Hi Everyone, Here is the final report recently submitted with CIHR:
1. Objectives of the event/activity:
C. If the event/activity achieved most or all of its objectives/expected results described in the application for funding, please list the three most significant results/accomplishments of the event/activity (maximum 250 words).
1. Identification and development of four projects to meet the collective goals of the KTTC: Collaborative work; Collaborative learning; Networking; and Professional development:
- Virtual Seminar Series (collaborative learning; professional development): Development of working group and plans for topic, mechanics and technical requirements for the first in a series of virtual seminars. Two members volunteered to co-facilitate the first session.
- Funding for subsequent meeting (collaborative work): Identification of a committee to submit a Meeting, Planning and Dissemination grant (or other funding opportunity) for to plan for an identified KTTC research project.
- Social Networking project/paper (collaborative work; networking): Development of a working group and draft outline of a project/paper examining the impact of the KTTC through social networking analysis.
- Mentoring (professional development; networking): Creation of a mentoring structure within the KTTC with mentor “chats” to be held on the KTTC blog and elsewhere.
2. Writing workshop
- Self-selected members met in a pre-meeting workshop to conceptualize articles based on the development of the KTTC, including: i) Interdisciplinary research in KT; ii) Happy discensus; iii) Envisioning ourselves.
3. Collaborative Development: Continued development of the purpose, role and function of the KTTC as a collaborative working group, including discussion and plans for ongoing sustainability. KT experts Sharon Strauss and Melissa Brouwers were invited to facilitate sustainability discussions at the meeting and advised the KTTC to focus less on the structure of the collaborative and more on collaborative work/projects to ensure ongoing sustainability. This was achieved during the meeting.
2. Description of the event/activity and participants:
A. Provide a brief description of your event/activity (date, location, activities, strategies, etc. maximum 250 words):
The 2nd annual KTTC face-to-face meeting was held on April 27th-29th, 2011 in Toronto. A 10-member meeting planning group developed the objectives for the meeting and met regularly to discuss the format/agenda of the 2½ day meeting. The meeting objectives were consistent with established KTTC objectives and included: i) Development of a tactical implementation plan for membership-identified collaborative learning and work activities; ii) Engagement in dialogue and planning towards supporting a sustainable collaborative; iii) Providing networking opportunities to strengthen member relations; iv) Offering a membership-identified training opportunity; and v) Providing dedicated time to engage in group writing activities. As such, the meeting was structured as follows:
- A 3-hour writing workshop opened the meeting on the 27th, where eight members met and drafted outlines for three collaborative papers regarding KTTC activity.
- The first whole-group activity included sharing and discussing the KTTC Steering Committee’s annual report.
- Day two focused on the sustainability of the KTTC via small and large group discussions facilitated by KTTC members. Melissa Brouwers provided a professional education session on how to build a career that incorporates both KT research and practice.
- Day three focused on the development of collaborative work projects through large group brainstorming, priority setting, and the completion of annual elections.
- The third day was significantly enhanced by leadership from a KT expert and PI of KT Canada, Sharon Straus.
- Opportunities for networking were created throughout the event with refreshment breaks and group meals.
3. Summary of discussions and/or deliverables (products, outcomes, decisions, recommendations etc.): (maximum 250 words)
A. Several critical discussions occurred during the meeting related to 1) a need for infrastructure elements (e.g., conference call support) to sustain electronic communications for committee and working group meetings, 2) a need to focus efforts on collaborative work instead of governance/operations, 3) a need to maximize our use of the KTTC blog to ensure participation of all members, communication and collaborative work throughout the year. The decision to focus on collaborative work activities more than on governance and structure was made to facilitate the group’s function as a collaborative, and, by doing so, to encourage our sustainability. Specific outcomes include the establishment of four identified projects: one virtual seminar series on which to build a structure and process for an on-going yearly activity, a grant application for a face-to-face planning meeting focused on a collaborative work project identified at the meeting, a project and paper involving a social network analysis of KTTC activity, and blog development as a vehicle for mentorship and networking.
4. Knowledge translation (KT) activities:
Provide a brief summary of KT activities (dissemination, exchange, partnerships etc. taking place before, during, and/or after the event/activity), if appropriate (maximum 300 words):
KT activities included:
1) to provide insight into how an academic and professional career can evolve, a session by KT expert and KT Canada member Melissa Brouwers regarding her professional path and development,
2) facilitation of sustainability discussions by a KT expert and PI of KT Canada, Sharon Strauss,
3) a post day 1.5 hour debrief by the planning committee to evolve the agenda for the final day to better meet member needs,
4) a post-event debrief by the planning committee, and
5) distribution of meeting summaries, working group minutes and the meeting evaluation with the collaborative (post-event).
