BEGIN:VCALENDAR VERSION:2.0 PRODID:-//swoogo.com//NONSGML kigkonsult.se iCalcreator 2.41.90// CALSCALE:GREGORIAN UID:33323633-3633-4836-b662-323435616136 BEGIN:VEVENT UID:ed3b8a3612ba4fca43053b9d9d596cce0f7de5ce@swoogo.com DTSTAMP:20260316T023631Z DESCRIPTION:Presentation 1\n4 - A Team Science Community Toolkit: A Co-Deve loped Approach to Open Science Up to Community Organizations\n_Presented b y: Madison Hartstein\, Northwestern University\nAuthored by: Stephanie Sch mitz Bechteler\, Chicago Urban League\nKareem Butler\, Chicago Appleseed C enter for Fair Courts\nElyse Daly\, Northwestern University\nOntisar Freel ain\, Health Research and Awareness NFP\nJoanne Glenn\, W.O.T. Foundation \nArielle Guzmán\, Chicago Medical Organization for Latino Advancement\nMa dison Hartstein\, Northwestern University\nTessneem S. Hasan\, Northwester n University\nCandace Henley\, The Blue Hat Foundation\nTaLana Hughes\, Si ckle Cell Disease Association of Illinois\nAngela E. Jordan\, University o f South Alabama\nRana K. Mazzetta\, Northwestern University\nDavid A. Mosk owitz\, University of Chicago\nMegha A. Patel\, Northwestern University\nH eather J. Risser\, Northwestern University\nSheila Sanders. Northwestern U niversity\nBonnie Spring\, Northwestern University\nHéctor Torres\, Colibr i Counseling\nKimberly M. Williams\, Erie Family Health Centers_\n\nBackgr ound\nTo redress health disparities\, there is a need to extend the scope and application of Team Science beyond the academic biomedical sciences to include other key domain experts: Community Organizations (COs).\n\nProbl em\nAlthough the importance of Community-Engaged Research (CER) has become well-recognized in theory\, in practice\, successful engagement in CER co ntinues to be thwarted by an absence of established bridges to practical p artnerships. Imbalances in power\, information\, and resources in CO and a cademic partnerships constrain the contribution of CO's voice and expertis e\; thereby impeding development of a shared mental model that incorporate s both scientific and real-world knowledge. \n\nActivities/Methods\nTo fac ilitate more insightful productive community-academic research partnership s\, we co-created the first\, public-facing Team Science Community Toolkit . We co-designed the toolkit with community partners to level the playing field and reduce the hindrance of unfamiliarity with scientific jargon\, g rant finances\, and research methodology. It is intended to create a bridg e that invites citizen scientists from the community into the biomedical r esearch endeavor to better address persistent health disparities. During n eeds assessment qualitative interviews\, CO staff suggested that learning more about how the research process works and having tools to support them throughout a scientific project could restore balance and provide greater agency for the CO.\n\nWe assembled a diverse project team of community an d academic partners to co-develop all content and tools. We utilized a com munity based participatory research (CBPR) approach\, grounded in the prin ciples of the Science of Team Science (SciTS) and User-Centered Design (UC D). The resulting toolkit includes templates\, checklists\, and interactiv e tools to support collaborative decision-making and communication. A real -world simulation takes users through the five stages of the research proc ess\, introduces all tools\, and provides context for their application.\n \nTo validate the concept\, content\, and usability of the toolkit\, we co nducted focus groups and usability testing with community experts outside of the project team. Participants expressed pride and enthusiasm to contri bute\, “we can actually influence it to be what we need” and “I’ve seen a lot of educational content that tries to be helpful\, useful\, and easy to use and this is the first one that I actually think is.”\n\nTo address co mmunity citizen scientists as full partners in the research effort\, we in tegrated the toolkit as a module in the existing open-access COALESCE (tea mscience.net) platform. Created to facilitate communication and research c ollaborations between scientists from different disciplines\, COALESCE’s m odules have been used by 50\,000+ individuals worldwide. Inclusion of the community toolkit in the platform invites COs into the research discussion and exposes academic and community partners to each others’ mental models . This presentation will demonstrate how to use the new toolkit\, includin g some of its interactive components. Use-case applications will be descri bed\, and collaboration will be invited to evaluate the toolkit’s effectiv eness.\n\nConclusion\nThe Team Science Community Toolkit is designed to em power self-advocacy and increase equity for Community Organizations engagi ng in research with academic partners. Many of the tools can be downloaded \, customized\, and deployed to foster productive communication in communi ty-academic partnerships.\n\nPresentation 2\n23 - Developing Integration S kills in Convergent Engineering Teams\n_Presented by: Theresa Lant\, Pace University\nAuthored by: Susan Day\, University of Louisville\nTheresa Lan t\, Pace University_\n\nOur research explores how engineering investigator s learn and apply integrative skills in larger\, multi-university converge nt engineering research programs including the non-technical components of collaboration. One of the challenges for engineering investigators\, with their high-consensus research disciplinarity\, is to understand standards of practice for low-consensus research domains like the social sciences(1 ). Engineering research has generally thrived in the context of multidisci plinarity\, in a supply chain fashion\, across the fine fields of engineer ing with some lesser measure of system integration. However\, high impact social science applications require a collaborative and comprehensive desi gn process for conceptualizing integrative strategies across subsystems. I n exceptional STEM education ecosystems in non-EPSCoR (2) states (e.g.\, S ilicon Valley/ Stanford\, Berkeley)\, through standards of practice develo ped to some degree through NSF funding\, (e.g.\, IGERT/ NRT/ IUSE 3) a col laborative process between social scientists and STEM investigators occurs . With successful NRT programming\, for example\, investigators have oppor tunities to engage in research that tests a theory of change in human beha vior across the non-technical components of research programs. In the low consensus social sciences\, conceptualization of numerous program componen ts (i.e.\, DEIA across the innovation ecosystem\, designs for knowledge ma nagement\, curriculum\, and professional development\, etc.) allow for num erous configurations for tailoring evidenced-based models and practices to the policy subsystem in which the research is embedded. STEM investigator s who learn integrative skills are more likely to consistently apply theor ies of change across essential programmatic components\, learn cognitive f lexibility and maximizing impact.\n\nOur research question centers on how engineers learn and apply integrative skills in convergent research progra ms. We have initial data using the NSF funded BRIDGES (4) survey from mult i-university engineering research teams through an on-going collaboration with a collaborative robotics research institute funded in part through NS F EPSCoR funds. The BRIDGES survey measures the cognitive and social precu rsors to developing an integrative capacity (5). Through application of th is survey\, meeting transcripts\, and interviews over time during the evol ution of this project team\, we will conduct a longitudinal investigation of how engineer investigators learn and apply integrative skills in conver gent research programs. The work we propose to present at INSCiTS 2023 wil l describe the initial conditions of the teams engaged in this multi-insti tution collaborative effort\, as demonstrated through survey responses\, i nterviews\, and meeting transcripts.\n\n * Borrego\, M & Newswander\, L\, ( 2008) Characteristics of successful cross-disciplinary engineering educati on collaborations\, Journal of Engineering Education\, DOI: 10.1002/j.2168 -9830.2008.tb00962.x\n * Established Program to Stimulate Competitive Rese arch (EPSCOR) https://new.nsf.gov/funding/initiatives/epscor\n * National Science Foundation Research Traineeship Programs (NRT\, IGERT)\; https://n ew.nsf.gov/funding/opportunities/national-science-foundation-research-trai neeship https://new.nsf.gov/funding/opportunities/improving-undergraduate- stem-education-directorate (IUSE).