Facilitative Components of Collaborative Learning: A Review of Nine Health Research Networks

Abstract

Objective: Collaborative research networks are increasingly used as an effective mechanism for accelerating knowledge transfer into policy and practice. This paper explored the characteristics and collaborative learning approaches of nine health research networks. Data sources/study setting: Semi-structured interviews with representatives from eight diverse US health services research networks conducted between November 2012 and January 2013 and program evaluation data from a ninth.[20] HEALTHCARE POLICY Vol.12 No.3, 2017 Lisa LeRoy et al. Study design: The qualitative analysis assessed each network' s purpose, duration, funding sources, governance structure, methods used to foster collaboration, and barriers and facilitators to collaborative learning. Data collection: The authors reviewed detailed notes from the interviews to distill salient themes. Principal findings: Face-to-face meetings, intentional facilitation and communication, shared vision, trust among members and willingness to work together were key facilitators of collaborative learning. Competing priorities for members, limited funding and lack of long-term support and geographic dispersion were the main barriers to coordination and collaboration across research network members. Conclusion: The findings illustrate the importance of collaborative learning in research networks and the challenges to evaluating the success of research network functionality. Conducting readiness assessments and developing process and outcome evaluation metrics will advance the design and show the impact of collaborative research networks. RésuméObjectif : Les réseaux de recherche collaborative sont de plus en plus utilisés comme mécan-isme efficace pour accélérer la transposition des connaissances dans la pratique et les politiques. Cet article explore les caractéristiques et les démarches d' apprentissage collaboratif de neuf réseaux de recherche en santé. Sources de données/paramètres de l'étude :Des entrevues semi-dirigées ont été menées, entre novembre 2012 et janvier 2013, auprès des représentants de huit réseaux de recherche sur les services de santé aux États-Unis; et les données d'évaluation du programme d' un neuvième réseau ont été utilisées. Conception de l'étude : L' analyse qualitative a permis d'évaluer, pour chacun des réseaux, la raison-d'être, la durée, les sources de financement, la structure de gouvernance, les méthodes pour favoriser la collaboration ainsi que les obstacles ou éléments facilitant l' apprentissage collaboratif. Collecte de données : Les auteurs ont étudié en détail les notes des entrevues afin d' en extraire les thèmes prédominants. Principaux résultats : Les principaux éléments facilitant l' apprentissage collaboratif sont les rencontres en personne, la facilitation et la communication intentionnelle, une vision partagée, la confiance entre les membres et la volonté de travailler ensemble. Les principaux obstacles de la coordination et de la collaboration entre les membres des réseaux de recherche sont les priorités con...

Content-specific differences in Padlet perception for collaborative learning amongst undergraduate students

“…Such critique is in line with other studies where despite the positive perception of Padlet, students in an English remedial class felt that since the students reflected prior to positing, there was delay in the feedback posted and so the discussion on the Padlet was neither natural nor instantaneous (Chuah, 2015). The caveats (and the pros) of online collaborations within health service research networks have also been discussed (Leroy et al, 2017). Like in a previous study where not all students found Padlet to be supportive of learning (Deni and Zainal, 2015), in this study, a small fraction of students responded either 'neutral' or 'disagree' to Padlet-mediated learning benefits and commented that the presenter was more important than the tool.…”

The Comparison of Trust in Virtual and Face-To-Face Collaborative Learning Teams

“…Presence, development and survival of trust is so vital for group performance that its effect on group outcomes has been extensively examined in the literature (Stacey, 2002;Liu, Magjuka & Lee, 2008;Mitchell & Zigurs, 2009;Van Gennip, Segers & Tillema, 2010;Fransen, Kirschner & Erkens, 2011). Mutual trust, and sense of community (Fransen Weinberger, & Kirschner, 2013;Leroy, Rittner, Johnson, Gerteis, & Miller, 2017) are defined to be as key factors to successful collaboration. In fact, building up mutual trust improves learnerlearner interaction (De Meo, Messina, Rosaci, & Sarné, 2017) or vice-versa.…”

“…To recap, trust is one of the most prominent factors for successful virtual collaboration (Leroy et al, 2017), and it is suggested in the literature that the effect of socio-emotional processes such as trust should be examined in a collaborative learning environment (Isohätälä, Järvenoja, & Järvelä, 2017). It is obvious that there is a need for further studies investigating trust development in such environments.…”

Multi‐level analysis of the learning health system: Integrating contributions from research on organizations and implementation

“…Research has examined how organizational learning and improvement are affected by internal organizational factors, such as individual training and learning to improve work while doing it 24 : teamwork, leadership, information technology, knowledge management, and culture. 18,[25][26][27][28][29][30][31][32][33][34] Studies also identify influences on learning within an organization's operating environment, including collaboration among care organizations 35 ; partnerships with external researchers 36 ; funding for research, innovation, and other activities supporting learning 29 ; and payment for high value care and other forms of care improvement. 25,29…”