developing a virtual interdisciplinary research community in higher education

Developing a virtual interdisciplinaryresearch community in higher education

BARBARA RICHARDSON1 & NEIL COOPER

2

1School of Occupational Therapy and Physiotherapy & 2School of Social Work and Psychosocial

Studies (Formerly School of Nursing and Midwifery), University of East Anglia, Norwich, UK

Summary As multidisciplinary collaboration in both clinical and research settings is becoming a

key aspect of contemporary health care, strategies to enhance interprofessional interaction in

postgraduate research programmes can offer important experiences to facilitate on-going interprofes-

sional relationships. This paper provides a retrospective appraisal of a strategy which used computer-

mediated communication to develop a virtual community network, known as ‘health_voice’, accessed

through a web page. The rationale for developing the network is presented, and the process of designing

and establishing the web-site through an action research approach is described. The outcome of the

strategy is reviewed with regard to the relationships between the ‘real’ and ‘virtual’ community.

Reflections on the developmental process contextualise the initiative within a concept of a community-

of-practice. It is acknowledged that the use of a virtual arena for communication within a research

community involves a cultural change in the dynamics of higher degree teaching and learning. Future

plans to further embed the virtual environment within a postgraduate research culture are given.

Key words: Interprofessional; computer mediated communication; research culture; research training;

community of practice.

Introduction

In the 1970s and ’80s health care professionals wanting to pursue MPhil or PhD qualifications

in the UK frequently studied in the cognate disciplinary settings of social or biological

sciences. Since the 1990s and the advent of university degree based training, health students

are increasingly able to study at a higher level within their own professional disciplines by

accessing research degree programmes established in health professional schools, or by

undertaking professionally oriented higher degrees. Undertaking higher degrees is consistent

with the career framework set out in government documents such as ‘Making a Difference’

(Department of Health, 1999) and ‘Allied Health Professions-Building Careers’ (Department

of Health, 2000). The development of roles for consultant nurses and expert practitioner posts

encourages health professionals to obtain academic qualifications and to continue to input into

clinical areas at a high level of expertise (Department of Health, 2001). The growth of research

oriented qualifications has many positive benefits. For example, evidence from the USA

indicates that doctoral educated nurses enhance interprofessional partnerships, the utilisation

of research and patient outcomes (Berger et al., 1999; Sterling & McNally, 1999). However,

Correspondence to: B. Richardson, School of Occupational Therapy and Physiotherapy, University of East Anglia,

Norwich NR4 7TL, UK. Tel: 01603 593320; Fax: 01603 59316; E-mail: [email protected]

JOURNAL OF INTERPROFESSIONAL CARE, VOL. 17, NO. 2, 2003

ISSN 1356–1820 print/ISSN 1469-9567 online/03/020173–10 # Taylor & Francis Ltd

DOI: 10.1080/1356182031000081777

J In

terp

rof

Car

e D

ownl

oade

d fr

om in

form

ahea

lthca

re.c

om b

y T

he U

nive

rsity

of

Man

ches

ter

on 1

0/26

/14

For

pers

onal

use

onl

y.

the availability of research degrees offered within specific professional groups can limit the

interaction and cross-fertilisation of scholarly debate that is desirable in health care research.

While professions such as nursing, physiotherapy and occupational therapy are keen to

establish their own fields of evidence based expertise, there is also a strong encouragement for

them to participate in interdisciplinary activity (Department of Health, 1994).

While there are many multidisciplinary programmes at master’s level, the cultures and

methods of operation of departments offering postgraduate research degrees are still

comparatively new and developing. Within the social sciences it has been established that

undertaking doctoral work may be an isolating experience (Delamont & Eggleston, 1983;

