Process Analysis: Setting up Google Glass for Classroom Teaching of Clinical Behaviors
Google Glass (Glass) provides first-person perspective via video recording or streaming. Current teaching practices typically provide students feedback on behaviors via observer or 1st-person narrative. Our clinic-based course was an ideal first trial of Glass in our Physical Therapy program, allowing students to see themselves from the patient perspective and reflect on their behaviors, as well as to try new technology that has potential in other classes. The purpose of this report is to provide an overview and analysis of the process, including issues encountered and required resources for setting up Glass as a teaching tool for clinical behaviors.
We obtained an internal grant for purchasing five pairs of Glass from Streye, a wearable technology company and Glass Enterprise partner. Community patient-volunteers in the course agreed to wear Glass for one session. We continued with documented peer feedback and instructor-led debriefing sessions. We added a self-reflection assignment in which students reflected on their performance after watching their video at the end of the term, using the same prompts as the peer feedback, and requested the patient-volunteers complete a survey for additional feedback. Students also completed surveys at the end of the course on: 1) the use of Glass in the patient environment, and 2) their preference for feedback comparing peer, participant, and Glass.
Faculty time outside of class from beginning of project to end of term was estimated at 32 hours including grantsmanship, device mastery, managing videos, and grading. Student (n=37) time outside of class was estimated to be 1 hour including watching video and completing the additional assignments. Majority indicated they were comfortable with Glass recording during the session (97.3%). Few students indicated it affected their communication ability (13.5%), that it was a distraction (21.6%), or that it affected their performance (2.7%). Some reported technical issues (54%), but most found the feedback helpful (97.3%). Glass was effective in achieving the expected student learning for clinical behaviors, based on further analysis of the surveys and reflections. All students thought Glass offered insights that did not exist with other methods of feedback, and had value for education.
Conclusions/Relevance to the conference theme:
Initial results were received favorably by the University and Glass is now incorporated in other courses. Expertise and efforts of the primary instructor were greatly appreciated during the Faculty Teaching Showcase, enhancing the tenure portfolio. Glass offers a perspective for feedback that was not previously considered for classroom teaching of clinical behaviors. Students found it valuable, and faculty noticed themes in reflections that were not present previously. While there is an initial cost in time and finances, Glass is feasible with University support, and of high value in terms of the benefits to student professional development.