Learning teams in higher education executing a collaborative assignment are not always effective. To remedy this, there is a need to determine and understand the variables that influence team effectiveness. This study aimed at developing a conceptual framework, based on research in various contexts on team effectiveness and specifically team and task awareness. Core aspects of the framework were tested to establish its value for future experiments on influencing team effectiveness. Results confirmed the importance of shared mental models, and to some extent mutual performance monitoring for learning teams to become effective, but also of interpersonal trust as being conditional for building adequate shared mental models. Apart from the importance of team and task awareness for team effectiveness it showed that learning teams in higher education tend to be pragmatic by focusing primarily on task aspects of performance and not team aspects. Further steps have to be taken to validate this conceptual framework on team effectiveness.
DOCUMENT
Teams have the potential to offer greater adaptability, productivity and creativity than any one individual can offer and provide more complex, innovative and comprehensive solutions. This necessitates sharing and developing of knowledge at a team-level, fueling the thinking about and research on team learning. This chapter expands the topic of team learning by synthesizing insights from research on collaborative learning in the learning sciences and on teamwork in the organization sciences. In doing so, it builds on the Integrative Model of Team Learning to present recent developments in empirical work on team learning. Significant phenomena are elaborated: with regard to team learning processes, the role of conflicts and team reflexivity is explained. Next, the role of leadership in teams with regard to team learning is demonstrated. In relation to the emergent states, this chapter focuses on two phenomena that are heavily studied in team research in general, but also show to be significant in describing team learning: psychological safety and team knowledge. Lastly, four research challenges for the field of team learning are identified. The first discusses the consequences of conceptualizing team learning as complex and dynamic for measurement and analysis. The second relates to the fact that current research mainly presents a descriptive or explanatory account of team learning and does not indicate what it implies for interventionist theories. The third concerns the awareness that (the effectiveness of) team learning processes differ depending on the type of task that the team is dealing with. The fourth and last issue zooms in on questions how to prepare the individual team member for team learning.
DOCUMENT
There is a wealth of research on computer-supported cooperative work (CSCW) that is neglected in computer-supported collaborative learning (CSCL) research. CSCW research is concerned with contextual factors, however, that may strongly influence collaborative learning processes as well, such as task characteristics, team formation, team members’ abilities and characteristics, and role assignment within a team. Building on a critical analysis of the degree to which research on CSCW translates to CSCL, this article discusses the mediating variables of teamwork processes and the dynamics of learning-teams. Based on work-team effectiveness models, it presents a framework with key variables mediating learning-team effectiveness in either face-to-face or online settings within the perspective of learning-team development.
DOCUMENT
University teacher teams can work toward educational change through the process of team learning behavior, which involves sharing and discussing practices to create new knowledge. However, teachers do not routinely engage in learning behavior when working in such teams and it is unclear how leadership support can overcome this problem. Therefore, this study examines when team leadership behavior supports teacher teams in engaging in learning behavior. We studied 52 university teacher teams (281 respondents) involved in educational change, resulting in two key findings. First, analyses of multiple leadership types showed that team learning behavior was best supported by a shared transformational leadership style that challenges the status quo and stimulates team members’ intellect. Mutual transformational encouragement supported team learning more than the vertical leadership source or empowering and initiating structure styles of leadership. Second, moderator analyses revealed that task complexity influenced the relationship between vertical empowering team leadership behavior and team learning behavior. Specifically, this finding suggests that formal team leaders who empower teamwork only affected team learning behavior when their teams perceived that their task was not complex. These findings indicate how team learning behavior can be supported in university teacher teams responsible for working toward educational change. Moreover, these findings are unique because they originate from relating multiple team leadership types to team learning behavior, examining the influence of task complexity, and studying this in an educational setting.
DOCUMENT
University teacher teams can work toward educational change through the process of team learning behavior, which involves sharing and discussing practices to create new knowledge. However, teachers do not routinely engage in learning behavior when working in such teams and it is unclear how leadership support can overcome this problem. Therefore, this study examines when team leadership behavior supports teacher teams in engaging in learning behavior. We studied 52 university teacher teams (281 respondents) involved in educational change, resulting in two key findings. First, analyses of multiple leadership types showed that team learning behavior was best supported by a shared transformational leadership style that challenges the status quo and stimulates team members’ intellect. Mutual transformational encouragement supported team learning more than the vertical leadership source or empowering and initiating structure styles of leadership. Second, moderator analyses revealed that task complexity influenced the relationship between vertical empowering team leadership behavior and team learning behavior. Specifically, this finding suggests that formal team leaders who empower teamwork only affected team learning behavior when their teams perceived that their task was not complex. These findings indicate how team learning behavior can be supported in university teacher teams responsible for working toward educational change. Moreover, these findings are unique because they originate from relating multiple team leadership types to team learning behavior, examining the influence of task complexity, and studying this in an educational setting. https://www.scienceguide.nl/2021/06/leren-van-docentteams-vraagt-om-gezamenlijk-leiderschap/
LINK
Presentatie tijdens studiedag Blended Learning van Vereniging Hogescholen, Utrecht.
