Team-based learning is “an instructional strategy that is “based on procedures for developing high performance learning teams that can dramatically enhance the quality of student learning.” (1) Put another way, it is the use of small groups in college teaching. Most of us are familiar with small-group learning at some level, either by being a member of a small group in our education, or by fashioning them for use in a class that we teach. Why are we seeing a growth in such forms of teaching?
In part, I think it is due to the fact that younger learners are more conversant with technology, are less tolerant of lecture settings, and are tired of passive learning settings. Small groups not only enhance learning, but they also foster interpersonal skill development. And finally, small groups can be an exciting new method for teachers to use to help engage their learners. According to Fink, small-group learning is transformational, driving four separate kinds of transformation:
- Transforming small groups into teams
- Transforming technique into strategy
- Transforming the quality of learning
- Transforming the joy of teaching
Further, Fink also notes that there are three different ways to use small groups: casual use, cooperative learning, and team-based learning. Casual use represents the first use by an instructor, where perhaps after delivering a short lecture the instructor then asks students to pair up with the person sitting next tot hem to discuss a question or solve a problem. After allowing a short period of time to pass, the instructor then calls on some of those students to provide a response. Cooperative learning is a bit more complex. It requires advance planning, regular use of small groups, role assignment, and so on. However, it does not require any significant change in the current structure or format of the course in which it occurs. The small group activities simply are fit into that structure. The pinnacle, then, is team-based learning. Here, the structure of the course in changed in order to most effectively take advantage of what are now called learning teams. These teams require commitment from students and a desire to solve problems beyond the abilities of any single member. (1, p. 7)
Fink notes that for learning teams to be used, a course need only have a body of information that students need to understand, and that the students learning how to apply the content by solving problems or resolving issues. A classic example of this approach could be embodied in the small group process of problem-based learning in healthcare education. Lastly, Fink defines team-based learning as “a particular instructional strategy that is designed to (a) support the development of high performance learning teams and (b) provide opportunities for these teams to engage in significant learning tasks.” (1, p. 9)
It is likely we all use at least a small measure of team-based learning in our teaching; the question is how to systematize doing so at a higher level. The text by Michaelson, Knight and Fink provides a detailed examination in how to do so.
References
1. Michaelson LK, Knight AB, Fink LD, editors. Team-based learning: a transformatice use of small groups in college teaching. Sterling, VA; Stylus Publishing 2004:vi
Monday, June 8, 2009
Monday, June 1, 2009
The American Public Health Association
I’ve been a member of the American Public Health Association for nearly 15 years now, and am among only perhaps a few hundred people from our profession to join and participate. I’d like to take a little time here to describe APHA and advocate for you to consider joining as a member of the Chiropractic Health Care section. Information I present here can also be found on the APHA website, at http://www.apha.org/.
APHA is the oldest and largest public health organization in the world, and has been in existence since 1872. As the website notes, “the Association aims to protect all Americans and their communities from preventable, serious health threats and strives to assure community-based health promotion and disease prevention activities and preventive health services are universally accessible in the United States.” Amongst its members are practitioners, educators and health care professionals of an amazing diversity, and this diversity includes several hundred chiropractors. The vision of APHA is a healthy global society, and it has worked ceaselessly to that end for more than a century. Its mission is to “Improve the health of the public and achieve equity in health status.” APHA gives voice to the underserved and the forgotten, ensuring that our efforts at improving national health leaves no one behind.
Advocacy is a major activity of APHA, and it regularly publishes legislative updates of its actions; the latest can be read at http://www.apha.org/NR/rdonlyres/74574D4F-4FC8-4920-8526-8B58259C2CF0/0/May2009LegislativeUpdate.pdf.
APHA has 25 sections, each comprised of major public health disciplines. Sections are the primary professional unit of APHA, and it is through its sections that much of its work is accomplished. I am pleased to note that one of the 25 sections is the Chiropractic Health Care section. As it is described on the website, the CHC “enhances public health through the application of chiropractic knowledge to the community by conservative care, disease prevention and health promotion.” The existence of this section is a result of the work of a number of people, but none more so than Dr. Rand Baird, who has been an APHA member for more than 25 years and was instrumental in growing the chiropractic membership. Palmer College has an active number of faculty and administrators among the members of this section.
It is important that we have this voice. Chiropractors serve on APHA’s Governing Council, and have made important input into public health policy. But our numbers are few and more should join. Please consider it. The investment of money pays off in influence, and our influence needs to be heard at the highest levels of our government. APHA can help make that happen.