\n * BRIDGES: Building Resources through Integrating Disciplines for Group Effectiveness in Science\, NSF SciSIP\, Award #1262754\, PIs: Lant\, T & Salazar\, M.\n * Salazar\, M.\, Lant\, T .\, Fiore\, S.\, & Salas\, E.\, (2012) Integrative Capacity: A New Perspec tive for Understanding Interdisciplinary Team Processes and Outcomes\,' Sm all Group Research. October 2012 vol. 43\, no. 5\; 527-558\n\nPresentation 3\n27 - Evidence-based Longitudinal Assessment of Interprofessional Teamw ork: Assessing team experience in an educational context\n_Presented by: T ony Lingham\, Interaction Science\nAuthored by: Tony Lingham\, Interaction Science\nTyler Reimschisel\, Case Western Reserve University_\n\nWe descr ibe an interprofessional education (IPE) course in which 435 students in 7 2 teams work on community-based projects while learning teamwork content a nd skills. Students were from the following programs: Dental Medicine (76) \, Genetic Counseling (8)\, Medicine (215)\, Nursing (311)\, Nutrition (1) \, Physician Assistant (34)\, Psychology (4)\, Social Work (58)\, and Spee ch-language pathology (8). A total of 40 sponsoring organizations with 83 community leaders (“champions”)\, 40 classroom instructors\, and 28 facult y. The student teams collaborated with the champions on authentic projects designed by the champions. We employed a longitudinal\, mixed-methods des ign to assess the experience of team interaction (i.e.\, pre-post design). Since the teams were embedded in a larger system\, we chose a 360-degree assessment for the student teams. The team-level assessments focus on the lived experience of interprofessional team members (internal to the team)\ , the team’s assessment of their outcomes based on their perception of wor king together (internal to the team)\, and the assessment from the champio ns (external assessment). We used the Team Learning Inventory or TLI (a 36 0 team-level assessment) together with a structured team coaching process to provide evidence-based team development from Time 1 and Time 2. Team co aching was provided to each team immediately after Time 1. The TLI was sel ected as the assessment tool because for almost two decades the TLI combin ed with structured team coaching has shown strong validity\, reliability\, and robustness with teams across all levels of diverse organizations in d ifferent countries and cultures. Four major dimensions of the experience o f teamwork are assessed using the TLI:\n\n * Diverging Dimension (5 aspects )\,\n * Converging Dimension (3 aspects)\;\n * Power and Influence Dimensi on\; and\n * Openness Dimension.\n\nBy forming partnerships among the educ ation\, practice\, and research communities\, this unique design for an IP E experience ensured that the IPE course focused on evidence-based team de velopment. Based on exploratory analysis from the first year of the course \, the teams that indicated in the goals and action steps of their coachin g session that they wanted to improve in specific dimensions and/or aspect s of team interaction showed improvements across all dimensions and/or asp ects that were indicated in the teams’ learning plans with a range from 3. 1% - 36.9%\, including 33.8 % improving in the Power and Influence Dimensi on\, 36.9% improving in the Planning aspect of the Converging Dimension\, and 30.8% improving in the Relationality aspect of the Diverging Dimension . Champions’ ratings from 10 questions (1-7 response rating) of their expe rience with the team had an average of 5.8 – 6.2 for each question (Time 1 ) and 6.0 – 6.4 (Time 2) showing an improvement from the champions’ assess ments of their experience working with the teams post the team coaching. T he evidence of improvement in team interaction is promising as our focus i s to develop High-Impact Teams (HITs) demonstrated by the team’s internal dynamics and functionality as well as the benefit the student team project has on the champion’s organization.\n\nPresentation 4\n34 - Interdiscipli nary Graduate Student Reflections on Transdisciplinary Team Science Traini ng\n_Presented by: Deborah DiazGranados\, Virginia Commonwealth University \nAuthored by: Deborah DiazGranados\, Virginia Commonwealth University\nSt ephen Fiore\, University of Central Florida\nTroy Hartley\, William & Mary _\n\nSolving today's most challenging societal problems requires innovativ e breakthroughs and novel solutions that transcend disciplines\, reaching a deeper level of knowledge integration. However\, achieving such integrat ion through team science is challenging due to the lack of adequate traini ng. To address this\, methods from allied disciplines need to be adapted f or use in training future transdisciplinary researchers. This presentation discusses team science training focused on coastal resilience. It brings together a multidisciplinary team of scholars focused on improving problem solving and teamwork in science.\n\nFirst\, a team of faculty coaches was recruited to guide a class of diverse doctoral and master's students from the natural and physical coastal\, marine and environmental sciences\, en gineering\, design\, and social and economic sciences. Second\, to develop and test different types of transdisciplinary pedagogies\, a series of wo rkshops was developed to train students on the fundamentals of team scienc e as well as collaborative knowledge building on complex transdisciplinary problems. We emphasized the development of conceptual models that are cap able of capturing system level problems as well as integrating diverse dis ciplinary perspectives. Third\, to foster individual and team learning\, a n intervention focusing on reflection in teamwork processes was used to en sure students monitor both the task of transdisciplinary problem solving\, as well as the teamwork processes engaged while collaborating.\n\nGraduat e students were introduced to the principles of team science\, collaborati ve problem solving\, and effective self-reflective tools and strategies. A dditionally\, students gained experience working with coastal community pa rtners (e.g.\, municipalities\, NGOs). As such\, this community-based clim ate-resilience project enabled students to practice team science research and use reflective practices to improve their competencies with various st akeholders. Assessment of team processes\, along with reflections on teamw ork and taskwork\, were used to highlight areas of collaboration needing i mprovement.\n\nFor this presentation we first provide an overview of the p roject and follow this with results from the first cohort of graduate stud ent teams. In addition to attitudinal and knowledge based surveys\, team m embers also provided diary type reflections. We focus on these team reflec tions where they describe their experiences in collaborative knowledge bui lding and problem solving sessions. These reflections were based on prompt s designed to helps students consider their experience in teamwork and in taskwork and what they found challenging. Additionally\, they reflected on what they learned about interdisciplinarity teamwork and taskwork. Analys es of reflections following their initial phases of collaboration showed t hat the students were initially challenged by the lack of awareness of tea m members expertise and knowledge from other disciplines. They were simila rly challenged by the scope of the work and temporal dynamics of the diffe rent research methods. Analyses of reflections following intense problem s olving sessions found that teams were gaining awareness of how to utilize the diversity of disciplines while better understanding team roles. Additi onally\, they reported gaining an awareness of location-based taskwork and variations in timing of the work when tasks differed in scale. We discuss these and related findings and how the project evolved to better address the team science training needs of the graduate students. DTSTART:20230726T130000Z DTEND:20230726T143000Z LAST-MODIFIED:20260316T023631Z LOCATION:Del Ray SEQUENCE:0 STATUS:CONFIRMED SUMMARY:Paper Session: Education & Training TRANSP:OPAQUE X-ALT-DESC;FMTTYPE=text/html:

Presentation 1
\n4 - A Team Science Community Toolkit: A Co-Developed Approach to Open Science Up to Community Organizations
Presented by: Madison Hartstein\, Northwestern University
\nAuthored by: Stephanie Schmitz Bechteler\, Chicago Urban League
\nKareem Butler\, Chicago Appleseed Center for Fair Courts
\nElyse Da ly\, Northwestern University
\nOntisar Freelain\, Health Research and Awareness NFP
\nJoanne Glenn\, W.O.T. Foundation
\nArielle Guzm án\, Chicago Medical Organization for Latino Advancement
\nMadison Ha rtstein\, Northwestern University
\nTessneem S. Hasan\, Northwestern University
\nCandace Henley\, The Blue Hat Foundation
\nTaLana H ughes\, Sickle Cell Disease Association of Illinois
\nAngela E. Jorda n\, University of South Alabama
\nRana K. Mazzetta\, Northwestern Uni versity
\nDavid A. Moskowitz\, University of Chicago
\nMegha A. Patel\, Northwestern University
\nHeather J. Risser\, Northwestern Un iversity
\nSheila Sanders. Northwestern University
\nBonnie Spri ng\, Northwestern University
\nHéctor Torres\, Colibri Counseling
\nKimberly M. Williams\, Erie Family Health Centers

