Using a boundary crossing lens to understand basic science educator and clinical educator collaboration in instructional design

Tracy B Fulton; L James Nixon; Amy L Wilson-Delfosse; David M Harris; Khiet D Ngo; Leslie H Fall; Bridget C O'Brien

doi:10.1080/0142159X.2023.2289848

Using a boundary crossing lens to understand basic science educator and clinical educator collaboration in instructional design

Med Teach. 2023 Dec 15:1-7. doi: 10.1080/0142159X.2023.2289848. Online ahead of print.

Authors

Tracy B Fulton¹, L James Nixon², Amy L Wilson-Delfosse³, David M Harris⁴, Khiet D Ngo^{5

6}, Leslie H Fall^{7

8}, Bridget C O'Brien⁹

Affiliations

¹ Department of Biochemistry and Biophysics, University of California, San Francisco, CA, USA.
² Department of Medicine, University of Minnesota Medical School, Minneapolis, MN, USA.
³ Department of Pharmacology, Case Western Reserve University, Cleveland, OH, USA.
⁴ Department of Medical Education, University of Central Florida, Orlando, FL, USA.
⁵ Departments of Medical Education and Pediatrics, Loma Linda University School of Medicine, Loma Linda, CA, USA.
⁶ Departments of Pediatrics and Undergraduate Medical Education, University of California, Riverside, CA, USA.
⁷ Center for Medical Education, Case Western Reserve University, Cleveland, OH, USA.
⁸ Aquifer, Inc, Hanover, NH, USA.
⁹ Department of Medicine, University of California, San Francisco, CA, USA.

PMID: 38100767
DOI: 10.1080/0142159X.2023.2289848

Abstract

Purpose: Collaborations between basic science educators (BE) and clinical educators (CE) in medical education are common and necessary to create integrated learning materials. However, few studies describe experiences of or processes used by educators engaged in interdisciplinary teamwork. We use the lens of boundary crossing to explore processes described by BE and CE that support the co-creation of integrated learning materials, and the impact that this work has on them.

Materials and methods: We conducted qualitative content analysis on program evaluation data from 27 BE and CE who worked on 12 teams as part of a multi-institutional instructional design project.

Results: BE and CE productively engaged in collaboration using boundary crossing mechanisms. These included respecting diverse perspectives and expertise and finding efficient processes for completing shared work that allow BE and CE to build on each other's contributions. BE and CE developed confidence in connecting clinical concepts with causal explanations, and willingness to engage in and support such collaborations at their own institutions.

Conclusions: BE and CE report the use of boundary crossing mechanisms that support collaboration in instructional design. Such practices could be harnessed in future collaborations between BE and CE.

Keywords: Instructional design; basic science educators; boundary crossing; clinical educators; collaboration; integration.