Evaluation, development and quality management in elderly care services

Structure Type: Course
Code: KFG11BGTJ02
Type: Compulsory
Level: Bachelor
Credits: 7.0 points
Responsible Teacher: Hietaniemi, Elina
Teacher Team: Hietaniemi, Elina ; Koivula, Anna-Kaarina
Language of Instruction: Finnish

Course Implementations, Planned Year of Study and Semester

Curriculum  Semester  Credits  Start of Semester  End of Semester
VANTYO-2013   3 autumn   2.0   2015-08-01   2015-12-31  
VANTYO-2013   3 spring   5.0   2016-01-01   2016-07-31  
VANTYO-2014   3 autumn   2.0   2016-08-01   2016-12-31  
VANTYO-2014   3 spring   5.0   2017-01-01   2017-07-31  

Learning Outcomes

Students will learn to evaluate, plan and implement development processes in elderly care and assert themselves as experts. They will learn to interpret and evaluate development targets in elderly care and services and use quality management methods to develop and manage the work with the elderly.

Student's Workload

182 hours

Prerequisites / Recommended Optional Courses

Basic studies, major part of professional studies. Knowledge foundation for gerontological work; services systems and case management; Anticipatory and resources-oriented gerontological work.

Contents

Evaluation and development methods; evaluation of a service process; quality of services and quality management; quality management systems; collaboration in quality development, EFQM Excellence model; Residence Assessment Instrument RAI

Recommended or Required Reading

Kivipelto, M., Heinonen, H., Larivaara, M., Jonsson, P., Kotiranta, T., Vierros, A., Vuorenmaa, M., Maijanen, S., Tulonen-Tapio, J. 2010. Näkökulmia arviointiin. Kaste-ohjelman valtionavustushankkeet. Saatavana: http://www.julkari.fi/bitstream/handle/10024/90811/URN_ISBN_978-952-245-649-6.pdf?sequence=1 .

Seppänen-Järvelä, R. & Vataja, K. (toim.) 2009. Työyhteisö uusille urille. Kehittäminen osaksi arjen työtä. Jyväskylä: PS-kustannus. Availability: http://plari.amkit.fi/vwebv/holdingsInfo?sk=fi_FI&bibId=89416

Lecklin, O. & Laine, R. 2009. Laadunkehittäjän työkalupakki. Helsinki: Talentum. Availability: http://plari.amkit.fi/vwebv/holdingsInfo?sk=fi_FI&bibId=89555

Niiranen, V., Lumijärvi I. & Stenval, J. 2005. Kuntapalvelujen tuloksellisuuden arviointi – tasapainotettu mittaristo kunnallisissa organisaatioissa. Jyväskylä: P-kustannus. Availability: http://plari.amkit.fi/vwebv/holdingsInfo?sk=fi_FI&bibId=68154

Launis K., Schaupp M., Koli A. & Rauas-Huuhtannen S. 2010. Muutospajaohjaajan opas. Helsinki: Tykes, raportteja 71. Availability: http://plari.amkit.fi/vwebv/holdingsInfo?sk=fi_FI&bibId=97297
Available: https://www.tekes.fi/Julkaisut/355452-mpaja_web.pdf

Ohter current research and articles.

Mode of Delivery / Planned Learning Activities and Teaching Methods

Lectures, discussions, exercises, development assignment for the practical training period. Part of the studies on Moodle learning environment, seminar at the end of the practical training period.

Assessment Criteria

Grade 5
Students have extensive, in-depth knowledge of the contents as defined in the learning outcomes. They know how to critically justify and evaluate the quality of elderly care and services. They have evaluation skills and they use quality tools in their work. Students reflect and critically evaluate current and future development challenges and related knowledge, applying it to their professional growth process.

Grade 3
Students have good knowledge of the contents as defined in the learning outcomes. They know how to justify and evaluate the quality of elderly care and services. They have evaluation skills and they use quality tools in their work. Students reflect and evaluate current and future development challenges and related knowledge, applying it to their professional growth process.

Grade 1
Students have basic knowledge of the contents as defined in the learning outcomes. They adequately reflect and evaluate theoretical and research knowledge as elderly care professionals of the future.

Assessment Methods

Active classroom participation. Assessment based on assignments (½) and development assignment during the practical training period (½).

Back