Hockey, 1991, 1994) in contrast with the natural sciences field in which research is frequently

team based and collaborative (Pole et al., 1997). Ideally health research aims to cut across

these traditional practices with research programmes which encourage contact between

different professions and organisations, while the research agenda remains exclusive to the

individual student. However, although many institutes of higher education support faculties

which relate to health sciences and professional studies, the component schools are often

conceptually isolated and this separation may be compounded by the geographical isolation of

some schools which have become integrated into higher education relatively recently in a

piece-meal way. Isolation at an individual level can militate against students participating

within a research community and therefore reduce their potential for informal learning and

identification with a peer group of researchers. The peer interaction of students, both within

their own school and across schools, may be further restricted by factors such as registration

occurring at a number of points in the academic year; the stage of development of their project

and the diversity of their individual timetables. Varied working styles and teaching and

learning preferences among supervisors can also make the timing and structure of supervisory

sessions vary considerably. As Boore (1996) suggests, opportunities for funding health

professionals for full-time postgraduate studies are very limited and study is frequently

undertaken part-time within a milieu of employment responsibilities and domestic demands

that can prevail against regular attendance at seminars, and engagement in associated

academic and social activities. In addition, many students may be admitted to research

programmes within the discipline of their first qualification and the opportunities to work

within a team environment as promulgated as the optimal work unit for future health care

(Hall & Weaver, 2001; Wood, 2001) may be severely compromised and left to chance

interactions. A combination of such factors can lead to student isolation, loss of motivation,

few interdisciplinary encounters and the potential withdrawal from the research programme.

The development of postgraduate research education in health has occurred within a period

of rising concern for the quality of education and training in Universities and the measurement

of factors such as completion rates for postgraduate research students. This has led to work by

bodies such as the UK Higher Education Quality Council to establish explicit guidelines for

research degrees, and the monitoring of postgraduate provision is becoming fixed within the

research assessment exercise (RAE) and quality assurance agency (QAA) subject reviews. A

review of postgraduate education (Higher Education Funding Council for England (HEFCE),

1996) highlights the importance of a strong research culture to underpin postgraduate research

training. It calls for a culture, which not only provides the requisite infrastructure of equipment

and libraries but also the availability of those active in research to supervise and a peer

community which is important in fostering a high-quality research culture. High quality

supervisory relationships are vital to postgraduate success (Seagram et al., 1998) and Wright

and Lodwick (1989) recognise the frequency and quality of supervision to be critical to the

progress. Collins (1993) suggests that the development of collegial relationships is vital to

support research activities, and Elton and Pope (1989) identify the need to embed students

into social and intellectual networks. Dorn et al. (1995) identify peer support and a sense of

174 BARBARA RICHARDSON & NEIL COOPER

J In

terp

rof

Car

e D

ownl

oade

d fr

om in

form

ahea

lthca

re.c

om b

y T

he U

nive

rsity

of

Man

ches

ter

on 1

0/26

/14

For

pers

onal

use

onl

y.

belonging as important in strengthening the persistence and sustained motivation of students

to complete doctoral study. Health professionals undertaking research degrees need to be

involved with inter-professional and cross-disciplinary activities that facilitate on-going

collaboration and interaction in order to generate research which is clinically relevant and

to prepare them to accept the diversity of epistemological perspectives prominent in

contemporary health research.

The two authors met in a context of mutual concern for the quality of postgraduate research

student experience and the need to bridge interprofessional boundaries. They agreed to the

development of a strategy that aimed to enhance the interaction within the postgraduate health

research community. Postgraduate research students were registered across three health-

oriented schools of Occupational Therapy and Physiotherapy, Nursing and Midwifery, and

Health Policy and Practice. Several specific challenges were identified:

. how to engage all, and particularly part-time, students in a research culture;

. how to offer students an opportunity for identification with their peers, both within their

school of registration and in other health oriented schools;

. how to encourage cross-school discussion which could explore commonly shared

theoretical, methodological and practical research problems;

. how to provide a forum for discussion and a recognised channel for giving and receiving

communication which could lead to collaborative working;

. how to facilitate high quality supervision, to ensure an equitable access to teaching and

learning for all students, whether part-time or full-time;

. how to foster scholarly interaction and good supervisory practice, to stimulate creative

dialogue between students and supervisors across health generally.

An action research framework placed the authors in the dual role of supervisor and researcher,

and further discussion of ways in which these objectives might be achieved followed.

