Search

Learning management systems have become a key component of teaching and learning in higher education. However, the evidence on the importance of learning management systems to learning is still in its infancy. Therefore, we aimed to investigate the role that the Canvas learning management system played in the Sydney School of Public Health at the University of Sydney, Australia. To do this, we conducted interviews with lecturers (n = 9) and postgraduate coursework students (n = 7) from the School during Semester 2, 2018. We analysed the interviews thematically, identifying one overarching theme: that Canvas is predominantly used and perceived as an information repository by teaching academics and students. This means that lecturers place course materials on the learning management system for students to use and are making limited use of other, more interactive features of the learning management system, despite interaction being seen as essential to effective teaching and learning. This use of Canvas was explained by two factors: (1) face-to-face learning is perceived as superior to online learning and (2) the existence of skill and capacity barriers that hinder improved online teaching and learning practice, even where professional development opportunities exist for lecturers. We argue that this represents suboptimal use of a learning management system, especially when online learning is likely to become more significant in the coming years. To address this issue, we recommend employing and appropriately resourcing educational designers within higher education settings. These specialists can aid lecturers in the creation of genuinely interactive online environments so that the benefits of online teaching and learning can be fully realised.

Background: The factors informing decisions to fund health services for Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander children are unclear. This study's objective aimed to describe decision-makers' perspectives on factors informing decisions to fund health services for Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander children. Methods: We conducted semi-structured interviews with 13 participants experienced in making funding decisions at organisational, state, territory and national levels. Decision-makers were from New South Wales, Northern Territory, Queensland, Victoria and Western Australia. Transcripts were analysed thematically following the principles of grounded theory. Results: We identified five themes, each with subthemes. First, prioritising engagement for authentic partnerships (opportunities to build relationships and mutual understanding, co-design and co-evaluation for implementation). Second, valuing participant experiences to secure receptiveness (cultivating culturally safe environments to facilitate acceptability, empowering for self-determination and sustainability, strengthening connectedness and collaboration for holistic care, restoring confidence and generational trust through long-term commitments). Third, comprehensive approaches to promote health and wellbeing (linking impacts to developmental milestones, maintaining access to health care, broadening conceptualisations of child health). Fourth, threats to optimal service delivery (fractured and outdated technology systems amplify data access difficulties, failure to 'truly listen' fuelling redundant policy, rigid funding models undermining innovation). Fifth, navigating political and ideological hurdles to advance community priorities (negotiating politicians' willingness to support community-driven objectives, pressure to satisfy economic and policy considerations, countering entrenched hesitancy to community-controlled governance). Conclusion: Decision-makers viewed participation, engagement, trust, empowerment and community acceptance as important indicators of service performance. This study highlights factors that influence decisions to fund health services for Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander children. Making decisions to fund health services requires evidence that decision-makers consider relevant. This study identifies and defines factors of health services for Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander children that influence funding decisions from the perspectives of decision-makers. Knowing the factors that decision-makers find useful when making decisions to fund health services can inform the types of measures that health services include in reports used to support applications for funding. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

