Skip to content

people in a computer network

Interested in collaborating remotely? How about collaborating across disciplines or
institutions?  Not sure which technologies to use to accomplish your research goals?
Come hear speakers from several organizations and disciplines talk about how they
collaborate and share their research using tools like the Open Science Framework - a free project management, file sharing, and resource connecting tool - and IBM’s Data Science Experience.  The event includes a hands-on workshop... so come with a research project in mind and a laptop.

Presenters:

  • Jonathan Entwistle (Invited): Big Data Platform Sales and Engineering at IBM
  • Hiroki Morizono: Principal Investigator and Director, Biomedical Informatics at Children’s National Hospital and Associate Research Professor at GWU
  • Rachel Breslin: Senior Operations Analyst in The Lab @ DC
  • Christy Regenhardt: Editor of the Eleanor Roosevelt Papers project
    ...More presenters forthcomingDate: Monday, January 22, 2018

Time: 9:30 am – 12:00 pm                      
Location: Himmelfarb Library -- Room #202
Light refreshments will be served.          

Follow us at https://blogs.gwu.edu/collaborativeculture/

The Development of a Large-Scale IPE Event: Lessons Learned

Register

DESCRIPTION

Join us on Monday, November 27, 2017, for "The Development of a Large-Scale Interprofessional Education Event: Lessons Learned." This FREE faculty development opportunity is part of The George Washington University (GW) Seminar Series and is hosted by the GW School of Nursing (SON).

The seminar includes refreshments and 1 Nursing CE contact hour.*

Members of the GW Interprofessional Education Planning committee will discuss the development and implementation of the twice-yearly Interprofessional Education (IPE) Day. This event brings together medical, nursing, physical therapy, physician assistant, and speech-language pathology students to work together to learn about patient-centered care, team communication and appreciation for each disciplines' contribution to health care delivery.

Objectives:

  1. Review the competencies for interprofessional collaboration
  2. Describe the development and evaluation of the learning experience based on interprofessional competencies
  3. Discuss the challenges and rewards of collaborating across schools on an IPE event

Presenters:

  • Shelley Brundage PhD, CCC, BCS-F, ASHA-F - Associate Professor, Department of Speech, Language and Hearing Science, CCAS
  • Howard Straker PA-C, MPH - Assistant Professor, Department of Physician Assistant Studies, SMHS
  • Holly Jonely PT, ScD, FAAOMPT, AT-ret - Assistant Professor, Department of Physical Therapy & Health Care Sciences, SMHS
  • Ellen F. Goldman, EdD, MBA - Professor, SMHS and GSEHD
  • David Leitenberg MD, PhD - Associate Professor, Department of Microbiology, Immunology, and Tropical Medicine, SMHS
  • Cameron Hogg DNP, FNP-BC - Assistant Professor, SON
  • Linda Cassar, DNP, RNC-OB - Clinical Assistant Professor, SON
  • Christine Pintz PhD, FNP-BC, FAANP - Associate Professor, SON

Moderators:

  • Joyce Pulcini, PhD, RN, PNP-BC, FAAN - Director of Global and Community Initiatives and Chair, Acute and Chronic Care Community, SON
  • Majeda El-Banna, PhD, RN - Assistant Professor and Director of RN-BSN/MSN Program, SON

WebEx Information:

WebEx link will be sent after registration for those interested in attending remotely.

Contact:

Please email Dr. Christine Pintz at cpintz@gwu.edu with any questions related to this event.

Leadership of the C3@GWU program host International Collaborators

Members of the C3 leadership and faculty welcomed a visit from the University of Amsterdam Institute for Interdisciplinary Studies. The group of faculty and doctoral students (from the PhD in Translational Health Sciences) discussed synergies between the C3 program and activities at the IIS in addition to teaching techniques and program development. The group found many opportunities for further international collaborations and potential exchanges in the future.