Increasingly use of cyberspace is providing a new social arena for communication and debate

(Hakken, 1999). Undergraduates and graduates are being exposed to web-based learning

formats in taught programmes. Ellenchild Pinch and Graves (2000) describe the use of web

based discussions in the teaching of bio-ethics, and VandeVusse and Hanson (2000) report

how on-line discussions may take the place of traditional classroom sessions, but there has

been less recognition of the need for postgraduate health research students and their

supervisors to explore, evaluate and integrate on-line activity in order to realise its potential in

the process of undertaking research. A strategy that used computer-mediated communication

suggested an ideal way to collectively address the identified objectives. The overall aim was to

provide a space in which to create a virtual community that would become embedded into and

contribute to the growth of a strong multidisciplinary research culture.

The process of development

Delineating the scope and content of the site

Ideas for the scope and content of the web-based communication system were stimulated by

visits to other institutions currently involved in web-based initiatives, and informal discussion

with students. There was an assumption that faculty would wish to contribute to a novel form

of teaching and learning. From reflection on the information gathered it was agreed to be

important to encourage interaction and engagement in academic debate through a web-based

discussion forum that gave psychological safety for the postgraduate health research students

to communicate freely amongst themselves, and with their supervisors, exclusively. This could

VIRTUAL INTERDISCIPLINARY RESEARCH IN HIGHER EDUCATION 175

J In

terp

rof

Car

e D

ownl

oade

d fr

om in

form

ahea

lthca

re.c

om b

y T

he U

nive

rsity

of

Man

ches

ter

on 1

0/26

/14

For

pers

onal

use

onl

y.

be achieved through construction of an inclusive mailing list that would identify and give

access to the group of students and their supervisors only. It was also important to ensure they

were offered information and assistance on the necessary skills to access what for many would

be an unfamiliar medium of communication. A bulletin board and conference facilities would

together offer asynchronous and synchronous communication channels for a web based forum

and could thus both support communication exchange at times when the peer group schedules

differed and also foster interaction through ‘real time’ discussion when the group were located

at different places geographically, but with a compatible schedule. Finally, it was important to

construct a web page with a user-friendly interface which would provide a location identity for

community members and also attract casual browsers who might be prospective students.

Technical development of the Health_Voice Web-site

Technical exploration started with an investigation of the potential facilities that could be

provided by the central University services. Finding a common language within and between

academics and technicians was problematic. Terms such as chat-line, discussion group,

conference group, news group and distance learning facility (DLF), web board and bulletin

board were used inter-changeably and misleadingly, with each term suggesting different

implications technically and functionally. It was necessary to establish first a commonly

understood basis of need before a University purchase of a web-board system (O’Reilly

Webboard 4.20.100, 1995 – 2000) could be made. This gave facilities for bulletin board

messages, on-line discussion and the construction of an e-mail list of mixed e-address sources.

The software offers asynchronous communication through messages which may be posted at

anytime and stored on a central server and synchronous communication whereby people who

are on-line at the same time can exchange typed messages in real time in a group discussion.

A name was needed to identify the group, to reflect the aims of the project and to announce

what it was. The website was therefore named ‘Health Voice’, this being an acronym of the

graduate health research student Virtual On-line Information and Community Exchange.

The resulting ‘community’ website has open access for a range of internet service providers

(ISPs). It can therefore be used by anyone, who is registered in the research community, for

24 hours each day from any computer with internet access. The home page is the gateway to

an agreed collection of hyper-links to sources that are relevant to current postgraduates and

potential applicants (e.g. the postgraduate prospectus; the accommodation office; the Dean of

Students office; the Sports Park; local maps of the town and links to the component Schools of

Health admission pages). There is an open access notice board, managed by the School Clerk,

which encourages a sharing of information across the Schools and notifies students and others

of forthcoming events and seminars. Instructions regarding how to register for, and utilise, the

discussion group and bulletin board are given along with the password-protected hyper-link

into the web board communication facilities. Each student and their supervisor(s) have a user

name and password. A technician from one of the Schools manages the site.

