Developing and Testing a Framework for Learning Online Collaborative Creativity in Medical Education: Cross-Sectional Study
Background: Collaborative Creativity (CC) is a social process of generating creative and innovative solutions to real-world problems through the collective effort and interaction of a group of people. By taking this approach, medical students can cultivate the abilities and mindset required to be creative thinkers, develop teamwork and interdisciplinary learning, complex problem-solving, and provide outstanding patient care. However, medical students ranked low on creativity, sparked by existing pedagogical approaches that focus more on knowledge outcomes, and the professional challenges for doctors and healthcare professionals have become more complex in an ever-evolving healthcare ecosystem requiring collaborative creativity. Objective: This study objective was to develop, test, and evaluate the acceptability of a new framework for learning online Collaborative Creativity (FLOCC). Methods: FLOCC builds upon the established pedagogical approaches of rapid Design Thinking, Team-Based Learning (TBL) and Problem-Based Learning (PBL) and is scaffolded by four individual asynchronous (Empathy Map, Frame Your Challenge, Turning Insights into How Might We Questions, and Individual Brainstorming) and five collaborative synchronous activities (Bundle Ideas, List Constraints, Final Idea, Prototyping and Blind Testing). Eighty-five medical students took part in two #feasibility studies (study 1, n=44; study 2, n=41) differentiated by two problems (healthcare and engineering sustainability issues). Learner acceptability was measured using a 31-item survey (using 7-point Likert scale) consisting of four factors (Distributed Creativity, Synergistic Social Collaboration, Time Regulation and Achievement, and Self and Emotions) and three free text questions. Results: Most students were positive about FLOCC, scoring higher mean percentages of 'Agree' in the first two factors (92% and 88%), followed by the latter two factors (80% and 70%); indicating high level of acceptability. Only Time Regulation and Achievement was statistically significant (P < 0.01) between means of studies 1 and 2. Effect size was larger in Self and Emotions and Time Regulation and Achievement (eta squared Ƞ2 = 0.34 and 0.72, respectively), than Synergistic Social Collaboration and Distributed Creativity (Cohen’s d = 0.01 for both). Conclusions: With effective time management, the FLOCC has potential as a tool or framework for nurturing collaborative creativity in medical students. Medical schools could provide the opportunity and environment for medical students to be creative thinkers; therefore, creativity approaches could be integrated into the curriculum to possibly foster the culture of creativity for breakthrough solutions by future doctors of the 21st century.
