Collaboration during the Master of Education in Health Professions Education program. Post 3: What were indicators of successful collaboration?

This blog series has three posts pertaining to USask’s Master of Education in Health Professional Education (MHPE) program.

1. In post #1, we share what we learned about collaboration in the program.
2. In post #2, we discuss why we learned about collaboration and share resources used to collaborate.
3. In post #3, our final post, we discuss indicators of success. → YOU ARE HERE 🥳

 What were indicators of successful collaboration within the MHPE program? 

Indicators of success^[1]…where do we even begin!?! We feel this blog series is a great indicator of success! We mentioned in our initial post that as a team we, the authors, had never collaborated as a group on a project during the MHPE program. A few of us had collaborated on an assignment, or provided peer feedback, but that’s it! As indicated in Post #2, Why did we learn about collaboration? What resources did we use?, the bulk of our collaboration came from engagement in discussion boards, group assignments, through peer feedback, and during virtual class meetings. That’s how we got to know each other and gained a sense of how we each work.

Discussion boards were a great way for us to start to get to know one another and begin the journey of collaborating. Asynchronous engagement and sharing of knowledge and experiences were key benefits of the discussion boards. Although we were often ‘assigned’ to respond to two posts, overtime some of us replied beyond that requirement because we saw value in this collaborative engagement opportunity. Many topics had us engaging until suggested deadlines or even after. We had shifted from doing what was ‘assigned’ to us (extrinsic motivation) to wanting further ‘engagement and networking’ (intrinsic motivation). What a great indicator of success!

Discussion board contributions gave us the opportunity to see who we might want to work with on projects. They were often a good place to ‘shop’ for team members. We learned the value of putting ‘your best foot’ forward, because you never knew what opportunities may present themselves based on:

• a discussion board post
• a presentation
• peer feedback
• a private “well done 👏” message

A few of our team members have indicated they usually finished independent projects at the last minute. However, since there was accountability to others in a team, the motivation to complete work efficiently and effectively was enhanced. This ensured that the weight of 50 lemons was not placed on one team member. Putting your best foot forward in any team activity is important because this may be the difference between a single or multiple opportunities. An indicator of successful collaboration that we experienced was having colleagues repeatedly reach out to us individually or us reaching out to colleagues for projects (class-based or beyond). 

Over time we developed a sense of trust among our peers. Initial non-anonymous peer ‘feedback’^[2] tended to be general (kind, gentle, avoided ‘correcting’) or pointing out errors without acknowledging strengths–neither of which were satisfying to receive. We learned from our instructors and peers how to review projects using a positive and constructive lens. We began not only providing suggestions for improvement, but also highlighting strengths to improve final submissions; so a further indicator of success was APPLYING peer feedback. We began ASKING for peer feedback opportunities if it wasn’t part of a course or assignment. The desire for a ‘second-set-of-eyes’ was magnified because we respected each other, regardless of professional role and learner level–the so-called professional ‘hierarchy’ was never relevant. It didn’t matter if a peer was a veterinarian, nurse, physician, dentist, educator, nutritionist, psychologist, dental hygienist, paramedic, etc.–we were all novices in this setting.

Success is seen in the fact that we continue to use collaborative approaches. Our Health Profession Education community of practice^[3], which meets on a bi-monthly basis, was inspired by our interactions and diverse experiences within the program. This group wants the learning to continue! Some of the members of this community of practice are authors or review team members on the Collaboration during the MHPE Program blog post series. Working on IPE Accreditation started as an assignment that led to collaborative writing with individuals outside the program. Another example is the Collaboration from Beginning to End: Building an Escape Room blog post which was a result of networking within the program that led to repeated opportunities to collaborate outside the program. Talk about amplified collaboration and indicator of success 🥳!!

The MHPE program motivated us to consider opportunities we never would have previously considered, such as career advancement, further schooling, and/or embracing leadership roles. Our collegiality and desire to collaborate has extended beyond the program. Peers and instructors have become valuable professional colleagues. Connections have been made for professional advancement, support has been provided in the form of reference letters, and encouragement has led to the Scholarship of Teaching and Learning. We’ve moved beyond networking as learners to collaborating as colleagues.

^[1] We invite you to contribute to our Indicators of Successful Collaboration Padlet.

^[2] Initially it was hard to call it ‘feedback’, because really we were just receiving (providing) general non-offensive, non-helpful comments, i.e.: “Nice job!”, “Looks great!”, “Well done”, etc.

^[3] A community of practice (CoP) is a group of people who share a common concern, a set of problems, or an interest in a topic and who come together to fulfill both individual and group goals (Retrieved from communityofpractice.ca). If you would like to join or find out more about our bi-monthly Community of Practice Virtual Coffee Chats ☕, email Chantal at chantal.lecuyer@usask.ca.