Background and aim: There is an increased understanding of and appreciation for teachers' work from other disciplines, primarily for formulating individual plans and enhancing one's teaching based on observations and shared reflections. This article reviews how reflective practice, which is self-initiated and focused, informs the understanding and improvement of teaching practices, demonstrates interaction with students, and guides teaching experiences. This article aims to explore reflective practices that were meaningful for engaging in in-class instructional teaching practices.Methods: A self-study methodology was used to examine the complicated relationship between teaching and learning and knowledge in action of teacher education pedagogy.Results and discussion: As teacher, we understand the importance of problem-solving, establishing connections between relationships, and motivating students to think about missing connections or reconsidering them. Implications: The benefit of the Teaching Triangle was enhancing interdisciplinary relationships, understanding professional teaching relationships, and learning from each other without boundaries.Conclusions: Three aspects of the interdisciplinary reflective practice that emerged were adopting philosophy and purpose-driven goals; facilitating teaching pedagogy and technology; and creating culturally safe and effective student learning environments.

No abstract

Introduction: While challenges facing community and acute care practitioners have been studied elsewhere, this is not the case for respiratory therapists (RTs). This study aimed to examine attitudinal differences amongst RTs in British Columbia regarding challenges faced by acute and community settings. Methods: A 40-item anonymous online survey was sent to members of the British Columbia Society or Respiratory Therapists. Of the 40 questions, 11 were relevant to the study's aim. Results: Of 1024 invitations, 197 (19.2%) responded. One-hundred and seventeen (59.4%) self-identified as working in acute care settings, 53 (26.9%) in community settings, and 27 (13.7%) as "other". Stress-and interpersonal-related challenges showed statistically significant differences (P ≤ 0.05) based on work setting. Acute care had the highest percentage of responses for challenges related to technology, stress, inter-professional collaboration, and training. Community settings had the highest percentage in challenges related to independence and education. Both being equal received the highest percentage in challenges related to problem-solving, interpersonal, communication, and resource management. Discussion: While attitudinal differences exist, they are not extreme. It did not appear that respondents' primary motivation was to vote along "party lines". Conclusions:The setting an RT works in can influence attitudes related to stress and interpersonal challenges. Despite this, one setting is not universally more challenging. Acute care settings can have greater technological, inter-professional, and training-related challenges. Community settings can have greater independence and education-related challenges. Both settings can provide similar challenges with problem-solving, communication, and resource management.