“Now I See”: Digital Storytelling for Mediating Interprofessional Collaboration

  • Grete Jamissen
  • Mike Moulton
Part of the Digital Education and Learning book series (DEAL)


Jamissen and Moulton describe how digital storytelling (DS) supported an interprofessional group of academics in overcoming challenges in their efforts to develop a holistic Master’s degree in Public Health. The DS workshop, part of a continuous formative evaluation program, invited the researchers to explore their own and each other’s professional identity and commitment to public health issues. The authors observed a change in the nature and degree of participation with an increased recognition of one’s own and other’s contributions to the interprofessional study program. As examples of boundary objects, digital stories, seen both as products (the finished stories) and as a process (constructing the narrative in a collaborative setting), help facilitate interprofessional collaboration.


Boundary Object Professional Identity Interprofessional Collaboration Digital Storytelling Collaborative Setting 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.


  1. Akkerman, S. F., & Bakker, A. (2011). Boundary crossing and boundary objects. Review of Educational Research, 81(2), 132–169.Google Scholar
  2. Almås, S. H. (2009). Tverrprofesjonell kapabilitet, sosialisering og helse- og sosialfaglig identitet. In E. Willumsen (Ed.), Tverrprofesjonelt samarbeid i praksis og utdanning. Oslo: Universitetsforlaget. Ch. 11.Google Scholar
  3. Amulya, J. (2004). What is reflective practice? Center for Reflective Community Practice: Massachusetts Institute of Technology. Available through: Community Science website. Accessed 28 Sept 2016.
  4. Antonovsky, A. (1987). Unraveling the mystery of health: How people manage stress and stay well. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.Google Scholar
  5. Boud, D., Cressey, P., & Docherty, P. (Eds.). (2006). Productive reflection at work: Learning for changing organizations. London: Routledge.Google Scholar
  6. Boyer, E. L. (1990). Scholarship reconsidered: Priorities of the professoriate. Princeton: Carnegie Foundation for the Advancement of Teaching.Google Scholar
  7. Bruner, J. (1986). Actual minds, possible worlds. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
  8. Carr, W., & Kemmis, S. (1986). Becoming critical: Education, knowledge, and action research. London: Falmer Press.Google Scholar
  9. Casto, M. R., & Julia, M. C. (1994). Interprofessional care and collaborative practice. Pacific Grove: Brooks/Cole Publ. Comp.Google Scholar
  10. Clark, P. G. (1994). Social, professional and educational values on the interdisciplinary team: Implications from the gerontological and geriatric education. Educational gerontology, 20, 35–52.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Csikszentmihalyi, M. (1997). Finding flow: The psychology of engagement with everyday life. New York: BasicBooks.Google Scholar
  12. D’Amour, D., Ferrada-Videla, M., San Martin Rodriguez, L., & Beaulieu, D. (2005). The conceptual basis for interprofessional collaboration: Core concepts and theoretical frameworks. Journal of Interprofessional Care, 19(Supplement 1), 116–131.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Dewey, J. (1997). Democracy and education: An introduction to the philosophy of education. New York: Free Press/Simon and Schuster.Google Scholar
  14. Engeström, Y., Miettinen, R., & Punamäki, R.-L. (Eds.). (1999). Perspectives on activity theory. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  15. Gabriel, Y. (2000). Storytelling in organizations: Facts, fictions and fantasies. Oxford: Oxford University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Goffman, E. (1971). The presentation of self in everyday life. Harmondsworth: Penguin Books.Google Scholar
  17. Heldal, F. (2010). Multidisciplinary collaboration as a loosely coupled system: Integrating and blocking professional boundaries with objects. Journal of Interprofessional Care, 24(1), 19–30.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Hislop, D. (2005). Knowledge management in organisations. London: Oxford Press.Google Scholar
  19. Jacobsen, D., & Jacobsen, R. H. (2004). Scholarship and Christian faith. Enlarging the conversation. New York: Oxford University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Jamissen, G. (2012). Når erfaring blir fortelling. Studenters praksisrefleksjon. In K. H. Haug, G. Jamissen, & C. Ohlmann (Eds.), Digitalt fortalte historier. Refleksjoner for læring. Oslo: Cappelen Damm Akademiske. Ch. 6.Google Scholar
  21. Jamissen, G., & Skou, G. (2010). Poetic reflection through digital storytelling – A methodology to foster professional health worker identity in students., 6(2), 177–191.Google Scholar
  22. Kane, R. A. (1983). Interprofessional teamwork, Manpower monograph (Vol. 8). Syracuse: Syracuse University School of Social Work.Google Scholar
  23. Kouyoumdjian, H. (2012). Learning through visuals. Psychology Today. Available through: Community Science website: Accessed 28 Sept 2016.
  24. Lambert, J. (2013). Digital storytelling: Capturing lives, creating community (4th ed.). New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
  25. Schön, D. (1983). The reflective practitioner: How professionals think in action. New York: Basic Books.Google Scholar
  26. Sole, D., & Wilson, D. G. (2002). Storytelling in organizations: The power and traps of using stories to share knowledge in organizations. LILA, Harvard Graduate School of Education.Google Scholar
  27. Star, S. L. (1989). The structure of ill-structured solutions: Boundary objects and heterogeneous distributed problem solving. In L. Gasser & M. Huhns (Eds.), Distributed artificial intelligence (pp. 37–54). San Mateo: Morgan Kaufmann Publishers Inc.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Star, S. L. (2010). This is not a boundary object: Reflections on the origin of a concept. Science, Technology, and Human Values, 35(5), 601–617.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Tønnessen, E. S. (2012). Digitale fortellinger som multimodal tekst. In K. H. Haug, G. Jamissen, & C. Ohlmann (Eds.), Digitalt fortalte historier. Refleksjoner for læring. Oslo: Cappelen Damm Akademiske. Ch. 4.Google Scholar
  30. Wenger, E. (1998). Communities of practice: Learning, meaning, and identity. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. World Health Organization. (1988). Learning together to work together for health. Genève: WHO.Google Scholar
  32. Willumsen, E. (2009). Tverrprofesjonelt samarbeid i praksis og utdanning. Oslo: Universitetsforlaget.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© The Author(s) 2017

Authors and Affiliations

  • Grete Jamissen
    • 1
  • Mike Moulton
    • 2
  1. 1.Oslo and Akershus University College of Applied SciencesOsloNorway
  2. 2.Norwegian University of Life SciencesÅsNorway

Personalised recommendations