Engaging the community – the process of establishing the community space

‘Real’ seminars and social activities acted as building blocks to establish a group and to initiate

development of a programme of virtual on-line seminars. These were timed to integrate with

the ‘real’ seminars in order to enable students to identify themselves as a community of

researchers and to gain feedback from them regarding their utilisation of the virtual space

provided by the web-board. The community group was first defined through attendance at a

‘real’ seminar entitled ‘what constitutes a PhD’ presented by an experienced examiner and

supervisor to which all post graduate research students within the three Schools were invited.


J In

terp

rof

Car

e D

ownl

oade

d fr

om in

form

ahea

lthca

re.c

om b

y T

he U

nive

rsity

of

Man

ches

ter

on 1

0/26

/14

For

pers

onal

use

onl

y.

At this meeting the idea of an on-line community was proposed and was followed by a first

virtual on-line seminar to launch the web site. All relevant people (i.e. all those registered for

postgraduate health research degrees and their supervisor(s)) were encouraged to use the site

via e-mails and hard copy fliers circulated on a number of occasions.

The first on-line seminar was scheduled for 6 – 8 pm mid-week, when it was hoped many of

those registered on the site would log on and participate in a discussion to orient them to the

use of the website. A ‘real’ debriefing meeting for this session was linked in the following week

to a ‘real’ seminar offering an up-date on e-journals and databases from the dedicated health

librarian. From the ensuing discussion at this meeting a further programme of virtual seminars

was planned. Topics of most interest to the students were thesis construction, expectations of

PhD supervision and procedures for viva examinations. While these are issues of concern for

the management of all research degrees, a strong similarity in perceived learning needs

between students in the different academic and professional groups was notable. The final pre-

defined seminar programme included systematic literature reviews, statistics, PhD vivas,

teaching and learning preferences and thesis construction. Appropriate facilitators were

recruited to lead the sessions, which were run on an approximately monthly basis, at a variety

of times to try and accommodate the diverse professional and domestic responsibilities of

students.

Evaluation in the developmental process

All on-line session facilitators were asked to provide e-mail feedback on their experience,

which was triangulated with the two authors’ reflections of the focus of the conversation in

each seminar, the participants who logged-on, and the on-line dynamics to identify any

implications for the next session. Feedback generated within the on-line and ‘real’ seminars as

the site operated was also taken into account in an on-going evaluation of the evolution of the

site.

Out of a potential 19 students and six supervisors, each of the virtual and real meetings

attracted between three and eight students and two to three supervisors from across all of the

health schools. The jointly suggested programme of on-line seminar discussions was the most

used element of the web-site. Shared interests in topics which form the mechanics of doing a

PhD provided a basis for multidisciplinary discussion of individual research topics. The

strategy of alternating initial ‘virtual’ seminars with ‘real’ seminars to facilitate face-to-face

meetings which could monitor progress was successful in revealing some early technical

problems for users unaccustomed to accessing communication software through a web-site. In

response, a ‘real’ practical hands-on seminar was held in the computer suite, lead by the

technician, who demonstrated the process of accessing the web-site and logging on. The

strategy also facilitated students to organise their own informal social meetings in the bar, and

a seminar in which they presented work to their peers. The growth of this ‘real’ active student

network reinforced the virtual community. Feedback received in de-briefings in the ‘real’

seminars suggested generally that the development was perceived to provide students with a

much needed group identity.

Both students and facilitators commented that the site helped them to develop an

understanding of ‘netiquette’, seen as an important communication skill for conversing

effectively through new media. The on-line facilitators, drawn from: each of the three health

schools, from an executive committee across the ‘professional schools’ group (which includes

the Law and Business Studies and Social Work Schools) and the University Registry,

appreciated using what they declared to be a new mode of communication. They felt it

important to ‘know your stuff’ because the questions and issues brought up in the discussion

were very varied. They also commented on a need to chose seminar topics that are very specific


J In

terp

rof

Car

e D

ownl

oade

d fr

om in

form

ahea

lthca

re.c

om b

y T

he U

nive

rsity

of

Man

ches

ter

on 1

0/26

/14

For

pers

onal

use

onl

y.

