IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/pal/palcom/v11y2024i1d10.1057_s41599-024-03454-y.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Decoding the disciplines: creating mutual understanding in multiprofessional education

Author

Listed:
  • Daniela Schmitz

    (Department for Human Medicine, Junior Professorship for Innovative and Digital Methods of Teaching and Learning in Multiprofessional Health Care, University Witten/Herdecke)

  • Jan-Hendrik Ortloff

    (Department for Human Medicine, Junior Professorship for Innovative and Digital Methods of Teaching and Learning in Multiprofessional Health Care, University Witten/Herdecke)

  • Julia Rinas-Bahl

    (Department for Human Medicine, Junior Professorship for Innovative and Digital Methods of Teaching and Learning in Multiprofessional Health Care, University Witten/Herdecke)

Abstract

Decoding the disciplines as a pedagogical approach to overcome threshold concepts in student learning. The method focuses on a process of making discipline-specific thinking and acting more accessible to students in order to enhance their learning process. Students of any discipline have difficulties with discipline-specific contents, methods or ways of thinking or acting, the so-called bottlenecks. In addition, there are bottlenecks specific to each discipline, such as topics related to scientific work. Findings from a Scholarship of Teaching and Learning approach in a multi-professional group of students in an online seminar session during the corona pandemic are presented. A decoding process on how to find a theoretical approach to one’s research question was conducted. The implementation of the decoding method took place either in face-to-face decoding expert interviews or in a writing process using predetermined guiding questions. Students’ reflections on the use of the method were analyzed using normalization process theory to identify facilitating and inhibiting aspects for the face-to-face and written implementation of the method in interprofessional learning groups. The results show that students could experience a role change or a new role when the decoding topic changes. With the interview method in particular, students can take on the role of experts or novices depending on the topic and thus actively participate. Whether a role change happens or not always depends on the dynamics and the communicative exchange of the group. Decoding takes a lot of time, especially for reflective writing.

Suggested Citation

  • Daniela Schmitz & Jan-Hendrik Ortloff & Julia Rinas-Bahl, 2024. "Decoding the disciplines: creating mutual understanding in multiprofessional education," Palgrave Communications, Palgrave Macmillan, vol. 11(1), pages 1-9, December.
  • Handle: RePEc:pal:palcom:v:11:y:2024:i:1:d:10.1057_s41599-024-03454-y
    DOI: 10.1057/s41599-024-03454-y
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://link.springer.com/10.1057/s41599-024-03454-y
    File Function: Abstract
    Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to subscribers.

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1057/s41599-024-03454-y?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Lungeanu, Alina & Huang, Yun & Contractor, Noshir S., 2014. "Understanding the assembly of interdisciplinary teams and its impact on performance," Journal of Informetrics, Elsevier, vol. 8(1), pages 59-70.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Schlecht, Colleen & McGuier, Elizabeth A. & Ann Huang, Lee & Daro, Deborah, 2023. "Creating an interdisciplinary collaborative network of scholars in child maltreatment prevention: A network analysis of the Doris Duke Fellowships for the Promotion of Child Well-Being," Children and Youth Services Review, Elsevier, vol. 153(C).
    2. John McLevey & Alexander V. Graham & Reid McIlroy-Young & Pierson Browne & Kathryn S. Plaisance, 2018. "Interdisciplinarity and insularity in the diffusion of knowledge: an analysis of disciplinary boundaries between philosophy of science and the sciences," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 117(1), pages 331-349, October.
    3. Wynne E. Norton & Alina Lungeanu & David A. Chambers & Noshir Contractor, 2017. "Mapping the growing discipline of dissemination and implementation science in health," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 112(3), pages 1367-1390, September.
    4. Zhe Cheng & Yihuan Zou & Yueyang Zheng, 2024. "A method for identifying different types of university research teams," Palgrave Communications, Palgrave Macmillan, vol. 11(1), pages 1-15, December.
    5. Wang, Jian & Hicks, Diana, 2015. "Scientific teams: Self-assembly, fluidness, and interdependence," Journal of Informetrics, Elsevier, vol. 9(1), pages 197-207.
    6. Anil, Akash & Singh, Sanasam Ranbir, 2020. "Effect of class imbalance in heterogeneous network embedding: An empirical study," Journal of Informetrics, Elsevier, vol. 14(2).
    7. Xie, Qing & Zhang, Xinyuan & Kim, Giyeong & Song, Min, 2022. "Exploring the influence of coauthorship with top scientists on researchers’ affiliation, research topic, productivity, and impact," Journal of Informetrics, Elsevier, vol. 16(3).
    8. Chen, Shiji & Arsenault, Clément & Larivière, Vincent, 2015. "Are top-cited papers more interdisciplinary?," Journal of Informetrics, Elsevier, vol. 9(4), pages 1034-1046.
    9. Ma, Guoshuai & Yuhua, Qian & Zhang, Yayu & Yan, Hongren & Cheng, Honghong & Hu, Zhiguo, 2022. "The recognition of kernel research team," Journal of Informetrics, Elsevier, vol. 16(4).
    10. Bethany K Laursen & Nicole Motzer & Kelly J Anderson, 2022. "Pathways for assessing interdisciplinarity: A systematic review," Research Evaluation, Oxford University Press, vol. 31(3), pages 326-343.

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:pal:palcom:v:11:y:2024:i:1:d:10.1057_s41599-024-03454-y. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Sonal Shukla or Springer Nature Abstracting and Indexing (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.nature.com/ .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.