Valid instruments to assess interprofessional competence in students during clinical studies are needed, especially considering an increasingly pressured healthcare environment where supervisors have various experience of supervision and assessment. The aim of this study was to explore the applicability of a Swedish version of the Interprofessional Collaborator Assessment Rubric (ICAR) in different clinical education contexts from both student and supervisor perspectives. The study used a qualitative design. Data was collected using focus group discussions with students (n = 35) and individual interviews with supervisors (n = 8). Data was recorded, transcribed verbatim, and analyzed using content analysis. The findings show that the instrument was perceived as a relevant working tool for assessing interprofessional competencies. The importance for learning was highlighted, which included an increased understanding and insight about different professions' roles and responsibilities, created opportunities of self-reflection and stimulated discussion about students' individual assessments. In terms of the interpretation and understanding of included concepts and user instructions, different suggestions for clarification emerged. Views about time for assessment varied between students and supervisors. In this study, the Swedish version of ICAR was considered an adequate assessment tool for assessing students' progression of interprofessional competencies in relation to course specific learning outcomes.
Keywords: Interprofessional education; collaboration; instrument development; students.