\nBa ckground
\nTo redress health disparities\, there is a need to extend the scope and application of Team Science beyond the academic biomedical s ciences to include other key domain experts: Community Organizations (COs) .

\nProblem
\nAlthough the importance of Community-Engaged Research (CER) has become well-recognized in theory\, in practice\, succe ssful engagement in CER continues to be thwarted by an absence of establis hed bridges to practical partnerships. Imbalances in power\, information\, and resources in CO and academic partnerships constrain the contribution of CO's voice and expertise\; thereby impeding development of a shared men tal model that incorporates both scientific and real-world knowledge. 

\nActivities/Methods
\nTo facilitate more insightful producti ve community-academic research partnerships\, we co-created the first\, pu blic-facing Team Science Community Toolkit. We co-designed the toolkit wit h community partners to level the playing field and reduce the hindrance o f unfamiliarity with scientific jargon\, grant finances\, and research met hodology. It is intended to create a bridge that invites citizen scientist s from the community into the biomedical research endeavor to better addre ss persistent health disparities. During needs assessment qualitative inte rviews\, CO staff suggested that learning more about how the research proc ess works and having tools to support them throughout a scientific project could restore balance and provide greater agency for the CO.

\nWe assembled a diverse project team of community and academic partners t o co-develop all content and tools. We utilized a community based particip atory research (CBPR) approach\, grounded in the principles of the Science of Team Science (SciTS) and User-Centered Design (UCD). The resulting too lkit includes templates\, checklists\, and interactive tools to support co llaborative decision-making and communication. A real-world simulation tak es users through the five stages of the research process\, introduces all tools\, and provides context for their application.

\nTo valida te the concept\, content\, and usability of the toolkit\, we conducted foc us groups and usability testing with community experts outside of the proj ect team. Participants expressed pride and enthusiasm to contribute\, “we can actually influence it to be what we need” and “I’ve seen a lot of educ ational content that tries to be helpful\, useful\, and easy to use and th is is the first one that I actually think is.”

\nTo address com munity citizen scientists as full partners in the research effort\, we int egrated the toolkit as a module in the existing open-access COALESCE (team science.net) platform. Created to facilitate communication and research co llaborations between scientists from different disciplines\, COALESCE’s mo dules have been used by 50\,000+ individuals worldwide. Inclusion of the c ommunity toolkit in the platform invites COs into the research discussion and exposes academic and community partners to each others’ mental models.  This presentation will demonstrate how to use the new toolkit\, including some of its interactive components. Use-case applications will be describ ed\, and collaboration will be invited to evaluate the toolkit’s effective ness.

\nConclusion
\nThe Team Science Community Toolkit is designed to empower self-advocacy and increase equity for Community Organ izations engaging in research with academic partners. Many of the tools ca n be downloaded\, customized\, and deployed to foster productive communica tion in community-academic partnerships.

\n\n


Presentation 2
\n23 - Develop ing Integration Skills in Convergent Engineering Teams
P resented by: Theresa Lant\, Pace University
\nAuthored by: Susan Day\ , University of Louisville
\nTheresa Lant\, Pace University

\nOur research explores how engineering investigators learn and app ly integrative skills in larger\, multi-university convergent engineering research programs including the non-technical components of collaboration. One of the challenges for engineering investigators\, with their high-con sensus research disciplinarity\, is to understand standards of practice fo r low-consensus research domains like the social sciences(1). Engineering research has generally thrived in the context of multidisciplinarity\, in a supply chain fashion\, across the fine fields of engineering with some l esser measure of system integration. However\, high impact social science applications require a collaborative and comprehensive design process for conceptualizing integrative strategies across subsystems. In exceptional S TEM education ecosystems in non-EPSCoR (2) states (e.g.\, Silicon Valley/ Stanford\, Berkeley)\, through standards of practice developed to some deg ree through NSF funding\, (e.g.\, IGERT/ NRT/ IUSE 3) a collaborative proc ess between social scientists and STEM investigators occurs. With successf ul NRT programming\, for example\, investigators have opportunities to eng age in research that tests a theory of change in human behavior across the non-technical components of research programs. In the low consensus socia l sciences\, conceptualization of numerous program components (i.e.\, DEIA across the innovation ecosystem\, designs for knowledge management\, curr iculum\, and professional development\, etc.) allow for numerous configura tions for tailoring evidenced-based models and practices to the policy sub system in which the research is embedded. STEM investigators who learn int egrative skills are more likely to consistently apply theories of change a cross essential programmatic components\, learn cognitive flexibility and maximizing impact.

\nOur research question centers on how engin eers learn and apply integrative skills in convergent research programs. W e have initial data using the NSF funded BRIDGES (4) survey from multi-uni versity engineering research teams through an on-going collaboration with a collaborative robotics research institute funded in part through NSF EPS CoR funds. The BRIDGES survey measures the cognitive and social precursors to developing an integrative capacity (5). Through application of this su rvey\, meeting transcripts\, and interviews over time during the evolution of this project team\, we will conduct a longitudinal investigation of ho w engineer investigators learn and apply integrative skills in convergent research programs. The work we propose to present at INSCiTS 2023 will des cribe the initial conditions of the teams engaged in this multi-institutio n collaborative effort\, as demonstrated through survey responses\, interv iews\, and meeting transcripts.