Machiel Keestra, past president of the international Association of Interdisciplinary Studies teaches at the University of Amsterdam Institute for Interdisciplinary Studies (http://www.uva.nl/profiel/k/e/m.keestra/m.keestra.html)

Linda de Greef is from the Innovation/Education lab and publishes on interdisciplinary teaching techniques (http://www.uva.nl/en/profile/g/r/l.degreef/l.de-greef.html)

Jessica Rodermans
, is the coordinator of the interdisciplinary electives & honours courses. (http://www.uva.nl/en/profile/r/o/j.rodermans/j.rodermans.html)

Dr. Keetstra and colleagues are very involved in both interdisciplinary education and also extracurricular activities as consultants and conference about interdisciplinary instruction.

Besides the teaching of regular interdisciplinary courses the group is also involved in interdisciplinary bachelor and master’s education. They develop interdisciplinary and transdisciplinary workshops, and ‘pressure cookers’ that bring together students and faculty from various departments from their university, together with businesses or NGOs or governmental institutions. They also offer advice and workshops to other institutions/programs at several Dutch universities on interdisciplinary curriculum development and education. They have initiated the National Interdisciplinary Education conference last year, which will be the first of a continuing series: https://www.nie-conference.nl/?page_id=925 .

Information on their institute is here: http://iis.uva.nl/en .

They are also editing a series Perspectives on Interdisciplinarity at Amsterdam UP: http://en.aup.nl/series/perspectives-on-interdisciplinarity .

Deborah DiazGranados is an Assistant Professor in the School of Medicine and an Affiliate Assistant Professor in Psychology at Virginia Commonwealth University. She received her PhD in Industrial/Organizational Psychology from the University of Central Florida, where while a graduate student was a research fellow at the Institute for Simulation and Training. As an Organizational Scientist she focuses on understanding the complexity of a variety of work contexts. Deborah's research focuses on the science of team science, and understanding teams, leadership, and collaboration between diverse individuals. She currently teaches a team science seminar in the School of Medicine at VCU. Deborah’s research has been published in peer-reviewed journals such as Journal of Applied Psychology, Journal of Management, Small Group Research, Human Resource Management Review, Academic Medicine, and The Joint Commission Journal on Quality and Patient Safety.

Dr. DiazGranados leads the think tank on The-Science-of-Team-Science: Measuring Team Effectiveness

Contact: diazgranados@vcu.edu

Looking for some conference outlets to expand your knowledge and contributions to collaboration and team science...Check out these!

Science of Team Science (SciTS) http://www.scienceofteamscience.org/

INGRoup http://www.ingroup.net/conference.html

AIS https://oakland.edu/ais/conferences/annualconference/

International Transdisciplinarity Conference (td-net) http://www.transdisciplinarity.ch/td-net/Konferenzen/ITD-2017.html

NORDP http://www.nordp.org/conferences

Atlanta Conference on Science and Technology Policy http://www.atlantaconference.org/

VIVO http://vivoconference.org/

Conference of the International Society for Scientometrics and Informetrics (ISSI) http://www.issi-society.org/aboutconf.html

Sunbelt Social Networks Conference of the International Network for Social Network Analysis (INSNA) http://insna.org/sunbelt2017/

AMIA http://www.amiaconference.net/

ACM CSCW https://cscw.acm.org/2017/

HICSS (Collaboration Systems & Technologies; Organizational Systems & Technologies tracks) http://hicss.hawaii.edu/

ProComm2017 http://sites.ieee.org/pcs/procomm2017/

National Communication Association https://www.natcom.org/convention-events/convention-resources/archives-historical-information/past-future-conventions

AOM www.aom.org

SIOP http://www.siop.org/conferences/17con/

American Evaluation Association http://www.evaluationconference.org/

American Public Health Association https://www.apha.org/annualmeeting

NSF EPSCoR http://nsfepscor2017.org/

The Open Science Framework (OSF) is a free, open source tool created and hosted by the Center for Open Science. Designed to meet immediate needs like file sharing, collaboration, and project management, the OSF contains additional features that become useful for the later phases in research such as preparing for publication or grant renewal. Flexible private/public settings allow researchers to share their work selectively and even receive Digital Object Identifiers, for persistent citation, without needing to leave the platform. By integrating with tools that researchers already use (e.g. Google Drive, Box, GitHub, and Zotero), the OSF does not require users to learn a whole new system or to change successful workflows. Through the “registration” feature, the OSF can help decrease some of the compliance burden by creating a timestamped version of the workspace for active research, which then serves as a preservation and access mechanism for projects.