APHA is the oldest and largest public health organization in the world, and has been in existence since 1872. As the website notes, “the Association aims to protect all Americans and their communities from preventable, serious health threats and strives to assure community-based health promotion and disease prevention activities and preventive health services are universally accessible in the United States.” Amongst its members are practitioners, educators and health care professionals of an amazing diversity, and this diversity includes several hundred chiropractors. The vision of APHA is a healthy global society, and it has worked ceaselessly to that end for more than a century. Its mission is to “Improve the health of the public and achieve equity in health status.” APHA gives voice to the underserved and the forgotten, ensuring that our efforts at improving national health leaves no one behind.
Advocacy is a major activity of APHA, and it regularly publishes legislative updates of its actions; the latest can be read at http://www.apha.org/NR/rdonlyres/74574D4F-4FC8-4920-8526-8B58259C2CF0/0/May2009LegislativeUpdate.pdf.
APHA has 25 sections, each comprised of major public health disciplines. Sections are the primary professional unit of APHA, and it is through its sections that much of its work is accomplished. I am pleased to note that one of the 25 sections is the Chiropractic Health Care section. As it is described on the website, the CHC “enhances public health through the application of chiropractic knowledge to the community by conservative care, disease prevention and health promotion.” The existence of this section is a result of the work of a number of people, but none more so than Dr. Rand Baird, who has been an APHA member for more than 25 years and was instrumental in growing the chiropractic membership. Palmer College has an active number of faculty and administrators among the members of this section.
It is important that we have this voice. Chiropractors serve on APHA’s Governing Council, and have made important input into public health policy. But our numbers are few and more should join. Please consider it. The investment of money pays off in influence, and our influence needs to be heard at the highest levels of our government. APHA can help make that happen.
Tuesday, May 26, 2009
Organizational Culture in Higher Education
In the business community, the focus on organizational culture really took off in the 1980, with the publication of books like Peters and Waterman In Search of Excellence. But since that time, there has been little agreement on how to view culture, and a number of theories have evolved. What is incontrovertible is that culture does play a role in aiding and resisting change. Change is, of course, inevitable in education.
Institutions are influenced not only by outside forces (ie, the economy) but by inside forces as well. This internal dynamic “has its roots in the history of the organization and derives its force from the values, processes, and goals held by those most intimately involved in the organization’s workings.” (1) Decisions and actions are a reflection of the organization’s culture. For those that have been in the culture for some time, the cultural values are part of the air they breath, not often considered consciously but almost always followed nonetheless. It is only when we break the codes of our culture that we find ourselves aware that they are there. But culture is a driver in educational organizations, and as our challenges become more difficult that there is a need to look at culture as a means to help address these challenges.
Tierney notes that organizational culture encourages members to:
- Consider conflict in the broad canvas of organizational life
- Recognize contradictions that create organizational tension
- Implement decisions with an awareness of their role on the culture
- Understand the symbolic dimensions of decisions and actions
- Consider why different groups have different perceptions about performance
Thus, Tierney offers a framework for looking at culture. In this framework, he considers:
- Environment: how does the organizational define its environment and what is its attitude toward that environment?
- Mission: how do we define the mission, articulate it, and use it for decision making? How much agreement is there?
- Socialization: How do new faculty (or staff or administrators) becomes socialized? How do we find out what we need to know to survive and thrive in our new environment?
- Information: What is information, who has it, and how do I get it?
- Strategy: How are decisions made? Who makes them? What happens if I make a bad decision?
- Leadership: What does the organization wants from its leaders? Who are they? Are there informal leaders as well as formal ones?
Our culture is conveyed in the relationships we have with our colleagues, and how we view what we see happening. No organization can be immune to the effects of culture, and understanding it is critical to aiding in innovation and change.
References
1. Tierney WG. The impact of culture on organizational decision making: theory and practice in higher education. Sterling, VA; Stylus Publishing 2008:24
Institutions are influenced not only by outside forces (ie, the economy) but by inside forces as well. This internal dynamic “has its roots in the history of the organization and derives its force from the values, processes, and goals held by those most intimately involved in the organization’s workings.” (1) Decisions and actions are a reflection of the organization’s culture. For those that have been in the culture for some time, the cultural values are part of the air they breath, not often considered consciously but almost always followed nonetheless. It is only when we break the codes of our culture that we find ourselves aware that they are there. But culture is a driver in educational organizations, and as our challenges become more difficult that there is a need to look at culture as a means to help address these challenges.