\n\n
  1. Borrego\, M & Newswander\, L\, (2008) Characteristics of successful cross-disciplinary engineering ed ucation collaborations\, Journal of Engineering Education\, DOI: 10.1002/j .2168-9830.2008.tb00962.x
    2. \n
  2. Established Program to Stimulate Compe titive Research (EPSCOR) https://new.nsf.gov/fund ing/initiatives/epscor
    3. \n
  3. National Science Foundation Research Traineeship Programs (NRT\, IGERT)\; https://new.nsf.gov/funding/opportunities/ national-science-foundation-research-traineeship https://new.nsf.gov/fund ing/opportunities/improving-undergraduate-stem-education-directorate ( IUSE).
    4. \n
  4. BRIDGES: Building Resources through Integrating Disciplin es for Group Effectiveness in Science\, NSF SciSIP\, Award #1262754\, PIs: Lant\, T & Salazar\, M.
    5. \n
  5. Salazar\, M.\, Lant\, T.\, Fiore\, S.\, & Salas\, E.\, (2012) Integrative Capacity: A New Perspective for Underst anding Interdisciplinary Team Processes and Outcomes\,' Small Group Resear ch. October 2012 vol. 43\, no. 5\; 527-558
    6. \n


Presentation 3
\n27 - E vidence-based Longitudinal Assessment of Interprofessional Teamwork: Asses sing team experience in an educational context
Presented by: Tony Lingham\, Interaction Science
\nAuthored by: Tony Lingham\, Interaction Science
\nTyler Reimschisel\, Case Western Reserve Unive rsity

\nWe describe an interprofessional education (IPE) c ourse in which 435 students in 72 teams work on community-based projects w hile learning teamwork content and skills. Students were from the followin g programs: Dental Medicine (76)\, Genetic Counseling (8)\, Medicine (215) \, Nursing (311)\, Nutrition (1)\, Physician Assistant (34)\, Psychology ( 4)\, Social Work (58)\, and Speech-language pathology (8). A total of 40 s ponsoring organizations with 83 community leaders (“champions”)\, 40 class room instructors\, and 28 faculty. The student teams collaborated with the champions on authentic projects designed by the champions. We employed a longitudinal\, mixed-methods design to assess the experience of team inter action (i.e.\, pre-post design). Since the teams were embedded in a larger system\, we chose a 360-degree assessment for the student teams. The team -level assessments focus on the lived experience of interprofessional team members (internal to the team)\, the team’s assessment of their outcomes based on their perception of working together (internal to the team)\, and the assessment from the champions (external assessment). We used the Team Learning Inventory or TLI (a 360 team-level assessment) together with a s tructured team coaching process to provide evidence-based team development from Time 1 and Time 2. Team coaching was provided to each team immediate ly after Time 1. The TLI was selected as the assessment tool because for a lmost two decades the TLI combined with structured team coaching has shown strong validity\, reliability\, and robustness with teams across all leve ls of diverse organizations in different countries and cultures. Four majo r dimensions of the experience of teamwork are assessed using the TLI:

\n\n
  1. Diverging Dimension (5 aspects)\,
    2. \n
  2. Converging Dimensi on (3 aspects)\;
    3. \n
  3. Power and Influence Dimension\; and
    4. \n
  4. O penness Dimension.
    5. \n

By forming partnerships among the educati on\, practice\, and research communities\, this unique design for an IPE e xperience ensured that the IPE course focused on evidence-based team devel opment. Based on exploratory analysis from the first year of the course\, the teams that indicated in the goals and action steps of their coaching s ession that they wanted to improve in specific dimensions and/or aspects o f team interaction showed improvements across all dimensions and/or aspect s that were indicated in the teams’ learning plans with a range from 3.1% - 36.9%\, including 33.8 % improving in the Power and Influence Dimension\ , 36.9% improving in the Planning aspect of the Converging Dimension\, and 30.8% improving in the Relationality aspect of the Diverging Dimension. C hampions’ ratings from 10 questions (1-7 response rating) of their experie nce with the team had an average of 5.8 – 6.2 for each question (Time 1) a nd 6.0 – 6.4 (Time 2) showing an improvement from the champions’ assessmen ts of their experience working with the teams post the team coaching. The evidence of improvement in team interaction is promising as our focus is t o develop High-Impact Teams (HITs) demonstrated by the team’s internal dyn amics and functionality as well as the benefit the student team project ha s on the champion’s organization.

\n\n


Presentation 4
\n34 - Interdisciplin ary Graduate Student Reflections on Transdisciplinary Team Science Trainin g
Presented by: Deborah DiazGranados\, Virginia Commonwe alth University
\nAuthored by: Deborah DiazGranados\, Virginia Common wealth University
\nStephen Fiore\, University of Central Florida
\nTroy Hartley\, William & Mary

\nSolving today's most c hallenging societal problems requires innovative breakthroughs and novel s olutions that transcend disciplines\, reaching a deeper level of knowledge integration. However\, achieving such integration through team science is challenging due to the lack of adequate training. To address this\, metho ds from allied disciplines need to be adapted for use in training future t ransdisciplinary researchers. This presentation discusses team science tra ining focused on coastal resilience. It brings together a multidisciplinar y team of scholars focused on improving problem solving and teamwork in sc ience.

