Investigating predictive power of agency and communion for interprofessional learner outcomes: A before–after study

ABSTRACT

As interprofessional education (IPE) continues to be instituted, much attention has been paid to training-intervention effectiveness. Less attention has been paid to the selection side of the IPE model; however, efficient delivery is necessary to sustain the development of IPE. This short report investigates the “two big social cognitions” (agency and communion) as individual-difference predictors of attitude change and knowledge acquisition. A 3-week before–after observational design with survey methodology was conducted in a pre-licensure IPE setting (n = 82). Results indicated significant interactions of agency and communion in predicting learner outcomes. Our findings should stimulate future IPE researchers to identify additional, selection-relevant design factors (e.g., individual differences) that may enhance comparative-effectiveness of IPE.

KEYWORDS:

• Agency
• communion
• confounds
• individual differences
• learner outcomes
• person

Declaration of interest

The authors report no conflicts of interest. The authors alone are responsible for the content and writing of this article.

Notes

^1. Kirkpatrick’s (1956) generic training evaluation framework, consisting of four criteria ((1) trainee reactions, (2) learning, (3) transfer/behaviour change, and (4) organization results), was adapted for application to IPE trainings (Barr et al., 2000). The six-level IPE adaptation expanded Levels 2 (learning) and 4 (organization results). The elaborated framework delineates person-centred and system-procedural outcomes. For Level 2 (learning), this corresponds to attitude/perception modification (2a) and knowledge/skill acquisition (2b), respectively. For Level 4 (organization results), this corresponds to change in care-delivery practices (4a) and improvement to patient health/well-being (4b). Complete definitions for the six-level framework are reproduced here: Level 1, reaction—learners’ views on the learning experience and its interprofessional nature; Level 2a, attitude/perception modification—changes in reciprocal attitudes or perceptions between participant groups and changes in perception or attitude towards the value/use of team approaches to caring for a specific client group; Level 2b, knowledge/skill acquisition—including knowledge and skills linked to interprofessional collaboration; Level 3, behavioural change—identifies individuals’ transfer of interprofessional learning to their practice setting and their changed professional practice; Level 4a, change in organizational practice—wider changes in the organization and delivery of care; Level 4b, benefits to patients/clients—improvements in health or well-being of patients/clients.