AbstractIn Australia, Aboriginal young people who are lesbian, gay, bisexual, trans, queer or otherwise sexuality and gender diverse (LGBTQ+) are recognised within several overlapping priority populations in state and federal sexually transmissible infection and HIV strategies. However, limited research has documented their unique sexual health experiences, needs and preferences. In this qualitative study, semi-structured interviews were conducted with 10 LGBTQ+ Aboriginal young people aged 16–24 years in New South Wales. Interviews incorporated questions about service access, positive and negative experiences and self-determined healthcare priorities. We conducted a strengths-based thematic analysis to understand the issues of greatest importance in sexual healthcare for participants. Using the framework of ‘imaginaries’, we explored how participants imagined sexual healthcare that would meet their individual and cultural needs. The dominant imaginary centred on respect, representation and the as-yet-unrealised possibility of sexual healthcare designed by and for people who shared the intersection of Aboriginal and LGBTQ+ experience. We identified individual-level, service-level and societal-level factors influencing this imaginary, including relationships, accessibility and experiences of racism. Analysing the imaginaries constructed by LGBTQ+ Aboriginal young people of empowering, culturally safe sexual healthcare that is ‘for them’ provides insight into potential service design to improve sexual health outcomes for this population. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: The Optimal Care Pathways (OCP) are a framework to promote high-quality and integrated cancer care for all Australians, from prevention through to end-of-life-care. Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander people experience disproportionate cancer incidence and mortality, but little research has addressed whether cancer care for Aboriginal people meets the standards prescribed by the OCPs. This study aims to consider barriers and facilitators to quality cancer care for Aboriginal people. Methods: Semi-structured interviews were conducted with 30 health professionals who deliver care to Aboriginal people with cancer in primary care and hospital settings in New South Wales, Australia. Health professionals included Aboriginal Health Workers, nurses, general practitioners, and community workers. Interviews were conducted in 2019–2020 and explored participant perspectives of barriers and facilitators of optimal cancer care, particularly related to prevention, early detection, diagnosis, and treatment for Aboriginal people. Data were qualitatively analysed using framework analysis. Results: In general, participants perceived Aboriginal patients to have good access to preventive care. In terms of early detection and diagnosis, access to primary care, pathology, radiology, and some specialists (e.g. respiratory physicians) was seen as optimal. However, access to hospital-based gastroenterologists for colonoscopy was perceived to be poor due to long wait times. Access to optimal care for cancer treatment was perceived to be hindered due to the lack of bulk-billing for bowel cancer, breast cancer, and cardiothoracic surgery. Other barriers to care identified by participants included unclear referral pathways, poor communication between patient and the treating team, and a lack of timely provision of discharge summaries. Conclusions: Facilitators of optimal care during treatment and survivorship included: the Integrated Team Care and Close the Gap programs, and presence of key health workers to help patients navigate the health system. The major barriers to quality cancer care for Aboriginal people appeared to be to specialist and procedural access, demonstrating that the 'Inverse Care' law applied in reducing access for populations at higher risk of cancer. This qualitative project involves Yarns with 30 health professionals in Aboriginal community-controlled services and other services, and addresses barriers and facilitators to adherence to Optimal Care Pathways for diagnosis and treatment of cancer for Aboriginal people. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This document is an editorial from the International Journal of Indigenous Health, Volume 19, Issue 1. The guest editors, from the Poche Centre for Indigenous Health at the University of Sydney, present a collection of research papers that focus on research collaborations that enhance and embed Indigenous ways of Knowing, Being, and Doing. The papers highlight the importance of privileging Indigenous voices in research and emphasize the potential for transforming health experiences for Indigenous people globally. The editorial also provides Australian context, discussing the recent national referendum on constitutional recognition of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander people, which resulted in a rejection of recognition. Despite this setback, the editorial emphasizes the ongoing fight for recognition, voice, and truth-telling and the importance of research collaborations that center Indigenous knowledges. [Extracted from the article]

This article assesses the cultural safety of mainstream mental health services in two regions of New South Wales, Australia, based on the experiences and perspectives of Aboriginal young people aged 16-25. Yarning, semi-structured, in-depth interviews were conducted with 13 Aboriginal young people in two regions of New South Wales. Thematic analysis was undertaken by all researchers to identify themes from the data and conceptual connections between them. Identified themes from individual analysis and coding were triangulated during several analysis meetings in which the key themes and findings were finalized. Aboriginal young people identified that Aboriginal community-controlled health services offered culturally safe social and emotional wellbeing service supports, whereas mainstream mental health services did not. Aboriginal young people proposed that institutional reforms such as increasing engagement with cultural competency programs, employing more Aboriginal staff, and implementing culturally meaningful services, would increase cultural safety in mainstream mental health services. Cultural safety within mainstream mental health services should be enhanced to ensure the subjective social and emotional well-being support needs of Aboriginal young people are understood, addressed, and supported. Without Aboriginal young people having confidence that mainstream mental health services and systems are prioritising cultural safety when providing supports, mainstream mental health systems risk failing to reduce mental health and social and emotional well-being disparities unjustly experienced by Aboriginal young people in New South Wales. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]