(e.g. vivas). If the focus was too broad (e.g. statistics), it was difficult to sustain a whole group

interest and to maintain a focused dialogue. They further commented upon the need in

discussions to respond quickly and to use short phrases because typing becomes truncated

with the urgency of giving an immediate response. There was often a need to manage several

strings of dialogue simultaneously, because a natural pause in discussion between a group of

several people can be further compromised by a lag in technology leading to a scrambled string

of responses, including new topics introduced for discussion, arriving at one time. This reflects

the sentiments of MacDonald and Caverly (2000) who identified that while synchronous

formats allow everyone online to interact, a disadvantage is that web-board programmes do

not organise the conversation. The flow of a conversation can mean that comments from those

with slower typing speeds lag behind those who are faster. The role of a chairperson was

developed in response to this feedback, and eventually functioned to welcome people to the

group as they entered ‘the room’, to sum up debates for those who entered late, to keep the

focus of the discussion; to encourage everyone to present their views, and to recall earlier

relevant comments which became missed by the flow of debate. One facilitator identified a

further benefit of students participating in these groups, stating that ‘it helps if voices can be

heard’. She particularly commented on the ‘good questions’ and wondered if some people

would feel inhibited to ask the same questions in another arena. Ellenchild Pinch and Graves

(2000) have identified that web based discussions using an asynchronous bulletin board can

facilitate discussion for reticent speakers and distance learners who can make their own

comments anytime, dis-engaged from any one group. The experiences of the synchronous

‘live’ discussions in which pertinent and penetrating comments were made by relatively

inexperienced researchers to experienced academics, suggest that the dynamics of face-to-face

interactions alter in ‘virtual’ conversations to further facilitate discussion for reticent speakers.

Brief interviews with four students were undertaken to examine some specific perspectives

of those who were using the site enthusiastically and those who were indifferent to its presence.

The comments of students who showed a strong interest and enthusiasm in sharing ideas and

learning in the novel environment, indicated a desire to further opportunity for both formal

and informal seminar discussion:

It’s important to form a group identity as a research student rather than working as an

individual, which is what tends to happen (full time second year occupational therapy

student)

I get a lot out of talking with other people, partly its nice to feel that there are other

people going through the same experience, the emotions and that, but you also find

out useful things like books they recommend . . . (full time first year psychology student)

As can be expected, not all students wished to engage in every seminar, and some students

chose not to use the web-site at all. Explanations given by two of them showed that they

remained to be convinced about the usefulness of internet based discussion:

If I have a specific problem I prefer to go to someone direct. It is clear who is

important to me. [Supervisor] is important; his advice is to the point, helpful and

supportive. [names] are important for sounding boards. The computer is a faceless

thing you can’t trust ( part-time second year nurse student)

Research culture to me is not sitting together with cups of tea discussing things, but

the environment to make things possible to get things done, the physical location,

accessibility of support. To me the computer is not accessibility, but one way out. If


J In

terp

rof

Car

e D

ownl

oade

d fr

om in

form

ahea

lthca

re.c

om b

y T

he U

nive

rsity

of

Man

ches

ter

on 1

0/26

/14

For

pers

onal

use

onl

y.

the computer is used within a range of measures that is fine, but I still wouldn’t use it

if I had a choice (part-time second year nurse student)

I was always too busy to find the time to log-on (part-time second year physiotherapy

student)

Such comments highlight different perceptions of ways of working in a student cohort and may

also give some indication of a disparate socialisation into a research culture. Research students

gain knowledge within the context of their everyday academic research activity and the

environments in which they have to use this knowledge. It was clear that the staff and students

across the different health schools shared many methodological, philosophical and practice

interests, and their shared concerns were frequently manifested through the interaction within

the seminars and workshops, but all postgraduates did not attend all of these activities.

One of the original objectives of the on-line forum was to engage part-time students in the

research culture. Some students resisted this. It must be acknowledged that different students

have different learning styles and will have preferences for certain contexts of learning.

However the response of these part-time students could also point to a student experience that

lacked interaction with post-graduate researchers other than their supervisors in formal

settings in which use of computers had not been shown to be of importance to the teaching and

learning process.

