Abstract
Recent debates question the extent to which adopting an educational innovation requires compromise between the innovation’s original design and the adoption site’s context. Through compromises, the innovation’s fundamental principles may be transferred, transformed, or abandoned. This paper analyzes such compromises during the piloting of Team-Based Learning (TBL). We ask: When is the process of transferring an innovation actually a process of transformation? This study is an autoethnography of our research team’s implementation process. Autoethnographies are personalized accounts where authors draw on their own experiences to extend understanding of a particular topic. To conduct this autoethnography, we used an in-depth, interactive interview with the piloting clinician educator. In the analysis of TBL’s fundamental principles, some aspects of the principles transferred easily, while others were transformed. Analysis raised concerns that the transformations threatened the foundational principles of TBL. While an educational innovation’s techniques may seem to be surface structures, they are realizations of deeper fundamental principles. The fundamental principles are themselves realizations of the innovation’s foundational philosophy. When techniques and/or principles are modified to a context, it is important to analyze if the modifications continue to uphold the innovation’s philosophy.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Similar content being viewed by others
References
Berliner, D. (2002). Educational research: The hardest science of them all. Educational Researcher, 31(8), 18–20.
Davis, C., & Ellis, C. (2008). Emergent methods in autoethnographic research: Autoethnograpic narrative and the multiethnographic turn. In S. Nagy Hesse-Biber & P. Leavy (Eds.), Handbook of emergent methods (pp. 283–302). New York, NY: Guilford Press.
Dunaway, G. (2005). Adaption of team learning to an introductory graduate pharmacology course. Teaching and Learning in Medicine, 17(1), 56–62.
Ellis, C., & Bochner, A. P. (2000). Autoethnography, personal narrative, reflexivity: Researcher as subject. In N. K. Denzin & Y. S. Lincoln (Eds.), Handbook of qualitative research (2nd ed., pp. 733–768). Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE Publications.
Fink, L. D. (2004). Beyond small groups: Harnessing the extraordinary power of learning teams. In L. K. Michaelsen, A. B. Knight, & L. D. Fink (Eds.), Team-based learning: A transformative use of small groups in college teaching (2nd ed., pp. 3–26). Sterling, VA: Stylus.
Fontana, A., & Frey, J. (2000). The interview: From structured questions to negotiated texts. In N. K. Denzin & Y. S. Lincoln (Eds.), Handbook of qualitative research (2nd ed., pp. 645–672). Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE Publications.
Haidet, P., Kelly, P. A., Bentley, S., Blatt, B., Chou, C. L., Fortin, A. H., et al. (2006). Not the same everywhere. Patient-centered learning environments at nine medical schools. Journal of General Internal Medicine, 21(5), 405–409.
Haidet, P., O’Malley, K. J., & Richards, B. (2002). An initial experience with “team learning” in medical education. Academic Medicine, 77(1), 40–44.
Holt, N. (2003). Representation, legitimation, and autoethnography: An autoethnographic writing story [Electronic version]. International Journal of Qualitative Methods, 2(1), 18–28.
Howell, M. D. (2008, October 21–November 5). The grand challenges in academic medicine: Patient care in academic settings. Presentation at the Academic Medicine Invited Session: Annual Meeting of the Association of American Medical Colleges, San Antonio, TX.
Hunt, D. P., Haidet, P., Coverdale, J. H., & Richards, B. (2003). The effect of using team learning in an evidence-based medicine course for medical students. Teaching and Learning in Medicine, 15(2), 131–139.
Janesick, V. J. (2000). The choreography of qualitative research design: Minuets, improvisations, and crystallization. In N. K. Denzin & Y. S. Lincoln (Eds.), Handbook of qualitative research (2nd ed., pp. 379–399). Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE Publications.
Michaelsen, L. K. (2004). Getting started with team-based learning. In L. K. Michaelsen, A. B. Knight, & L. D. Fink (Eds.), Team-based learning: A transformative use of small groups in college teaching (2nd ed., pp. 27–50). Sterling, VA: Stylus.
Michaelsen, L. K., Fink, L. D., & Knight, A. (1997). Designing effective group activities: Lessons for classroom teaching and faculty development. In D. DeZure (Ed.), To improve the academy: Resources for faculty, instructional and organizational development (pp. 373–398). Stillwater, OK: New Forums.
Michaelsen, L. K., Knight, A. B., & Fink, L. D. (Eds.) (2004).Team-based learning: A transformative use of small groups in college teaching. Sterling, VA: Stylus.
Michaelsen, L. K., Parmalee, D. X., McMahon, K. K., & Levine, R. E. (2008). Team-based learning for health professions education: A guide to using small groups for improving learning. Sterling, VA: Stylus.
Nieder, G. L., Parmelee, D. X., Stolfi, A., & Hudes, P. D. (2005). Team-based learning in a medical gross anatomy and embryology course. Clinical Anatomy, 18(1), 56–63.
Reed-Danahay, D. (1997). Auto/ethnography. New York: Berg.
Regehr, G. (2010). It’s NOT rocket science: Rethinking our metaphors for research in health professions education. Medical Education, 44(1), 31–39.
Richardson, L. (1995). Writing-stories: Co-authoring ‘The sea monster’, a writing story. Qualitative Inquiry, 1(2), 189–203.
Rider, E. A., & Brashers, V. (2006). Team-based learning: A strategy for interprofessional collaboration. Medical Education, 40(5), 486–487.
Rodgers, B. L., & Cowles, K. V. (1993). The qualitative research audit trail: A complex collection of documentation. Research in Nursing and Health, 16(3), 219–226.
Seidel, C. L., & Richards, B. F. (2001). Application of team learning in a medical physiology course. Academic Medicine, 76(5), 533–534.
Slavin, R. E. (2008). Perspective on evidence-based research in education: What works? Issues in synthesizing educational program evaluations. Educational Researcher, 37(1), 5–14.
Stake, R. E. (1975). To evaluate an arts program. In R. E. Stake (Ed.), Evaluating the arts in education: A responsive approach. Columbus, Ohio: Merrill.
Thompson, B. M., Schneider, V. F., Haidet, P., Perkowski, L. C., & Richards, B. F. (2007). Factors influencing implementation of team-based learning in health sciences education. Academic Medicine, 82(Suppl 10), S53–S56.
Vickers, M. H. (2002). Researchers as Storytellers: Writing on the edge—and without a safety net. Qualitative Inquiry, 8(5), 608–621.
Whitcomb, M. E. (2002). Research in medical education: What do we know about the link between what doctors are taught and what they do? Academic Medicine, 77(11), 1067–1068.
Acknowledgments
The authors would like to acknowledge the generous support received from the University of Ottawa’s a) Teaching and Learning Grant, b) Office of Faculty Development, c) Undergraduate Medical Education Office, and d) Academy for Innovation in Medical Education (AIME).
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Varpio, L., Bell, R., Hollingworth, G. et al. Is transferring an educational innovation actually a process of transformation?. Adv in Health Sci Educ 17, 357–367 (2012). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10459-011-9313-4
Received:
Accepted:
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10459-011-9313-4