Link to the C3@GWU OSF page: https://osf.io/7vu9u/

 

Angela McNelis, Associate Dean for Scholarship, Innovation, and Clinical Science in the School of Nursing at GW, and member of the C3@GWU team recently conducted an interview with Jane Kirschling, Dean of University of Maryland School of Nursing, on Promoting IPE Initiatives. Jane has experience promoting IPE at multiple universities and offered valuable tips on promoting IPE. Highlights from the interview include:

  • Success of IPE initiatives require institutional support: both administrative and financial.
  • Providing funding for “seed proposals” can generate interdisciplinary collaboration to address IPEC competencies.
  • Training for both faculty and students is required for successful IPE initiatives.

For more information on Jane’s experiences facilitating IPE initiatives and barriers to success, please read the full interview transcript here.

Tell me about how you established the IPE initiative at the University of Kentucky?

The genesis of beginning IPE in earnest was directly the result of a white paper to improve care at the hospital by educating health professionals together. UK owned the health enterprise which paved the way.  There were two full-time employees dedicated and funded to spearhead the initiative, and very importantly, the dean of medicine was behind and supportive of the work.

Based on work coming out of Minnesota, we structured our curricula so that every student in their first year would have a team-based exposure.

The health sciences Deans made commitments to support the work through both dollars and workload, and they signed a commitment to the same.

At Maryland, we don't own our health enterprise. The Deans were charged with being champions and there was a faculty group working on the initiative. I named three code directors from social work medicine and pharmacy, and gave them stipends, and they worked with the faculty group. It is important to note that our focus is primarily on point of care in the clinical environment and secondarily on academic/didactic education.

Can you share some of the initiative occurring at Maryland?

  1. The first iteration of IPE at the University was a half-day with students. We used 13 different case examples using the IPEC competencies and we had 2 disciplines. Now, we have one case that is used all day. We use standardized patients to support the cases and student learning.   For example, our case was on multiple sclerosis that was not well regulated and had social determinants of health tenets. We had 350 students, mostly nursing, with some schools requiring participation and others making it optional. Also importantly, we do a faculty development day to prepare them to facilitate student learning.
  2. The second way we support IPE is through seed proposals. We fund approximately 5 to 7 per year at the $10,000-$15,000 range. The proposals must be an IPE initiative that includes two or more disciplines and addresses the IPEC competencies. The funds must support the initiative and cannot be used for faculty salaries. For example, one recent funded study was to varnish teeth in low income children. Another example is where medicine, social work and nursing worked together on an inpatient psychiatric child unit. Clients on the unit are dealing with substance abuse, acting out, emotional and nutritional issues. The focus was on teaching parents how to play during a family night on the unit.
  3. Another way that we are supporting IPE at the University is that we send teams to IPEC training.  The 2 1/2 day intensive in the fall has a general focus and in the spring is on quality and population health. When these teams return, they are expected to come back with a preliminary idea of a project. Typically there are 3 to 5 people on a team.
  4. We have a faculty development fund to support IPE related activities. The call goes out about every two months and faculty can request up to $2000 for travel to a conference, books, etc.
  5. Students are exposed to IPE at the introductory level through a one credit hour course. Out of the 15 hours, students spend six hours together working toward a common goal.

    Can you talk about some of the barriers you encountered and how you addressed those?

Overall, some of the barriers that we continue to encounter are that there is no common academic calendar for the schools. We still do not have 100% participation of all schools nor do all schools require IPE activities for all students.

The other misconception we are still trying to deal with is that IPE only has to be with more than 2 disciplines. People seem to think you have to have everyone at the table but it doesn't have to be all.  Actual practice typically is only 2 or 3 different disciplines so let’s educate students this way!

