Focus: This showcase will present findings from an interprofessional education co-design program, aimed at improving students’ willingness to engage in interprofessional collaborative practice after graduating, and professional identity development.
Background/context: Health discipline professional bodies increasingly require interprofessional collaborative practice (IPCP; Jadotte & Noel, 2021). Yet, challenges remain in implementing interprofessional education (IPE), especially for regional and/or multicampus universities which must still provide equity of access regardless of student location. These challenges provide a unique opportunity to teach skills required for future asynchronous IPCP.
Description: Participants co-designed educational materials that could be delivered asynchronously, contributing to solutions for the wicked problem of interprofessional learning across campuses and distance. Two half-day workshops (over two weeks) and between-workshop homework tasks supported by online materials facilitated the co-design process.
Method: Two groups of participants were included: nine emerging health professionals (EHPs) from psychology, dietetics, occupational therapy and nursing, and eight community members aged 65+ who interacted with at least three health professionals in the past year. Community members provided personal experience as healthcare beneficiaries, consistent with patient-centred care co-design.
Evidence: Pre- and post-program quantitative measures captured program impact on student willingness to engage in IPCP using the Interprofessional Socialisation and Valuing Scale (King et al., 2010) and professional identity (Professional Identity Five-Factor Scale; Tan et al., 2017). Artefacts produced by students form an indication of activities students value and ways we can engage optimally with students. Quantitative data are reported descriptively due to a small sample; artefacts will be thematically analysed.
Contribution: This study shows the importance of co-design in interprofessional practice, and implications in professional development and skill building for contemporary work settings. Such skills are crucial in an increasingly connected and technological professional world.
Engagement: How can education and training of asynchronous interprofessional practice be improved, within and beyond healthcare professions?

Focus: Practical strategies to improve the quality and impact of teamwork in higher education.
Background: Employers across the world deem teamwork as equally important as technical skills (Riebe et al., 2016). Mastering teamwork in higher education is crucial, yet it poses challenges for students: coordinating diverse individuals toward shared objectives, effective communication, conflict management, and ensuring equitable contributions from all team members. Particularly, the shift from individual responsibility to shared accountability can be unfamiliar and demanding. Finally, learning effective teamwork can be hindered when instructors are uncertain how to create conducive environments for collaboration. There is a need for educators to receive training in teamwork pedagogies and proactively integrate these approaches into the classroom setting (Burbach et al, 2010).
Method: Over the past 3 years a multi-disciplinary teamwork community of practice (CoP) has collaboratively developed recommendations and resources on best implementing and teaching teamwork in higher education. The CoP engages teamwork across its entire lifecycle, exploring its various stages with a strong emphasis on teamwork processes rather than just the product or student output. The recommendations and resources are developed from existing literature, insights from industry experts, and the successful practices of CoP members.
Evidence: CoP-developed strategies have been trialled by educators with positive feedback from students. These have been shared via presentations and workshops in over 10 national and international conferences.
Contribution: This showcase contributes to the scholarship on effective pedagogies for teamwork in higher education and provides practical advice for educators seeking to enhance their teaching amid the evolving needs of collaborative learning.
Engagement: During the presentation, the audience will participate in demonstrating the effectiveness of certain teamwork strategies by taking on the role of students in a team. Participants will acquire valuable knowledge and resources to improve student learning experiences and outcomes through effective teamwork.

Focus
This longitudinal research investigates students’ trajectories towards completion or withdrawal in a Bachelor of Arts programme in New Zealand, considering different aspects of students and instruction that may be influential.
Background/Context
Students’ academic achievement before and after admission has a significant effect on their likelihood of withdrawing (Harvey & Luckman, 2014; Mabel & Britton, 2018; Thomas, 2012; Willcoxson, 2010). However, there are other influential factors, such as the appropriateness of the programme (Harvey & Luckman, 2014; Willcoxson, 2010), and the number of courses taken in the first year (Tower et al., 2015). Another key factor is the quality of students’ engagement at university (Qvortrup & Lykkegaard, 2022; Tinto, 2010). Previous studies investigating withdrawal have often considered withdrawal within the first year of study, although many students withdraw later (Mabel & Britton, 2018).
Description
This research considers students’ withdrawal decisions from the students’ perspectives, increasing understanding of what we can do to encourage completion, as well as whether we should do so.
Methods
This research takes a narrative enquiry approach to analyse longitudinal interview data, collected from 21 participants, including an exit interview with each participant who withdrew before completion. The data was analysed thematically to identify factors contributing to decisions to withdraw from university.
Evidence
Although the data came from just 21 participants, deep and rich data was collected longitudinally. The researcher built rapport with the participants, allowing honest disclosure about their experiences and perspectives.
Contribution
By increasing understanding of students’ experiences, early warning signs may be identified which could inform efforts to support students. Such efforts could ultimately improve the experiences of a wide range of students during their undergraduate degrees.
Engagement
Participants will be engaged through interactive questions during the presentation as well as being asked for feedback and suggestions towards the end of the presentation.

Focus: Assessing the applicability of interactive oral assessments (IOA) as a high stakes final assessment in bioscience courses. Empirical data analysis supports integration of IOA as an authentic assessment to increase student engagement, satisfaction and assessment performance.

Background/context: High-stakes written examination, which is the norm in the biosciences often fails to reflect real-world application (French et al., 2023). With the prevalence of generative artificial intelligence, these types of assessment raise questions of validity and reliability. This presentation identifies how the IOA can be used to address current challenges in higher education (Reedy et al., 2021).

Description: IOA are semi-structured oral assessments designed to gauge students' understanding, critical thinking and reasoning for a defined set of learning objectives (Sortiriadou et al., 2020). It involves an unscripted one-on-one interaction between student and assessor. This highly flexible assessment format meets the criteria of authentic assessment (Ashford-Rowe et al., 2014; Wiggins, 1990).

Methods: A longitudinal mixed-methods study was conducted to evaluate the effectiveness of using IOA in a second year genetics course with 139 students over two years. Data collection included 5-point Likert scale surveys and course evaluations for thematic analysis. Quantitative data of course performance was analysed using Kruskal-Wallis or Mann-Whitney tests.

Evidence: When IOA were used as final assessment, student performance was significantly improved. There was no evidence of bias between assessors, or based on gender, English proficiency, or nationality. In addition to improved student performance, students identified IOA as significantly assisting their learning in an authentic environment.

Contribution: This project demonstrates the processes of designing and implementing a valid alternative high stakes assessments and implementation of IOA should be considered.

Engagement: The floor will be opened for questions and feedback. Have you considered integrating IOA into your courses? What are the roadblocks or limitations that have prevented incorporation?