Key lessons for designing health literacy professional development coursesLucio Naccarella A C and Bernice Murphy B
A Centre for Health Policy, Melbourne School of Population and Global Health, The University of Melbourne, 207 Bouverie Street, Carlton, Vic. 3053, Australia.
B Centre for Culture, Ethnicity and Health. 23 Lennox Street, Richmond, Vic. 3121, Australia. Email: email@example.com
C Corresponding author. Email: firstname.lastname@example.org
Australian Health Review 42(1) 36-38 https://doi.org/10.1071/AH17049
Submitted: 24 February 2017 Accepted: 28 September 2017 Published: 2 November 2017
Journal compilation © AHHA 2018 Open Access CC BY-NC-ND
Health literacy courses for health professionals have emerged in response to health professionals’ perceived lack of understanding of health literacy issues, and their failure to routinely adopt health literacy practices. Since 2013 in Victoria, Australia, the Centre for Culture, Ethnicity and Health has delivered an annual health literacy demonstration training course that it developed. Course development and delivery partners included HealthWest Partnership and cohealth. The courses are designed to develop the health literacy knowledge, skills and organisational capacity of the health and community services sector in the western metropolitan region of Melbourne. This study presents key learnings from evaluation data from three health literacy courses using Wenger’s professional educational learning design framework. The framework has three educational learning architecture components (engagement, imagination and alignment) and four educational learning architecture dimensions (participation, emergent, local/global, identification). Participatory realist evaluation approaches and qualitative methods were used. The evaluations revealed that the health literacy courses are developing leadership in health literacy, building partnerships among course participants, developing health literacy workforce knowledge and skills, developing ways to use and apply health literacy resources and are serving as a catalyst for building organisational infrastructure. Although the courses were not explicitly developed or implemented using Wenger’s educational learning design pedagogic features, the course structure (i.e. facilitation role of course coordinators, providing safe learning environments, encouraging small group work amongst participants, requiring participants to conduct mini-projects and sponsor organisation buy-in) provided opportunities for engagement, imagination and alignment. Wenger’s educational learning design framework can inform the design of future key pedagogic features of health literacy courses.
What is known about the topic? Health professionals are increasingly participating in health literacy professional development courses.
What does this paper add? This paper provides key lessons for designing health literacy professional development courses by reflecting upon Wenger’s professional educational learning design framework.
What are the implications for practitioners? To ensure health professionals are receiving evidence-informed health literacy professional education, we encourage future health literacy courses be designed, implemented and evaluated using existing professional educational learning design frameworks.
Additional keyword: education.
References Barrett SE, Puryear JS, Westpheling K. Health literacy practices in primary care settings: Examples from the field. The Commonwealth Fund. 2008. Available at: http://www.commonwealthfund.org/publications/fund-reports/2008/jan/health-literacy-practices-in-primary-care-settings--examples-from-the-field [verified 17 October 2017].
 Sørensen K, Van den Brouke S, Fullam J, Doyle G, Pelikan J, Slonska Z, Brand H, (HLS-EU) Consortium Health Literacy Project European Health literacy and public health: a systematic review and integration of definitions and models. BMC Public Health 2012; 12 80
| Health literacy and public health: a systematic review and integration of definitions and models.CrossRef |
 Coleman CA, Hudson S, Maine LL. Health literacy practices and educational competencies for health professionals: a consensus study. J Health Commun 2013; 18 82–102.
| Health literacy practices and educational competencies for health professionals: a consensus study.CrossRef |
 Macabasco-O’Connell A, Fry-Bowers EK. Knowledge and perceptions of health literacy among nursing professionals. J Health Commun 2011; 16 295–307.
| Knowledge and perceptions of health literacy among nursing professionals.CrossRef |
 Bloom BS, editor. Taxonomy of educational objectives. Book 1: cognitive domain. New York City: Longman; 1956.
 Anderson LW, Krathwohl DR, Airasian PW, Cruikshank KA, Mayer RE, Pintrich PR, Raths J, Wittrock, MC, editors. A taxonomy for learning, teaching, and assessing: a revision of Bloom’s taxonomy of educational objectives, abridged edition. White Plains, NY: Longman; 2001.
 Wenger E. Communities of practice: learning, meaning, and identity. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press; 1998.
 Cousins JB, Earl LM. The case for participatory evaluation. Educ Eval Policy Anal 1992; 14 397–418.
| The case for participatory evaluation.CrossRef |
 Pawson R, Tilley N. Realistic evaluation. London: Sage; 1997.
 Kirkpatrick DL. Evaluating training programs: evidence vs. proof. Train Dev J 1977; 31 9–12.
 Strauss A, Corbin J. Basics of qualitative research. Techniques and procedures for developing grounded theory. London: Sage; 1998.