Any final thoughts?

On a positive note, faculty who want to engage in this kind of work will find each other and come together, and future fertilization for IPE will occur. The challenge is to be persistent and give it time to develop.

posted by Angela McNelis & Paige McDonald

Creating a Culture of Collaboration at George Washington University (C3@GWU) presents

Structuring Teams to Capitalize on Collaborative Technologies

Missed today's session?....Watch it at:

https://gwu.webex.com/mw3200/mywebex/nbrshared.do

https://blogs.gwu.edu/collaborativeculture/files/2016/10/collaboration3-28b3ii5.jpg

DATE:  Friday, April , 21 2017

LOCATION: National Churchill Library & Center, Gelman Library 1st floor

or join us by Webex at http://go.gwu.edu/43v

TIME: 10:00am-12:00pm

Collaborative teams can benefit from using a variety of emerging technologies. In this University Seminar event, colleagues from across the GWU campus will examine the roles for collaborative technologies in our work, and how we can best structure our teams to utilize these resources. Collaborative technologies for sense-making, project management, learning and knowledge sharing, and collaborative data analysis will all be explored during the symposium. Since most collaboration begins with informal conversations, following the panel discussion there will also be time to share experiences with your colleagues.

Light refreshments will be served.

Format and Panelists: The first 50 minutes will be dedicated to the panel. In the round table session that follows, each panelist will move to one of the tables and attendees can join the table that most interests them. At each table, the group will be asked to identify one practical thing that they can do to in order to improve use of collaborative technologies within their teams in each of the following areas: (a) communication among team members, (b) sharing of files, (c) project management, and (d) co-development of products (e.g., collaborative editing, or collaborative analysis of data).

Sample questions: Are there things that you do to ensure that the writing collaboration will be successful? Do you have specific technologies that you employ when you're working with a group? Does it differ if the group is spread across the country or the world? What things do you (or others in the group) do to make sure you're using the technology in a productive way? Or

Your table's discussion may end up focusing more on establishing specific roles or a team charter. There may be some overlap as well as a team sets guidelines for communication expectations, frequency of logging in to the collaborative technology, etc.

Sharon Hill, PhD (Team Projects) Dr. N. Sharon Hill is an associate professor of management at The George Washington University School of Business. Her research focuses on (1) organizational change and (2) virtual work arrangements where the use of technology replaces traditional face-to-face interaction. A dominant theme in her research is the critical role that leadership at different levels of the organization plays in facilitating the success of both organizational change and virtual teamwork. Her articles have appeared in such leading outlets as Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, Organization Science, Personnel Psychology, Leadership Quarterly and Research in Personnel and Human Resource Management.

Alan E. Greenberg, MD, MPH. (Collaboration for Research) Professor and Chair of the Department of Epidemiology and Biostatistics. He is also Professor in the Departments of Medicine and of Microbiology, Immunology and Tropical Medicine in the School of Medicine and Health Sciences. He is a graduate of GW’s School of Medicine and leads a number of key research activities, including:

  • Director of the NIH-supported District of Columbia Developmental Center for AIDS Research (DC D-CFAR)
  • Founding Director of the GW Center for HIV/AIDS Epidemiology, Biostatistics and Public Health Laboratory Research.
  • Principal Investigator of the "Public Health Partnerships" between GW and the District of Columbia Department of Health and the Elizabeth Glaser Pediatric AIDS Foundation.
  • Site Leader for NIH-funded HIV Prevention Trials Network Clinical Research Site.
  • GW Secretariat for the NIH-DC DOH Partnership for AIDS Progress (PFAP).

Rosy Jurjus, MD, PhD. (collaboration for publishing) Assistant Professor of Anatomy and Regenerative Biology. After obtaining her Medical Degree in July 2005, Dr Jurjus was exposed to different research topics and worked with various collaborators in Lebanon, France, Italy and in the United States. Such exposures instilled in her the interest and motivations for an eventual academic career, including teaching and research, away from direct medical practice and patient care. In addition to her research interests she teaches the anatomical sciences mainly in human gross anatomy and histology. She has transitioned from a primary care physician to a basic scientist and an educator. Her long-term career goal is to combine the two and to conduct research with a strong translational focus as well as in medical education within an academic environment.

