

  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 assignment:
  The student has followed the instructions and her/his 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' assignments. The student has followed the instructions for the assignment

  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 assignment:
  The student has followed the instructions for the written assignment and shows insufficient knowledge about the other students' written assignments
  The student has mastered the substance of her/his work, but the application is limited

  Assessment criteria – excellent (5)

  Criteria for evaluation of the exam:
  The student shows in her/his answer an in-depth knowledge and maturity beyond the traditional
  
  Criteria for evaluation of assignment individually or in groups:
  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)
  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 lead a discussion at the seminar

  ---

  Person(s) in charge

  Camilla Strandell-Laine

  Mode of delivery

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

  Learning material

  Boman, E., Levy, M. R., & Fagerström, L. (2020). Differences and similarities in scope of practice between registered nurses and nurse specialists in emergency care: an interview study. Scandinavian Journal of Caring Sciences, 34(2), 492–500. https://doi.org/10.1111/scs.12753
  Boman, E., Glasberg, A.-L., Levy-Malmberg, R., & Fagerström, L. (2019). “Thinking outside the box”: advanced geriatric nursing in primary health care in Scandinavia. BMC Nursing, 18(1), N.PAG. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12912-019-0350-2
  Boman, E., Levy, M. R., & Fagerström, L. (2019). Nurses’ understanding of becoming nurse practitioner role in the Norwegian emergency care context: A qualitative study. Nordic Journal of Nursing research. https://doi.org/10.1177/2057158518783166
  Bryant-Lukosius, D., & DiCenso, A. (2004). A framework for the introduction and evaluation of advanced practice nursing roles. Journal of Advanced Nursing (Wiley-Blackwell), 48(5), 530–540. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-2648.2004.03235.x
  Kerr, L., & Macaskill, A. (2020). The journey from nurse to advanced nurse practitioner: applying concepts of role transitioning. British Journal of Nursing, 29(10), 561–565. https://doi.org/10.12968/bjon.2020.29.10.561
  Mackey, H., Noonan, K., Kennedy Sheldon, L., Singer, M., & Turner, T. (2018). Oncology Nurse Practitioner Role: Recommendations from the Oncology Nursing Society’s Nurse Practitioner Summit. Clinical Journal of Oncology Nursing, 22(5), 516–522. https://doi.org/10.1188/18.CJON.516-522

  Learning methods

  Lectures, group discussion

  Objects, timing and methods of assessment

  0-5

  Teaching language

  Swedish

  Timing

  11.09.2020 - 31.01.2021

  Enrollment date range

  02.07.2020 - 30.09.2020

  • 5 credits

  Group(s)

  • SHV20HD-V
  • SHV20HH-Å
  • SHV19H-V
  • SHV20HH-V
  • SHV20HD-Å

  Seats

  10 - 15

  Teachers and responsibilities

  Lisen Kullas-Nyman, Rika Levy-Malmberg

  Responsible unit

  Vaasa

  Degree Programme(s)

  Degree Programme in Social Services and Health Care

  Campus

  Vasa, Wolffskavägen 31

  Share of online studies

  1 credits

  Assessment scale

  H-5

  Exam dates and retake possibilities

  written assignment

  Student's schedule and workload

  1 sp = 27 hours

  Assessment criteria

  Assessment criteria – satisfactory (1-2)

  The student has a superficial knowledge of the subject
  Assessment criteria for written work:
  The student has followed the instructions and her knowledge of the other students' work is
  inadequate. The student shows limited substantive knowledge, it can be essential
  The student shows a lack of knowledge regarding the other students' written work. The
  students have followed the instructions for the written work. but has a lack of knowledge in
  the substance concerns the essential

  Assessment criteria – good (3-4)

  The student is accountable for the literature, can reflect and motivate their positions
  Assessment criteria for written work:
  The student has followed the instructions for the written work and shows partly insufficient knowledge
  regarding the other students' written work
  The student masters the substance of his work but the application is limited

  Assessment criteria – excellent (5)

  The student shows an in-depth knowledge and maturity beyond the traditional
  Criteria for evaluating written work individually or in groups
  Study period

•   Welfare policy and societal impact SHV16UL02-3002 11.09.2020-31.01.2021  5 credits  (SHV20HD-V, ...) +-
  Competence objectives of the study unit

  The student:
  Is well acquainted with the content, characteristics and prospects of welfare policy
  Can analyse the international and national trends of the international community
  Can contribute to further development of the client/patient/user's participation and participation in health and care
  Can influence the development of her/his own business area in contact with the environment and with political decision makers

  Prerequisites

  No prerequisites

  Content of the study unit

  Social and health policy
  Welfare policy
  Community Development

  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 assignment:
  The student has followed the instructions and her/his 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' assignments. The student has followed the instructions for the assignment. She/He 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 assignment:
  The student has followed the instructions for the written assignment and shows insufficient knowledge about the other students' written assignments.
  The student has mastered the substance of her/his work, but the application is limited

  Assessment criteria – excellent (5)

  Criteria for evaluation of the exam:
  The student shows in her/his answer an in-depth knowledge and maturity beyond the traditional
  
  Criteria for evaluation of assignment individually or in groups:
  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)
  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 lead a discussion at the seminar

  ---

  Person(s) in charge

  Susanne Jungerstam

  Mode of delivery

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

  Learning material

  Available on Moodle.

  Learning methods

  Lectures, excercises.

  Objects, timing and methods of assessment

  Finns på Moolde. (not translated)

  Teaching language

  Swedish

  Timing

  11.09.2020 - 31.01.2021

  Enrollment date range

  02.07.2020 - 30.09.2020

  • 5 credits

  Group(s)

  • SHV20HD-V
  • SHV20HH-Å
  • SHV19H-Å
  • SHV19H-V
  • SHV20HH-V
  • SHV20HD-Å

  Seats

  0 - 80

  Teachers and responsibilities

  Susanne Jungerstam, Camilla Strandell-Laine

  Responsible unit

  Vaasa

  Degree Programme(s)

  Degree Programme in Social Services and Health Care

  Campus

  Vasa, Wolffskavägen 31

  Share of online studies

  4 credits

  Assessment scale

  H-5

  Exam dates and retake possibilities

  Available on Moodle.

  Student's schedule and workload

  5 ECTS credits, total of 135 hours.
  Lectures 12 h
  Self-study 123 h

  Assessment criteria

  Finns på Moolde. (not translated)

  Assessment criteria – satisfactory (1-2)

  Finns på Moolde. (not translated)

  Assessment criteria – good (3-4)

  Finns på Moolde. (not translated)

  Assessment criteria – excellent (5)

  Finns på Moolde. (not translated)

Academic year 2021 - 2022

There is no implementations attached to this degree programme.