Additionally, elections were held at the meeting, adding three new members (with three stepping down) to the Steering Committee, for a total of 12 members, which will meet regularly to work on the objectives identified at the meeting. Two new members were added to the Executive Committee with two stepping down, maintaining a four-member committee to ensure the plans from the meeting proceed. The four projects are: 1) Virtual seminar series; 2) Grant/Funding opportunities for the next face to face meeting; 3) Impact of KTTC through social networking analysis project and paper; and 4) Mentoring within the KTTC. Each project is being facilitated by partnerships/committees formed during the meeting and planning activities developed during small group work on the first and second day of the meeting. Members are encouraged to post a summary of activities to the blog (http://ktclearinghouse.ca/kttc/) and to use this forum for communicating about collaborative work activities, including the various manuscripts currently underway.
5. Impact/outcomes of event/activity (including, but not limited to, summary of participant evaluation results where available:
B. Provide a brief summary of participant evaluation results and/or testimonials where available
As with the previous face to face meeting, all attendees were asked to provide (in an end-of-meeting written evaluation) highlights of the meeting (Stars) as well as ideas for improvements for future meetings (Wishes). These “Two Stars and a Wish” evaluations included the following:
Stars: Networking opportunities, a sense of progress; learning opportunities; new ideas; the facilitators (Melissa Brouwers, Sharon Straus); the hard work and dedication of the steering, planning and other committees; the creation of an intellectually safe and robust space in which to interact and collaborate; adjustments made to the agenda during the meeting to accommodate group feedback; the writing workshop; efforts at ensuring sustainability; enjoyed discovering commonalities and diversities; project plans afoot.
Wishes: more KTTC!; less time needs to be spent on sustainability, more on projects; next year: shorter?; next year: a rural location, beside water?; next year: 20% admin, 80% project work; need to create more of a connection between committee/group members and the non-committee/group KTTC members; more participation from non-committee members (so as to help balance workloads); retain our “trainee” identification / collaborative branding; project productivity!
6. Intended follow-up:
A. Provide a brief summary of intended follow-up activities, where appropriate:
The KTTC Steering Committee will meet monthly to discuss the progress of the four identified projects. The chairs of each of these committees will continue to work on these projects and report back to the Steering Committee. Ongoing collaborations from the writing workshop will result in the preparation of three manuscripts for submission for publication. The Executive Committee will identify and find solutions for infrastructure sustainability, e.g., conference calling, and maintaining momentum of the KTTC.
A face to face meeting for 2012 will be critical to advance much of this work and substantial efforts will be made to apply for funding to ensure this occurs.
Evelyn Cornelissen 12:02 am on January 11, 2012 Permalink
Thanks Shalini! Being a neophyte in the blogosphere, I don’t have a preconceived notion of what a blog c/should be. I love how you’ve described your perspective on what our blog offers. You’ve captured all the key purposes/benefits that I can think of. I’m particularly interested in the opportunity to engage in thought-provoking dialogue in a peer setting. Keen to hear what others think…
EC
Robin Urquhart 10:32 am on January 11, 2012 Permalink
Yes, thanks Shalini for the post. I have to agree with Evelyn in that I had no preconceived notion of what a blog c/should be before the KTTC, since I didn’t previously participate in one. Nonetheless, after our experience on this one, I have a few thoughts:
1) Because I am new to the blogosphere, I am not quite sure how to interact/work with/feel about this form of communication (while this is certainly not the case for everyone, perhaps others feel similarly?). For one, I really enjoy reading others’ posts, many of which make me think about something a little differently or provide me with a few pointers/tips to use (related to PhD process, etc) yet do not necessarily trigger me to respond. So, if/when I post something that no one responds to, does that mean no one cares or is paying attention, or rather is it just the nature of blogging wherein people read each other’s posts – and sometimes get something from it – much more often than they actually reply?
For KTTC’ers who have not yet posted or responded here (as well as those who have) — is checking the blog from time to time valuable at all?
2) In regards to functions of this blog, I am especially interested in the opportunity to engage in thought-provoking dialogue (as Evelyn said) and to become familiar with the membership/build relationships with other members. For me, I think it would be great to somehow use this forum to let each other know what we’re up to and what our KT interests are.
Robin