Reflections on the ‘real’ and ‘virtual’ communities in a community-of-practice

The virtual community space provided was intended as a ‘place’ into which a community

could grow by extending the potential for unplanned learning through ‘planned’ activity. It

was envisaged that the characteristics of that community and its membership would emerge

through these activities, and could be very different from the groups attending the ‘real’

established seminars. The process of entering a research culture can be seen as an induction

into a community of practice. Lave and Wenger (1990) proposed that there is an

interrelationship between working and learning and observed how learners participate in

‘communities of practice’. Linkages between people who share a body of knowledge are often

informal but offer their members a community in which meanings are shared, knowledge is

transferred and identities are constructed. Knowledge and ‘know-how’ emerge through

processes of interaction and communication as the learner participates within the community.

Within a process of ‘legitimate peripheral participation’ (ibid.) learners or new-comers within a

community of practice adopt appropriate community behaviour, acquire specific values,

establish relationship patterns and discern what sort of knowledge is legitimate and how to use

this knowledge in practical situations. The learner is socialised into the community through

shared experiences within the community and gradually moves from the periphery of this

community to its centre, becoming more actively engaged through ‘situated learning’ (ibid.).

The ‘situatedness’ of social and cultural interactions means that situated learning is usually

unplanned rather than purposeful. People learn through their experience, and thus learning is

embedded in the setting in which the knowing and learning have meaning. From a situative

perspective, Fenwick (2000) proposed that rather than aiming to develop individuals the

tutor’s role is to help them to participate meaningfully in the activities they choose to enter.

Face-to-face seminars and supervisory sessions are a social arena in which the roles of

student and supervisors are enacted, representations become stabilised and power relation-

ships ‘fixed’ at individual and institutional levels. Alternative communication channels through

the use of the internet offer students resources in which the ‘fixity’ of relationships legitimised

in face-to-face settings may be transformed through debate and feedback from a wider group.


J In

terp

rof

Car

e D

ownl

oade

d fr

om in

form

ahea

lthca

re.c

om b

y T

he U

nive

rsity

of

Man

ches

ter

on 1

0/26

/14

For

pers

onal

use

onl

y.

Supervisors enter on-line communications in which they are confronted with norms of

behaviour which are emerging through sustained interaction between students whom they may

not know. On-line, the conventional and visible signs of status are replaced by judgements of

contextual knowledge and semantic presentation.

Exploring other forms of communication involves a cultural change, and evaluation of this

project has highlighted a need to persuade academics to appraise current practice. The

supervisor can play an important part in guiding the student to the variety of ways in which

they can learn and develop. Evaluation of this initiative suggests that the socialisation of part-

time students may be limited by intrinsic and extrinsic factors which can combine to reduce

the likelihood that they will take opportunity to explore all media for accessing information.

Despite good on-line access, supervisors themselves showed limited interest in working in this

media. Feedback pointed to a lack of prioritisation of their time for this sort of learning and

teaching event. In schools with taught postgraduate degree programmes, such as the Clinical

Psychology Doctorate and Doctor of Medicine, there was also a lack of understanding of

which students were to be included in this postgraduate research student innovation and

therefore the extent of their own involvement. On reflection the lack of participation in on-line

sessions by the majority of faculty in all three schools was consequent on this lack of

understanding of the complexity of individual tutor workloads and the variety of students with

whom they work. This limited the opportunity to fulfil aims of promoting supervisory practice

across the schools and to encourage debate which included supervisors and students. The lack

of supervisory presence on the site may also explain the minimal use of the bulletin board as an

asynchronous communication medium to ask factual questions. It is unlikely that this aspect of

the web-site will develop further until supervisors become more engaged and encourage its

use. A visual presence of supervisors in the seminars could also provide models of research

engagement to persuade more reticent students to engage in these activities.

Lave and Wenger (1990) propose that the learner moves from a marginal community

position to a more active core of a community. The virtual space provided through ‘Health

Voice’ has been ‘settled’ predominantly by students rather than supervisors, However,

students as learners have the potential to influence the community of which they are a part and

can drive cultural change through brokering elements of practice from the membership of one

community to another (Wenger, 1998). In this student group there is evidence that students

have communicated ideas from these on-line discussions to their supervisors that have resulted

in a more explicit integration of postgraduate students into the ‘real’ world life of faculty

meetings in their own communities. Students have also exchanged views with other

supervisors from other schools which has helped widen their understanding of the

epistemological debate around the topics of their own research (Pallas, 2001).