\nFirst\, a team of faculty coaches was recruited to gui de a class of diverse doctoral and master's students from the natural and physical coastal\, marine and environmental sciences\, engineering\, desig n\, and social and economic sciences. Second\, to develop and test differe nt types of transdisciplinary pedagogies\, a series of workshops was devel oped to train students on the fundamentals of team science as well as coll aborative knowledge building on complex transdisciplinary problems. We emp hasized the development of conceptual models that are capable of capturing system level problems as well as integrating diverse disciplinary perspec tives. Third\, to foster individual and team learning\, an intervention fo cusing on reflection in teamwork processes was used to ensure students mon itor both the task of transdisciplinary problem solving\, as well as the t eamwork processes engaged while collaborating.

\nGraduate stude nts were introduced to the principles of team science\, collaborative prob lem solving\, and effective self-reflective tools and strategies. Addition ally\, students gained experience working with coastal community partners (e.g.\, municipalities\, NGOs). As such\, this community-based climate-res ilience project enabled students to practice team science research and use reflective practices to improve their competencies with various stakehold ers. Assessment of team processes\, along with reflections on teamwork and taskwork\, were used to highlight areas of collaboration needing improvem ent.

\nFor this presentation we first provide an overview of th e project and follow this with results from the first cohort of graduate s tudent teams. In addition to attitudinal and knowledge based surveys\, tea m members also provided diary type reflections. We focus on these team ref lections where they describe their experiences in collaborative knowledge building and problem solving sessions. These reflections were based on pro mpts designed to helps students consider their experience in teamwork and in taskwork and what they found challenging. Additionally\, they reflected on what they learned about interdisciplinarity teamwork and taskwork. Ana lyses of reflections following their initial phases of collaboration showe d that the students were initially challenged by the lack of awareness of team members expertise and knowledge from other disciplines. They were sim ilarly challenged by the scope of the work and temporal dynamics of the di fferent research methods. Analyses of reflections following intense proble m solving sessions found that teams were gaining awareness of how to utili ze the diversity of disciplines while better understanding team roles. Add itionally\, they reported gaining an awareness of location-based taskwork and variations in timing of the work when tasks differed in scale. We disc uss these and related findings and how the project evolved to better addre ss the team science training needs of the graduate students.

