Table 2.
Faculty and Student Participant Responses on the Strength of the various domains of the IPECP-IEs Framework. N = 12
| Framework Domain | Students who thought it was a strength N = 8 | Faculty who thought it was a strength N = 4 | Total |
|---|---|---|---|
| Curriculum aims and objectives clearly communicated and achieved at the end of the IPECP-IEs | 7 | 4 | 11 |
| Home and Host institutional leadership support approaches to enable the implementation of the IPECP-IEs | 8 | 4 | 12 |
| Administration between home and host institutions that included MOUs, handling applications by students, regular communication on steps, guidelines on various stages before, during, and after the elective | 8 | 4 | 12 |
| Faculty adequately skilled to deliver and guide learning | 8 | 4 | 12 |
| Student teams, number, and discipline selected to participate in the IPECP-IEs | 8 | 2 | 10 |
| Multilateral partnership approach that allowed reciprocity with equal benefits for both home and host institutions | 8 | 4 | 12 |
| Learning facilities to aid learning included Zoom, voice-over power points, teaching plans, curriculum, and reference materials to aid learning | 8 | 4 | 12 |
| Web Application system to enable applications to enable centralization of the application and acceptance process | 8 | 4 | 12 |
| Communication strategy i.e., emails and WhatsApp groups between faculty and students pre, during, and post-elective participation | 8 | 4 | 12 |
| The teaching method used; country-specific case studies to guide learning and acquisition of IPECP | 7 | 4 | 11 |
| Assessment methods used student lead i.e., pre-, and post-knowledge and skills scale using the ICCASS 2018 revised, group assignments, and joint report submission about the IPECP-IEs | 8 | 4 | 12 |
| Acculturation process that involved online voice-over power points for the students and an online faculty workshop that allowed faculty to gain skills in IPECP competencies, teaching, assessment, and virtual teaching skills | 8 | 4 | 12 |
| Online virtual learning model utilizing both synchronous sessions and asynchronous sessions | 6 | 4 | 10 |
| Elective Duration involved one week of orientation and 6 weeks of attachment and learning at the host institution | 4 | 4 | 8 |
| Funding to facilitate the student’s internet connection, faculty internet and time compensation, and Institutional Administrative costs | 8 | 4 | 12 |
Items on the leadership approach and the multilateral collaboration approach were more easily answered by the faculty than the students. However, a detailed explanation was done to ensure the students got to understand each structure in-depth