As Freeth (2001) suggests, sustained action is needed to change culture and to maintain

interprofessional collaboration. To embed the virtual community space within the

postgraduate research culture across health and other health-oriented schools, evaluation of

the development process suggests a specific need to encourage supervisors to engage in on-line

activities. It is relevant for them to recognise an alternative means of communication for those

students working in small and dispersed cohorts, and for those students who feel inhibited in

or lack face-to-face group communication. It is also relevant for them actively to consider

strategies for blurring boundaries between health and social care practice that can be reflected

in health research. Development plans are therefore to increase opportunities for students to

engage in critical enquiry with their peers and supervisors. It is intended to pursue faculty

interaction online and also to invite students and their supervisors who are undertaking

research oriented around social care to participate and add to the perspectives of health. In

addition to the now regular programme of student-led on-line informal discussions, faculty

from other institutes will be invited to collaborate in on-line discussions that will facilitate skills


J In

terp

rof

Car

e D

ownl

oade

d fr

om in

form

ahea

lthca

re.c

om b

y T

he U

nive

rsity

of

Man

ches

ter

on 1

0/26

/14

For

pers

onal

use

onl

y.

of debate in a structured expert-lead programme of appraisal of specific research issues which

may further encourage supervisors to share experiences of the supervisory process. Use of

external facilitators and the feasibility of establishing international networks will also be

explored and will establish technical feasibility for exploiting purposeful international

collaboration in co-ordination of a virtual international conference. This would fully optimise

the use of computer mediated communication for health.

Conclusion

The project has provided an opportunity to facilitate students from across health Schools

mutually to explore the full use of IT resources and the potential richness of interactive web

networks as a tool to encourage optimal cross-disciplinary communication. It has provided an

alternative medium to face-to-face interaction that offers them a group identity and

development of skills of debate in an increasingly used social arena of academic discussion.

Multidisciplinary teamwork is a central aspect of contemporary health care and collaboration is

necessary within the research environment to ensure research relevance and to generate ideas.

An important part of research student training and experience is the existence of a vibrant

research culture in which there is opportunity for students to actively participate in cross-

disciplinary conversations. The use of cyberspace as an arena for communication and debate

provides research students and their supervisors with an opportunity to explore, evaluate and

integrate on-line activity within postgraduate study. This project offers a route for personal

development for individuals working in small and dispersed cohorts and an alternative means

of communication for those who may feel inhibited in face-to-face group communication.

Cross-Schools discussion has expanded academic debate and selected facilitators have

broadened the perspective. In addition, the initiative has added to external evidence of a

sustained and purposeful strategy for postgraduate research student experience in health that

assures a quality of teaching and learning and the potential for national and international

interaction.

In the long term there is not only a need to examine whether this new social network

generates researchers who are enthusiastic for and accustomed to the creation of new

knowledge through interdisciplinary research, but also to examine the inter-relationship

between the medium of communication, the community of practice and the knowledge and

practice generated from it.

Acknowledgements

This project was supported by a University Teaching and Learning Scholarship awarded by

the University of East Anglia Teaching and Learning Quality Committee in 2000.

References

BERGER, A.M., EILERS, J.G., HEERMANN, J.A., WARREN, J.J., FRANCO, T. & TRIOLO, P.K. (1999). State-of-the-art

patient care: The impact of doctorally prepared clinical nurses. Clinical Nurse Specialist, 13(5), 259 – 266.

BOORE, J.R. (1996). Postgraduate education in nursing: a case study. Journal of Advanced Nursing, 23(3), 620 – 629.

COLLINS, B.A. (1993). A review and integration of knowledge about faculty research productivity. Journal of Professional

Nursing, 9, 159 – 168.

DELMONT, S. & EGGLESTON, J. (1983). Supervision of students for research degrees. Birmingham. British Educational

Research Association.

DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH (1999). Making a difference: strengthening nursing. London: Department of Health.

DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH (2000). Allied health professions – building careers. London: Department of Health.


J In

terp

rof

Car

e D

ownl

oade

d fr

om in

form

ahea

lthca

re.c

om b

y T

he U

nive

rsity

of

Man

ches

ter

on 1

0/26

/14

For

pers

onal

use

onl

y.

DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH (2001). Investment and reform for NHS staff – taking forward the NHS plan. London:

Department of Health.

DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH (1994). Research and development in occupational therapy, physiotherapy and speech and language

therapy: a position statement. London, HMSO.

DORN, S., PAPALEWIS, R. & BROWN, R. (1995). Educators earning their doctorates: doctoral students’ perceptions

regarding cohesiveness and persistence. Education, 116(2), 305 – 314.

ELLENCHILD PINCH, W.J. & GRAVES, J.K. (2000). Using web based discussion as a teaching strategy: bioethics as an

exemplar. Journal of Advanced Nursing, 32(3), 704 – 712.

ELTON, L. & POPE, M. (1989). Research supervision – the value of collegiality. Cambridge Journal of Education, 19(3),

267 – 276.

FENWICK, T.J. (2000). Expanding Conceptions of Experiential Learning: A Review of The Five Contemporary

Perspectives on Cognition. Adult Education Quarterly, 50(4), 243 – 272.

FREETH, D. (2001). Sustaining interprofessional collaboration. Journal of Interprofessional Care, 15(1), 37 – 46.

HALL, P. & WEAVER, L. (2001). Interdisciplinary education and teamwork: a long and winding road. Medical Education,

35, 867 – 875.

HAKKEN, D. (1999). Cyborgs @Cyberspace? - an ethnographer looks to the future. London: Routledge.

HOCKEY, J. (1991). The social science PhD: A literature Review. Studies in Higher Education, 16(3), 319 – 332.

HOCKEY, J. (1994). New territory: problems of adjusting to the first year of a social science PhD. Studies in Higher

Education, 19, 177 – 190.

LAVE, J. & WENGER, E. (1990). Situated learning: legitimate peripheral participation. Cambridge: Cambridge University

Press.

MACDONALD, L. & CAVERLY, D.C. (2000). Techtalk: Synchronous distance developmental education. Journal of

Developmental Education, 23(3), 38 – 39.

O’REILLYWEBBOARD 4.20.100 (1995 – 2000). Duke Engineering/O’Reilly & Associates, Inc. (WebBoard is a trademark

of O’Reilly & Associates, Inc.).

PALLAS, A.M. (2001). Preparing education doctoral students for epistemological diversity. Educational Researcher,

30(5), 6 – 11.

POLE, C., SPROKKEREEF, A. & BURGESS, R. (1997). Supervision of doctoral students in the natural sciences:

expectations and experiences. Assessment and Evaluation in Higher Education, 22(1), 49 – 64.

SEAGRAM, B., GOULD, J. & PYKE, S. (1998). An investigation of gender and other variables on time to completion of

doctoral degrees. Research in Higher Education, 39(3), 319 – 335.

STERLING, Y.M. & MCNALLY, J.A. (1999). Clinical practice of doctorally prepared nurses. Clinical Nurse Specialist,

13(6), 296 – 302.

VANDEVUSSE, L. & HANSON, L. (2000). Evaluation of online course discussion. Faculty facilitation of active student

learning. Computers in Nursing, 18(4), 181 – 188.

WENGER, E. (1998). Communities of practice: Learning, meaning, and identity. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

WOOD, D. (2001). Interprofessional education – still more questions than answers. Medical Education, 35, 816 – 817.

WRIGHT, J. & LODWICK, R. (1989). The process of the PhD: A study of the First Year of Doctoral Study. Research Papers

in Education, 4, 22 – 56.


J In

terp

rof

Car

e D

ownl

oade

d fr

om in

form

ahea

lthca

re.c

om b

y T

he U

nive

rsity

of

Man

ches

ter

on 1

0/26

/14

For

pers

onal

use

onl

y.

developing a virtual interdisciplinary research community in higher education

Documents