MedED-AI Epoch #113 Reflection on Co-Creation in Education: Are We Ready for It? Can we Instill AI in Co-Creation?

Hosting Dr. Luna Dou’s session, "Co-Creation: Are Our Students Ready for It?", at the University of Buckingham was an enlightening experience that deepened my understanding of the evolving role students can play in shaping their education. The session shed light on various methods and strategies to enhance student engagement and ultimately improve learning outcomes. As an advocate of innovation in medical education, I found the insights particularly valuable.

Ladder of Student Participation in Curriculum Design

One of the key visuals presented was the Ladder of Student Participation in curriculum design, based on the work of Bovill and Bulley (2011). This ladder provides a spectrum, ranging from students having no control over the curriculum to taking complete ownership. The steps can be broadly categorized as follows:

1. Dictated Curriculum – At this level, students are passive recipients of a pre-determined curriculum with no say in the content or structure.

2. Participation Claimed but Limited Influence – Students may be invited to participate, but their input is minimal and often does not impact decision-making.

3. Prescribed Choices – Students can choose between options that have already been outlined by the faculty, offering them limited but structured participation.

4. Students Control Aspects of Prescribed Areas – At this point, students start to take ownership of certain parts of the curriculum under the guidance of tutors, influencing some areas of their learning.

5. Students Control Some Areas – Students have autonomy over certain aspects of the curriculum, exercising more significant influence and contributing meaningfully.

6. Partnership + Negotiated Curriculum – Students and faculty collaborate to design the curriculum, sharing decision-making power.

7. Students in Control – The highest level, where students have full control over the curriculum, demonstrating a shift toward a more student-centered education model.

This ladder challenges educators to reflect on where they stand in terms of student involvement and to consider the potential benefits of moving towards greater student participation. In medical education, for instance, involving students in the co-creation of assessments (like clinical scenarios for OSCEs or SBA questions) could empower them to take charge of their learning and foster deeper understanding.

Models of Student Participation in Co-Creating Curricula

The session also introduced three distinct models for engaging students in co-creating curricula:

Model A: A selected group of students works on co-creation activities.

Model B: The entire cohort participates in the co-creation process.

Model C: A core group of students engages in consultation with the larger cohort to incorporate feedback into the co-creation process.

For educators, choosing the right model depends on the context and objectives. In medical education, Model A might work well in smaller focus groups for curriculum reform, whereas Model C could be useful for larger initiatives requiring cohort-wide feedback, such as revising clinical rotations or practical assessments.

10 Steps for Planning and Implementing Co-Creation Projects

The second image provided a clear roadmap for implementing co-creation projects in educational settings. The step-by-step framework offers practical guidance, ensuring that the process is both structured and collaborative:

1. Have you considered?

What is co-creation, and why is it necessary for your institution and students? This first step prompts educators to reflect on the rationale behind adopting a co-creation approach. For medical education, this could mean asking whether current methods of curriculum development truly address the evolving needs of students, especially in areas like clinical training or digital health competencies.

2. What?

What are the objectives of co-creation, and what is the focus of the activity? Clear goals must be set to ensure that co-creation aligns with broader educational aims. In medical education, this might involve improving clinical reasoning skills, developing better assessment tools, or integrating new technological advances like AI and telemedicine into the curriculum.

3. How?

How do you engage students in the co-creation process? This step emphasizes the need for strategies to involve students in a way that is both meaningful and feasible. In my own context, we could encourage medical students to co-create assessment tools or simulation-based learning experiences, ensuring that their input shapes the design of future training modules.

4. How do you evaluate?

How do you measure the impact of co-creation? Establishing clear metrics to evaluate success is crucial. In medical education, this could involve tracking improvements in students’ clinical skills or knowledge retention after participating in co-created learning activities.

5. What is the role?

Who is involved in the co-creation project, and what roles do they play? This stage is about assigning roles and responsibilities. For example, in medical education, faculty members might facilitate workshops where students develop clinical scenarios, while students take the lead in designing assessment rubrics for these scenarios.

6. Where?

In which context will the co-creation project take place? It is essential to define the scope of the project. In medical education, co-creation could take place in the context of revising clinical rotation schedules, improving OSCE stations, or designing new e-learning modules.

7. What are the risks?

Co-creation is not without risks. This step encourages educators to consider potential challenges, such as ensuring that the co-created curriculum meets accreditation standards or balancing student input with academic rigor. In medical education, managing these risks is crucial, given the strict regulatory environment and the need for consistent, high-quality training.

8. When?

What is the timeline for implementation? Defining a clear timeline helps keep the project on track. For example, we might implement a co-created assessment framework at the start of the academic year and evaluate its effectiveness through mid-term exams or OSCEs.

9. What are the incentives?

How do you reward and recognize students' contributions? Acknowledging student contributions is vital to sustain engagement. In medical education, this might involve awarding academic credit for participation in co-creation projects or offering recognition at graduation ceremonies.

10. How do you recognize?

This final step is about ensuring that co-creation is celebrated and that both faculty and students recognize its value. Building a culture of co-creation helps embed the practice into the institution’s long-term vision. For medical students, being part of a co-created curriculum could prepare them for the collaborative nature of the healthcare industry, where teamwork and input from various stakeholders are crucial.

Reflecting on the information presented in these images, it is clear that co-creation is a powerful tool for engaging students and enhancing educational outcomes. In the medical education context, involving students in curriculum design could bridge the gap between theoretical knowledge and practical application. It empowers them to take ownership of their learning while ensuring that the curriculum remains responsive to their needs and the demands of modern healthcare.

#CoCreationInEducation #MedicalEducation #CurriculumDesign #StudentEngagement #InnovationInTeaching #HigherEdLeadership #CoCreationProcess