DOCUMENT
We extend a standard for doing agile scrum teamwork in education that permits individual assessment within teams (IAFOR ECE2020). Since the teacher's bandwidth in education is limited and increasingly under pressure, we focus on course design options that can be used to leverage the bandwidth. One economizing option in courses is to let teams prerecord prototype presentation videos before sprint review takes place. This allocates expensive teacher's time to team interrogation time which enriches interaction and engagement and enables effective sharing between teams to improve communication flow in sparse stakeholder feedback scenarios. We also describe three learning analytic pathways that can be smartly integrated into learning dashboards to monitor student and team progress or into learning recommender systems and chatbots to generate action-directed, just-in-time feedback and advice to students. The first one is for setup that enables control of important team diversity and student inclusion parameters such as demographic, personality and professional traits that are known from the student population in advance and that enables handy attribution of 21st-century skill sets within teams. The second one is the product pathway that builds on a datastream generated from qualitative, quantitative and immersive product features that are known from prototyping. The third one is the process pathway in which information on 21st-century skills is generated that are at play in individual and dynamic team processes. We are convinced that these extensions will further enable effective learning technology that is directed to applying agile scrum in education efficently, both for students as teachers.
DOCUMENT
Background: Non-technical errors, such as insufficient communication or leadership, are a major cause of medical failures during trauma resuscitation. Research on staffing variation among trauma teams on teamwork is still in their infancy. In this study, the extent of variation in trauma team staffing was assessed. Our hypothesis was that there would be a high variation in trauma team staffing. Methods: Trauma team composition of consecutive resuscitations of injured patients were evaluated using videos. All trauma team members that where part of a trauma team during a trauma resuscitation were identified and classified during a one-week period. Other outcomes were number of unique team members, number of new team members following the previous resuscitation and new team members following the previous resuscitation in the same shift (Day, Evening, Night). Results: All thirty-two analyzed resuscitations had a unique trauma team composition and 101 unique members were involved. A mean of 5.71 (SD 2.57) new members in teams of consecutive trauma resuscitations was found, which was two-third of the trauma team. Mean team members present during trauma resuscitation was 8.38 (SD 1.43). Most variation in staffing was among nurses (32 unique members), radiology technicians (22 unique members) and anesthetists (19 unique members). The least variation was among trauma surgeons (3 unique members) and ER physicians (3 unique members). Conclusion: We found an extremely high variation in trauma team staffing during thirty-two consecutive resuscitations at our level one trauma center which is incorporated in an academic teaching hospital. Further research is required to explore and prevent potential negative effects of staffing variation in trauma teams on teamwork, processes and patient related outcomes.
DOCUMENT
De ontwikkelingen en veranderingen in de gezondheidszorg maken het noodzakelijk dat verpleegkundigen door middel van bij- en nascholing hun deskundigheid op peil houden. Deskundigheid is de basis waarop herregistratie in het BIG-register zal gaan plaatsvinden. Per 1 januari 2009 moeten zorgverleners na vijf jaar hun deskundigheid aantonen door te voldoen aan de werkervaringseis en, als ze daar niet aan voldoen, de scholingseis1. Deskundigheidsbevordering en Lifelong Learning - levenslang leren - gaan hand in hand. Lifelong Learning is het principe dat mensen gedurende hun hele leven in staat en gemotiveerd zijn om te leren en dat de omgeving daartoe mogelijkheden biedt2, 3. E-learning wordt geassocieerd met leeractiviteiten die plaatsvinden op een zelfgekozen moment waarbij een met een computernetwerk verbonden computer interactief gebruikt wordt. ‘Any place, any time’ is een wezenlijk aspect van e-learning. E-learning is belangrijk voor het levenslang leren van verpleegkundigen.
DOCUMENT
Background Interprofessional education is promoted as a means of enhancing future collaborative practice in healthcare. We developed a learning activity in which undergraduate medical, nursing and allied healthcare students practice interprofessional collaboration during a student-led interprofessional team meeting. Design and delivery During their clinical rotation at a family physician’s practice, each medical student visits a frail elderly patient and prepares a care plan for the patient. At a student-led interprofessional team meeting, medical, nursing and allied healthcare students jointly review these care plans. Subsequently, participating students reflect on their interprofessional collaboration during the team meeting, both collectively and individually. Every 4 weeks, six interprofessional team meetings take place. Each team comprises 9–10 students from various healthcare professions, and meets once. To date an average of 360 medical and 360 nursing and allied healthcare students have participated in this course annually. Evaluation Students mostly reported positive experiences, including the opportunity to learn with, from and about other healthcare professions in the course of jointly reviewing care plans, and feeling collectively responsible for the care of the patients involved. Additionally, students reported a better understanding of the contextual factors at hand. The variety of patient cases, diversity of participating health professions, and the course material need improvement. Conclusion Students from participating institutions confirmed that attending a student-led interprofessional team meeting had enabled them to learn with, from and about other health professions in an active role. The use of real-life cases and the educational design contributed to the positive outcome of this interprofessional learning activity.
DOCUMENT
