Van het enkelvoudig coachen van groepen moeten we eigenlijk af. Want wie bijvoorbeeld alleen maar kijkt naar de communicatieprocessen in een groep, zonder oog voor de context waarin groepsactiviteiten plaatsvinden, mist wezenlijke informatie. In plaats van de enkelvoudige aanpak kiezen we voor de Integrale Procesbegeleiding van Groepen, het IPG-model. Met dit groepsdynamisch model kunt u complexe groepsdynamieken, -fenomenen en –processen in hun onderlinge samenhang doorgronden en begeleiden.
In het nieuwste nummer van de Nieuwe Meso, het vakblad voor bestuurders en schoolleiders in het basis, voortgezet en middelbaar beroepsonderwijs is het Focus-deel dit keer gewijd aan het opleiden van leraren. De gastredactie bestaande uit HvA-lector Marco Snoek, Fontys-lector Quinta Kools en de DNM-redacteuren Pieter Leenheer en Gerritjan van Luin belichten het thema vanuit verschillende invalshoeken: de initiële lerarenopleidingen, ervaringen van startende leraren, en de wijze waarop de initiële lerarenopleiding en professionalisering van ervaren leraren kan samenkomen in professionele leergemeenschappen en in lesson studies. Daarbij gaan de verschillende artikelen in op de rol van schoolleiders en besturen bij het opleiden van nieuwe leraren en het ondersteuning van professionaliseren van ervaren leraren.Het focusdeel bevat bijdragen van verschillende HvA medewerkers: Marco Snoek, Evelien van Geffen, Tom van Eijck en Ed van den Berg.
Background: The Nurses in the Lead (NitL) programme consists of a systematic approach and training to 1) empower community nurses in implementing evidence, targeted at encouraging functional activities of older adults, and 2) train community nurses in enabling team members to change their practice. This article aims to describe the process evaluation of NitL. Methods: A mixed-methods formative process evaluation with a predominantly qualitative approach was conducted. Qualitative data were collected by interviews with community nurses (n = 7), focus groups with team members (n = 31), and reviewing seven implementation plans and 28 patient records. Quantitative data were collected among community nurses and team members (N = 90) using a questionnaire to assess barriers in encouraging functional activities and attendance lists. Data analysis was carried out through descriptive statistics and content analysis. Results: NitL was largely executed according to plan. Points of attention were the use and value of the background theory within the training, completion of implementation plans, and reporting in patient records by community nurses. Inhibiting factors for showing leadership and encouraging functional activities were a lack of time and a high complexity of care; facilitating factors were structure and clear communication within teams. Nurses considered the systematic approach useful and the training educational for their role. Most team members considered NitL practical and were satisfied with the coaching provided by community nurses. To optimise NitL, community nurses recommended providing the training first and extending the training. The team members recommended continuing clinical lessons, which were an implementation strategy from the community nurses. Conclusions: NitL was largely executed as planned, and appears worthy of further application in community care practice. However, adaptations are recommended to make NitL more promising in practice in empowering community nurse leadership in implementing evidence.
