4 results
146 Incorporating a multi-session case study using team assessment results to highlight team science concepts in a team science graduate course
- Part of
- John Kues, Laura Hildreth, Angela Mendell, Jacquline Knapke, Jennifer Molano
-
- Journal:
- Journal of Clinical and Translational Science / Volume 8 / Issue s1 / April 2024
- Published online by Cambridge University Press:
- 03 April 2024, pp. 43-44
-
- Article
-
- You have access Access
- Open access
- Export citation
-
OBJECTIVES/GOALS: To describe the creation, use and outcome of a successful multi-session case study for team science education and training. Creating a case study that spans multiple sessions can aid in emphasizing many team science concepts using one ongoing scenario. METHODS/STUDY POPULATION: We will describe the creation and use of a multi-session case study used in a team science graduate course. This case study incorporates the interpretation and use of assessments that coincide with concepts presented in each session. Participants engage with the case study as a team. The use of this case study allows participants to draw conclusions and make decisions about team interventions using concepts they’ve just learned. The multi-session case study also allows participants to see the outcome of their decisions in the next session. Further, the continuous nature of this case study allows participants to build on their knowledge from session to session and make connections between concepts. RESULTS/ANTICIPATED RESULTS: Incorporating a multi-session case study should help participants better understand team science concepts and practice incorporating the use of those concepts into teams in a more realistic way over time. The case study framework has been used in a team science graduate course for the last two years. The teaching team has incorporated continuous improvement into optimizing the case study over time. We’ll share preliminary results collected over the use of the case study so far along with the improvements made over time. DISCUSSION/SIGNIFICANCE: This education framework is very versatile and can be incorporated into a team science course or series of workshops and provides a real-world situation that allows participants to practice incorporating team science concepts and interventions in a team.
145 Enhancing team science education and training through discussions, examples and vignettes tailored to Clinical Research Professionals (CRPs)
- Part of
- Angela Mendell, Elizabeth Kopras, Laura Hildreth, Jacquline Knapke, John Kues, Jennifer Molano
-
- Journal:
- Journal of Clinical and Translational Science / Volume 8 / Issue s1 / April 2024
- Published online by Cambridge University Press:
- 03 April 2024, p. 43
-
- Article
-
- You have access Access
- Open access
- Export citation
-
OBJECTIVES/GOALS: To describe team science training that can be tailored to specific audiences, in this case, Clinical Research Professionals (CRP) using discipline-specific vignettes, and to highlight the benefits of audience-specific training in team science. METHODS/STUDY POPULATION: Translational science teams are comprised of members from various disciplines. All members can benefit from team science training. Our education team has incorporated discipline-specific training into educational offerings. This project focuses on education tailored to CRPs and their role in clinical research. Historically, team science training has been focused on faculty and trainees. The exclusion of CRPs can limit the impact of this training. We’ve created workshops specifically geared toward CRPs. This presentation demonstrates how we tailor team science training to CRPs by using relevant examples and real-world vignettes to highlight concepts. RESULTS/ANTICIPATED RESULTS: The team science workshops conducted specifically for CRPs have been well received. CRPs have been eager to engage with team science-related material. The number of team science workshops requested by CRP groups is continuing to increase. We will share both quantitative and qualitative evaluation results from several team science workshops conducted to-date. The inclusion of scenarios that relate to common situations encountered by CRPs has been especially helpful in demonstrating team science concepts they have personally experienced. DISCUSSION/SIGNIFICANCE: Helping CRPs directly apply team science concepts to their work is very valuable for improving high-functioning team behavior. CRPs can use new knowledge and skills to enhance efficiency and reduce stress and burnout. The impact of team science is maximized when all members of the team are trained.