BEGIN:VALARM UID:65376439-6433-4530-b238-393038336132 ACTION:DISPLAY DESCRIPTION:Presentation 1\n4 - A Team Science Community Toolkit: A Co-Deve loped Approach to Open Science Up to Community Organizations\n_Presented b y: Madison Hartstein\, Northwestern University\nAuthored by: Stephanie Sch mitz Bechteler\, Chicago Urban League\nKareem Butler\, Chicago Appleseed C enter for Fair Courts\nElyse Daly\, Northwestern University\nOntisar Freel ain\, Health Research and Awareness NFP\nJoanne Glenn\, W.O.T. Foundation \nArielle Guzmán\, Chicago Medical Organization for Latino Advancement\nMa dison Hartstein\, Northwestern University\nTessneem S. Hasan\, Northwester n University\nCandace Henley\, The Blue Hat Foundation\nTaLana Hughes\, Si ckle Cell Disease Association of Illinois\nAngela E. Jordan\, University o f South Alabama\nRana K. Mazzetta\, Northwestern University\nDavid A. Mosk owitz\, University of Chicago\nMegha A. Patel\, Northwestern University\nH eather J. Risser\, Northwestern University\nSheila Sanders. Northwestern U niversity\nBonnie Spring\, Northwestern University\nHéctor Torres\, Colibr i Counseling\nKimberly M. Williams\, Erie Family Health Centers_\n\nBackgr ound\nTo redress health disparities\, there is a need to extend the scope and application of Team Science beyond the academic biomedical sciences to include other key domain experts: Community Organizations (COs).\n\nProbl em\nAlthough the importance of Community-Engaged Research (CER) has become well-recognized in theory\, in practice\, successful engagement in CER co ntinues to be thwarted by an absence of established bridges to practical p artnerships. Imbalances in power\, information\, and resources in CO and a cademic partnerships constrain the contribution of CO's voice and expertis e\; thereby impeding development of a shared mental model that incorporate s both scientific and real-world knowledge. \n\nActivities/Methods\nTo fac ilitate more insightful productive community-academic research partnership s\, we co-created the first\, public-facing Team Science Community Toolkit . We co-designed the toolkit with community partners to level the playing field and reduce the hindrance of unfamiliarity with scientific jargon\, g rant finances\, and research methodology. It is intended to create a bridg e that invites citizen scientists from the community into the biomedical r esearch endeavor to better address persistent health disparities. During n eeds assessment qualitative interviews\, CO staff suggested that learning more about how the research process works and having tools to support them throughout a scientific project could restore balance and provide greater agency for the CO.\n\nWe assembled a diverse project team of community an d academic partners to co-develop all content and tools. We utilized a com munity based participatory research (CBPR) approach\, grounded in the prin ciples of the Science of Team Science (SciTS) and User-Centered Design (UC D). The resulting toolkit includes templates\, checklists\, and interactiv e tools to support collaborative decision-making and communication. A real -world simulation takes users through the five stages of the research proc ess\, introduces all tools\, and provides context for their application.\n \nTo validate the concept\, content\, and usability of the toolkit\, we co nducted focus groups and usability testing with community experts outside of the project team. Participants expressed pride and enthusiasm to contri bute\, “we can actually influence it to be what we need” and “I’ve seen a lot of educational content that tries to be helpful\, useful\, and easy to use and this is the first one that I actually think is.”\n\nTo address co mmunity citizen scientists as full partners in the research effort\, we in tegrated the toolkit as a module in the existing open-access COALESCE (tea mscience.net) platform. Created to facilitate communication and research c ollaborations between scientists from different disciplines\, COALESCE’s m odules have been used by 50\,000+ individuals worldwide. Inclusion of the community toolkit in the platform invites COs into the research discussion and exposes academic and community partners to each others’ mental models . This presentation will demonstrate how to use the new toolkit\, includin g some of its interactive components. Use-case applications will be descri bed\, and collaboration will be invited to evaluate the toolkit’s effectiv eness.\n\nConclusion\nThe Team Science Community Toolkit is designed to em power self-advocacy and increase equity for Community Organizations engagi ng in research with academic partners. Many of the tools can be downloaded \, customized\, and deployed to foster productive communication in communi ty-academic partnerships.\n\nPresentation 2\n23 - Developing Integration S kills in Convergent Engineering Teams\n_Presented by: Theresa Lant\, Pace University\nAuthored by: Susan Day\, University of Louisville\nTheresa Lan t\, Pace University_\n\nOur research explores how engineering investigator s learn and apply integrative skills in larger\, multi-university converge nt engineering research programs including the non-technical components of collaboration. One of the challenges for engineering investigators\, with their high-consensus research disciplinarity\, is to understand standards of practice for low-consensus research domains like the social sciences(1 ). Engineering research has generally thrived in the context of multidisci plinarity\, in a supply chain fashion\, across the fine fields of engineer ing with some lesser measure of system integration. However\, high impact social science applications require a collaborative and comprehensive desi gn process for conceptualizing integrative strategies across subsystems. I n exceptional STEM education ecosystems in non-EPSCoR (2) states (e.g.\, S ilicon Valley/ Stanford\, Berkeley)\, through standards of practice develo ped to some degree through NSF funding\, (e.g.\, IGERT/ NRT/ IUSE 3) a col laborative process between social scientists and STEM investigators occurs . With successful NRT programming\, for example\, investigators have oppor tunities to engage in research that tests a theory of change in human beha vior across the non-technical components of research programs. In the low consensus social sciences\, conceptualization of numerous program componen ts (i.e.\, DEIA across the innovation ecosystem\, designs for knowledge ma nagement\, curriculum\, and professional development\, etc.) allow for num erous configurations for tailoring evidenced-based models and practices to the policy subsystem in which the research is embedded. STEM investigator s who learn integrative skills are more likely to consistently apply theor ies of change across essential programmatic components\, learn cognitive f lexibility and maximizing impact.\n\nOur research question centers on how engineers learn and apply integrative skills in convergent research progra ms. We have initial data using the NSF funded BRIDGES (4) survey from mult i-university engineering research teams through an on-going collaboration with a collaborative robotics research institute funded in part through NS F EPSCoR funds. The BRIDGES survey measures the cognitive and social precu rsors to developing an integrative capacity (5). Through application of th is survey\, meeting transcripts\, and interviews over time during the evol ution of this project team\, we will conduct a longitudinal investigation of how engineer investigators learn and apply integrative skills in conver gent research programs. The work we propose to present at INSCiTS 2023 wil l describe the initial conditions of the teams engaged in this multi-insti tution collaborative effort\, as demonstrated through survey responses\, i nterviews\, and meeting transcripts.\n\n * Borrego\, M & Newswander\, L\, ( 2008) Characteristics of successful cross-disciplinary engineering educati on collaborations\, Journal of Engineering Education\, DOI: 10.1002/j.2168 -9830.2008.tb00962.x\n * Established Program to Stimulate Competitive Rese arch (EPSCOR) https://new.nsf.gov/funding/initiatives/epscor\n * National Science Foundation Research Traineeship Programs (NRT\, IGERT)\; https://n ew.nsf.gov/funding/opportunities/national-science-foundation-research-trai neeship https://new.nsf.gov/funding/opportunities/improving-undergraduate- stem-education-directorate (IUSE).