Paige McDonald, EdD, (collaboration for teaching) Director, Health Sciences Core Curriculum. Assistant Professor of Clinical Research and Leadership. Dr. Paige McDonald has over 20 years of leadership in military, educational and consulting sectors. She served for five years on active-duty in the United States Navy as an Antisubmarine Warfare Officer and Administrative Department Head. Dr. McDonald has over 16 years experience teaching undergraduate and graduate courses in various higher education settings.  She has taught at The George Washington University since 2008. Dr. McDonald’s research interests include adult learning, blended learning, online learning, meta-cognition, reflective practice, and change.

 

A recent article in The Lancet discusses structural mechanisms that can increase the capacity for integrating gender and sex into health research. See http://www.thelancet.com/journals/lancet/article/PIIS0140-6736(17)30343-4/fulltext?rss=yes. While the focus of this article describes the "four structural mechanisms used by the Canadian Institutes of Health Research across various funding opportunities to build capacity for improvement of sex and gender integration in health research," the mechanisms may be adaptable to other contexts and be relevant for universities seeking an integrated approach.
As described in the article's abstract, the four structural mechanisms are: 
  1. Mandatory reporting of sex and gender integration for all research applications.
  2. Requirement for research teams to include a sex and gender champion, defined as a person showing sex and gender expertise related to the topic under study through graduate training, current research, or publication track record. Sex and gender champions are responsible for ensuring that sex and gender is an integral component of project rationale, experimental design, methods, analysis, and knowledge translation.
  3. Inclusion of a cross-cutting sex and gender platform within large research consortia. The platform aims to ensure that relevant sex and gender research questions will be studied across all research initiatives. The role of the platform leaders is to consult with the different research teams to provide guidance to each team for incorporation of sex and gender in design and analysis strategies.
  4. Mandatory completion of sex and gender online training modules by principal applicants. Applicants are required to provide proof of completion of at least one of three online training modules developed by the Institute of Gender and Health: sex and gender in biomedical research, sex and gender in research involving primary data collection in humans, and sex and gender in the analysis of human data.
Incorporating the mechanisms into University practices would likely require the support of senior Administrative leaders, resources (human and financial), as well as a cultural shift in awareness of the importance of sex and gender--indeed all types of diversity--into all human research projects. It is interesting to think about how these mechanisms could be embedded into the GW research community. What are your ideas and thoughts?

Creating a Culture of Collaboration at George Washington University (C3@GWU) presents

Gender & Team Science: Improving Effectiveness of Research Teams

DATE: Thursday, March 30, 2017

LOCATION: National Churchill Library & Center, Gelman Library 1st floor

TIME: 10:00am-11:00am

Light Refreshments will be served.

Examining gender issues in team science is critical from the perspective of advancing and facilitating actions at the organizational level.  Organizations can set goals for improving the diversity, capacity, and quality of human capital by creating a more responsive, effective and efficient research environment for people to develop and work. This presentation will review the literature related to gender and team science, with a focus on evidence-based policy implications designed to guide how research institutions can improve the processes and practices that affect how science is conducted.

Holly J. Falk-Krzesinski, PhD, is the Vice President, Strategic Alliances with Elsevier’s Global Academic Relations group where she is involved in initiatives focused on promoting women in STEM fields and around data to examine issues related to gender inequality in research.  In her previous roles as the Director of the Office of Research Development and office of Research Team Support & Development at Northwestern University, she facilitated collaborative research initiatives with a special interest on approaches to gender parity in scientific collaboration and interdisciplinary research. Through her leadership with the Annual Science of Team Science Conference, Dr. Falk-Krzesinski has been instrumental in developing a strong community of practice for team science and presents on various team science- and gender-related topics around the world.