3203 Collaboration in Reappointment, Promotion, and Tenure Guidelines
- Jacqueline Knapke, John R. Kues, Stephanie M. Schuckman, Rebecca C. Lee
-
- Journal:
- Journal of Clinical and Translational Science / Volume 3 / Issue s1 / March 2019
- Published online by Cambridge University Press:
- 26 March 2019, pp. 130-131
-
- Article
-
- You have access Access
- Open access
- Export citation
-
OBJECTIVES/SPECIFIC AIMS: As the issues facing our global society become more complex, university faculty are called upon to address these contemporary problems using interdisciplinary approaches. But do reappointment, promotion, and tenure (RPT) guidelines reflect and reward this fundamental change in the nature of higher education and scholarly inquiry? After collecting all of the RPT guidelines across the university, our research team at the University of Cincinnati (UC) conducted a content analysis of these documents to determine how collaborative work is defined, interpreted, and supported. In addition, we also sought to identify differences in how collaborative work is valued across disciplines and how that value has changed over time. METHODS/STUDY POPULATION: An initial database was assembled that included two distinct data samples: historical and current. Both included RPT criteria for over 100 disciplinary units at the university. Working with the initial comprehensive database, the team narrowed content by selecting all language related to collaborative work using several relevant keywords or keyword fragments (team, collaborat[*], disciplin[*], and interprofessional). This process resulted in a subset of data reflecting the area of interest that could then be coded. Three investigators independently coded common portions of the data for categories. The investigators met regularly to compare the results of their coding, and discrepancies between the investigators’ coding schemes were resolved through discussion. The final, common coding scheme will used to code the remainder of the data by each independent investigator. The team meets weekly to discuss significant passages and assign codes, and then reach consensus related to important themes that are identified. Specifically, we will examine the frequency with which collaborative activities are included, the value and emphasis given to them, and the differences across units. Having a historical sample and a current sample also allows us to analyze trends over time and further compare disciplinary differences. RESULTS/ANTICIPATED RESULTS: UC is a diverse institution that includes world-renowned creative schools (the College Conservatory of Music and the College of Design, Architecture, Art, and Planning), as well as traditional colleges of medicine, nursing, pharmacy, allied health, engineering, business, arts and sciences, etc. UC also includes two branch campuses that specialize in associate’s degree level education. Given the diversity in educational and research missions across these areas, we anticipate discovering several themes within the RPT guidelines, primarily centered around the traditional foundations of faculty work such as service, research, and teaching. We anticipate strong differences by college and disciplinary focus, with emphasis on collaborative work and engagement increasing as RPT guidelines become more current. DISCUSSION/SIGNIFICANCE OF IMPACT: Our experience is that faculty members want to engage in collaborative work when possible and appropriate, but their perception is that independent contributions to their field are more highly valued than interdisciplinary work. As universities rush to endorse and promote interdisciplinary, team-oriented research and teaching, this study will afford a better understanding of the types of activities valued at one large and diverse urban institution, grounded in the actual language of RPT criteria.
2474 Promoting collaboration among researchers: A team science training curriculum
- Jacqueline Knapke, Amy Short, Tamilyn Bakas, Jacinda Dariotis, Elizabeth Heubi, Saundra Regan, Barbara Speer, John Kues
-
- Journal:
- Journal of Clinical and Translational Science / Volume 2 / Issue S1 / June 2018
- Published online by Cambridge University Press:
- 21 November 2018, p. 59
-
- Article
-
- You have access Access
- Open access
- Export citation
-
OBJECTIVES/SPECIFIC AIMS: As multidisciplinary, interdisciplinary, and transdisciplinary research has become imperative to solving the complex problems of contemporary healthcare, teaching researchers how to create and maintain high-functioning and innovative teams has also become paramount. In Fall 2016, the Center for Improvement Science (CIS) core, in collaboration with the Translational Workforce Development (TWD) core, at the Cincinnati Center for Clinical & Translational Science & Training (CCTST) began offering training in Team Science in an effort to better prepare researchers for collaborative work. Since then, the CIS has expanded Team Science education into a multifaceted and adaptable curriculum that includes workshops, team consultations, Grand Rounds, grant writing assistance, grant review, train-the-trainer, and a graduate-level course. METHODS/STUDY POPULATION: Over almost 2 years, we have offered 9 unique workshops attended by individuals from the University of Cincinnati, UCHealth, and Cincinnati Children’s Hospital Medical Center. Recruitment was primarily accomplished via email invitations. Topics ranged from introductory team science issues such as Creating Teams, Team Effectiveness, and Team Leadership to more advanced team science areas such as Team Dysfunctions and Conflict Management. In addition, we have consulted with researchers on Team Science components of grant applications and served as grant reviewers for Team Science elements in a competitive, internal research funding program. We have developed tools and teaching strategies for faculty members tasked with teaching students about collaboration (train-the-trainer). And finally, we offered a graduate level course on Collaboration and Team Science. RESULTS/ANTICIPATED RESULTS: Over 250 participants attended our workshops and Grand Rounds, many at the faculty level, but we also had research staff and graduate students register. Content was very well-received, with workshop evaluations typically scoring in the high 4.5 and above range (on a 5-point scale, with 5 being the highest rating). The CIS team received (and accepted) at least 2 follow-up invitations from workshop participants to provide training to an additional team or group. We are tracking data on long-term effects of team science training and consultation, both in research productivity and team satisfaction/longevity. DISCUSSION/SIGNIFICANCE OF IMPACT: The goals of Team Science training at the Cincinnati CCTST are 2-fold: to provide practical knowledge, skills, and tools to enhance transdisciplinary collaboration and to promote systemic changes at UC, CCHMC, and UCHealth that support team science. After almost 2 years of training, team science is gaining traction among key leaders at our local institutions and a broader audience of researchers who see how collaborative practice can enhance their professions.