\n * BRIDGES: Building Resources through Integrating Disciplines for Group Effectiveness in Science\, NSF SciSIP\, Award #1262754\, PIs: Lant\, T & Salazar\, M.\n * Salazar\, M.\, Lant\, T .\, Fiore\, S.\, & Salas\, E.\, (2012) Integrative Capacity: A New Perspec tive for Understanding Interdisciplinary Team Processes and Outcomes\,' Sm all Group Research. October 2012 vol. 43\, no. 5\; 527-558\n\nPresentation 3\n27 - Evidence-based Longitudinal Assessment of Interprofessional Teamw ork: Assessing team experience in an educational context\n_Presented by: T ony Lingham\, Interaction Science\nAuthored by: Tony Lingham\, Interaction Science\nTyler Reimschisel\, Case Western Reserve University_\n\nWe descr ibe an interprofessional education (IPE) course in which 435 students in 7 2 teams work on community-based projects while learning teamwork content a nd skills. Students were from the following programs: Dental Medicine (76) \, Genetic Counseling (8)\, Medicine (215)\, Nursing (311)\, Nutrition (1) \, Physician Assistant (34)\, Psychology (4)\, Social Work (58)\, and Spee ch-language pathology (8). A total of 40 sponsoring organizations with 83 community leaders (“champions”)\, 40 classroom instructors\, and 28 facult y. The student teams collaborated with the champions on authentic projects designed by the champions. We employed a longitudinal\, mixed-methods des ign to assess the experience of team interaction (i.e.\, pre-post design). Since the teams were embedded in a larger system\, we chose a 360-degree assessment for the student teams. The team-level assessments focus on the lived experience of interprofessional team members (internal to the team)\ , the team’s assessment of their outcomes based on their perception of wor king together (internal to the team)\, and the assessment from the champio ns (external assessment). We used the Team Learning Inventory or TLI (a 36 0 team-level assessment) together with a structured team coaching process to provide evidence-based team development from Time 1 and Time 2. Team co aching was provided to each team immediately after Time 1. The TLI was sel ected as the assessment tool because for almost two decades the TLI combin ed with structured team coaching has shown strong validity\, reliability\, and robustness with teams across all levels of diverse organizations in d ifferent countries and cultures. Four major dimensions of the experience o f teamwork are assessed using the TLI:\n\n * Diverging Dimension (5 aspects )\,\n * Converging Dimension (3 aspects)\;\n * Power and Influence Dimensi on\; and\n * Openness Dimension.\n\nBy forming partnerships among the educ ation\, practice\, and research communities\, this unique design for an IP E experience ensured that the IPE course focused on evidence-based team de velopment. Based on exploratory analysis from the first year of the course \, the teams that indicated in the goals and action steps of their coachin g session that they wanted to improve in specific dimensions and/or aspect s of team interaction showed improvements across all dimensions and/or asp ects that were indicated in the teams’ learning plans with a range from 3. 1% - 36.9%\, including 33.8 % improving in the Power and Influence Dimensi on\, 36.9% improving in the Planning aspect of the Converging Dimension\, and 30.8% improving in the Relationality aspect of the Diverging Dimension . Champions’ ratings from 10 questions (1-7 response rating) of their expe rience with the team had an average of 5.8 – 6.2 for each question (Time 1 ) and 6.0 – 6.4 (Time 2) showing an improvement from the champions’ assess ments of their experience working with the teams post the team coaching. T he evidence of improvement in team interaction is promising as our focus i s to develop High-Impact Teams (HITs) demonstrated by the team’s internal dynamics and functionality as well as the benefit the student team project has on the champion’s organization.\n\nPresentation 4\n34 - Interdiscipli nary Graduate Student Reflections on Transdisciplinary Team Science Traini ng\n_Presented by: Deborah DiazGranados\, Virginia Commonwealth University \nAuthored by: Deborah DiazGranados\, Virginia Commonwealth University\nSt ephen Fiore\, University of Central Florida\nTroy Hartley\, William & Mary _\n\nSolving today's most challenging societal problems requires innovativ e breakthroughs and novel solutions that transcend disciplines\, reaching a deeper level of knowledge integration. However\, achieving such integrat ion through team science is challenging due to the lack of adequate traini ng. To address this\, methods from allied disciplines need to be adapted f or use in training future transdisciplinary researchers. This presentation discusses team science training focused on coastal resilience. It brings together a multidisciplinary team of scholars focused on improving problem solving and teamwork in science.\n\nFirst\, a team of faculty coaches was recruited to guide a class of diverse doctoral and master's students from the natural and physical coastal\, marine and environmental sciences\, en gineering\, design\, and social and economic sciences. Second\, to develop and test different types of transdisciplinary pedagogies\, a series of wo rkshops was developed to train students on the fundamentals of team scienc e as well as collaborative knowledge building on complex transdisciplinary problems. We emphasized the development of conceptual models that are cap able of capturing system level problems as well as integrating diverse dis ciplinary perspectives. Third\, to foster individual and team learning\, a n intervention focusing on reflection in teamwork processes was used to en sure students monitor both the task of transdisciplinary problem solving\, as well as the teamwork processes engaged while collaborating.\n\nGraduat e students were introduced to the principles of team science\, collaborati ve problem solving\, and effective self-reflective tools and strategies. A dditionally\, students gained experience working with coastal community pa rtners (e.g.\, municipalities\, NGOs). As such\, this community-based clim ate-resilience project enabled students to practice team science research and use reflective practices to improve their competencies with various st akeholders. Assessment of team processes\, along with reflections on teamw ork and taskwork\, were used to highlight areas of collaboration needing i mprovement.\n\nFor this presentation we first provide an overview of the p roject and follow this with results from the first cohort of graduate stud ent teams. In addition to attitudinal and knowledge based surveys\, team m embers also provided diary type reflections. We focus on these team reflec tions where they describe their experiences in collaborative knowledge bui lding and problem solving sessions. These reflections were based on prompt s designed to helps students consider their experience in teamwork and in taskwork and what they found challenging. Additionally\, they reflected on what they learned about interdisciplinarity teamwork and taskwork. Analys es of reflections following their initial phases of collaboration showed t hat the students were initially challenged by the lack of awareness of tea m members expertise and knowledge from other disciplines. They were simila rly challenged by the scope of the work and temporal dynamics of the diffe rent research methods. Analyses of reflections following intense problem s olving sessions found that teams were gaining awareness of how to utilize the diversity of disciplines while better understanding team roles. Additi onally\, they reported gaining an awareness of location-based taskwork and variations in timing of the work when tasks differed in scale. We discuss these and related findings and how the project evolved to better address the team science training needs of the graduate students. TRIGGER:-PT15M END:VALARM END:VEVENT END:VCALENDAR