pandemic. They appreciated working together on the set tasks, the lack of travel saving costs, being more equitable and offering an ecofriendly option. They felt that the workload was balanced and enjoyable. Students indicated that they gained new knowledge from one another regarding different techniques such as breech delivering and COVID-19 treatments. The evaluation of this pilot showed that they all achieved learning goals for global health. Challenges included managing different time zones; varied connectivity, limitations in patient access that were mainly linked to pragmatics and ethical issues, time demands and that no specific funds were allocated. Students thought more preparation between lecturers and students, such as could be enabled with portal with which they could connect before the module could help ‘break the ice’ for the first session. It was thought better to group students equally from both schools to avoid anyone being left behind. The template could be adapted for other potential bilateral virtual electives in the future, but administration time is needed for sustainability. Existing partnerships and established links would be the optimal starting point for further development of virtual electives. Possible barriers include language if English is not a common language for both academics and students; time zones will be challenging if more than 4 hours difference, connectivity and access to various platforms by both countries, weather disturbances such as cyclones and ensuring a common student level and elective timing. Students also need enough flexibility in their schedule to select the virtual elective. Once international travel is more readily available and permittable, students may still wish to opt for a virtual optional if they are developed and available.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Wever et al. (2022) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched one closely related paper. Consider it for comparative context: