Faculty development: if you build it, they will come.
ABSTRACT The goals of this study were three-fold: to explore the reasons why some clinical teachers regularly attend centralised faculty development activities; to compare their responses with those of colleagues who do not attend, and to learn how we can make faculty development programmes more pertinent to teachers' needs.
In 2008-2009, we conducted focus groups with 23 clinical teachers who had participated in faculty development activities on a regular basis in order to ascertain their perceptions of faculty development, reasons for participation, and perceived barriers against involvement. Thematic analysis and research team consensus guided the data interpretation.
Reasons for regular participation included the perceptions that: faculty development enables personal and professional growth; learning and self-improvement are valued; workshop topics are viewed as relevant to teachers' needs; the opportunity to network with colleagues is appreciated, and initial positive experiences promote ongoing involvement. Barriers against participation mirrored those cited by non-attendees in an earlier study (e.g. volume of work, lack of time, logistical factors), but did not prevent participation. Suggestions for increasing participation included introducing a 'buddy system' for junior faculty members, an orientation workshop for new staff, and increased role-modelling and mentorship.
The conceptualisation of faculty development as a means to achieve specific objectives and the desire for relevant programming that addresses current needs (i.e., expectancies), together with an appreciation of learning, self-improvement and networking with colleagues (i.e., values), were highlighted as reasons for participation by regular attendees. Medical educators should consider these 'lessons learned' in the design and delivery of faculty development offerings. They should also continue to explore the notion of faculty development as a social practice and the application of motivational theories that include expectancy-value constructs to personal and professional development.
- SourceAvailable from: Ximena TriviñoRevista peruana de medicina experimental y salud publica 09/2014; 31(3):417-423.
- [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
ABSTRACT: Objectives. To describe the experience and results of the implementation of a faculty development program for professors of Medicine in the Medical Education Certificate program developed at the School of Medicine, Pontificia Uniersidad Catolica de Chile. Materials and methods. This was a descriptive, cross-sectional, quantitative and qualitative study. The population consisted of all graduates of the program until 2011. A questionnaire with open and closed-ended questions was applied, exploring different levels of impact using the Kirkpatrick evaluation model. Results. Over 97% expressed a high degree of satisfaction (Kirkpatrick level 1). Most respondents reported changes in learning, knowledge and teaching skills (Kirkpatrick Level 2) with statistically significant differences in retrospective pre-post questionnaires 93% reported having improved their teaching performance generally, and 85% in a specific performance (Kirkpatrick Level 3). At level 4 of the Kirkpatrick evaluation model, most perceived an increased interest in teaching and 69% reported being valued more highly at the institutional level. Five categories emerged from the qualitative analysis: value given to teaching and of training in teaching, importance of teaching skills, the contribution of teaching to the professional role, contribution to personal development and strengthening of the academic community. Conclusions. The effects of this faculty development program in medical education have been positive. Professors of Medicine, in addition to improving their teaching performance, perceived changes in personal development, in their role as physicians, in the academic community and in the institution.Revista peruana de medicina experimental y salud publica 09/2014; 31(3):417-23.
Article: Twelve tips for curriculum renewal.[Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
ABSTRACT: Abstract Background: Curriculum development in the health sciences usually entails a lengthy, in-depth review of most or all aspects of the curriculum. The review usually leads to the generation of a detailed report that is submitted to the Dean or executive committee of the faculty. Much has been written about the process of curriculum development but very little has been written about the important processes of curriculum renewal and revision. Aims: Health sciences curricula, including those that are newly developed, will benefit from timely periodic revision. The revision process with subsequent diligent curriculum monitoring is called curriculum renewal. In this article, we articulate twelve tips on how to assure dynamic, ongoing curriculum renewal. The overall goal of the renewal should be to assure timely, evidence-based curriculum responsiveness to changes in practice, health care, student needs and educational approaches based on quality research. Methods: We searched the health care education literature for articles related to curriculum development, seeking credible evidence on, and recommendations for, best practices for ongoing renewal of developed curricula. Results and conclusions: The health sciences literature is replete with recommendations to guide suggestions for curriculum development; however, there are few credible research-based guidelines to inform dynamic curriculum renewal. Given the rapid development of research-based knowledge in health sciences education practices, there is a need to diligently monitor the ongoing successes and failures of a developed curriculum with a view to instituting large or small timely changes to assure timely curriculum renewal.Medical Teacher 07/2014; · 2.05 Impact Factor