Tierney notes that organizational culture encourages members to:
- Consider conflict in the broad canvas of organizational life
- Recognize contradictions that create organizational tension
- Implement decisions with an awareness of their role on the culture
- Understand the symbolic dimensions of decisions and actions
- Consider why different groups have different perceptions about performance
Thus, Tierney offers a framework for looking at culture. In this framework, he considers:
- Environment: how does the organizational define its environment and what is its attitude toward that environment?
- Mission: how do we define the mission, articulate it, and use it for decision making? How much agreement is there?
- Socialization: How do new faculty (or staff or administrators) becomes socialized? How do we find out what we need to know to survive and thrive in our new environment?
- Information: What is information, who has it, and how do I get it?
- Strategy: How are decisions made? Who makes them? What happens if I make a bad decision?
- Leadership: What does the organization wants from its leaders? Who are they? Are there informal leaders as well as formal ones?
Our culture is conveyed in the relationships we have with our colleagues, and how we view what we see happening. No organization can be immune to the effects of culture, and understanding it is critical to aiding in innovation and change.
References
1. Tierney WG. The impact of culture on organizational decision making: theory and practice in higher education. Sterling, VA; Stylus Publishing 2008:24
Monday, May 18, 2009
Likelihood Ratios
Imagine that in trying to gather information about a particular patient you are seeing you come across an article that describes a diagnostic test that may help better confirm your suspected diagnosis. For example, let us assume that your patient is suffering from back pain, and you suspect that she might have a herniated intervertebral disc. You believe this because your work-up for that patient has found that there is pain in the low back which radiates down the leg and into the lateral side of the foot, that certain motions are quite painful, that this came on after a doing physical labor, and that it has worsened over the past three days. In addition, you have a number of positive diagnostic tests which have occurred, but they seem mildly contradictory and you feel that it may be due to the severe pain the patient is experiencing. What can you do to get a better handle on what is happening?
You can look at the likelihood ratio for one of the diagnostic tests you did. Why look at this? Well, the main reason is that doing so will help move you from your estimate of the likelihood the patient has a disc herniation (also called the pre-test probability) to a more accurate estimate (called the post-test probability of the target disorder). The likelihood ratio is a tool which moves us from pre-test probability to post-test probability.
Consider: the presence of a positive straight leg raise test is seen as indicative of a disc herniation. But it is not conclusive and there may be other possible explanations for its presence. But certainly, with the other information you have collected from your patient, a large likelihood ratio will likely move to you a more positive confirmation of disc herniation, and also may lead you to consider either diagnostic imaging or to a particular management protocol.
A likelihood ratio is the relative likelihood that a given test would be expected to be positive (or negative) in a patient with a disorder as opposed to one without (1). Likelihood ratios can be calculated easily from 2x2 contingency tables used to calculate sensitivity and specificity; a likelihood ratio is actually [Sensitivity/(1- Specificity)]. For the actual math involved, please see http://w3.palmer.edu/lawrence/RSCH841/Reliability%20and%20Validity.doc.
But here is the key to understanding a likelihood ratio. It indicates the extent to which a diagnostic test will increase (or decrease) the pretest probability of the target disorder. LRs of 1 mean that the pre and post-test probabilities are exactly the same; if greater than 1, it indicates an increase in the probability that the target disorder is present (and the greater this number, the greater the probability), while the converse is true for likelihood ratios of less than 1. With a likelihood ratio, you can use a nomogram (such as the one found at http://www.cebm.net/index.aspx?o=1161) to convert the pretest probability to a post-test probability.
In our case, let’s begin by assuming that the pre-test probability of the presence of herniated disc is 50%; this is based on our own clinical expertise plus any literature we may have read. From the paper we found, we see that the likelihood ratio for a straight leg raise is 12. Plugging this into the online nomogram shows us that the post-test probability of a disc herniation is now 94%. One could feel quite comfortable that this patient does indeed have a disc herniation, and can proceed accordingly.
You can find tables of likelihood ratios derived from the scientific literature, such as those seen in the Rational Clinical Examination series from JAMA. They are the most valuable test we have for the use of diagnostic tests.
References
1. Guyatt G, Rennie D, Meade MO, Cook DJ. Users’ Guides to the medical literature: a manual for evidence-based clinical practice, 2nd edition. New York, NY; McGraw Hill, 2008:426-430
2. Sackett D, Rennie D. The science of the art of the clinical examination. JAMA 1992;267:2650-2652
You can look at the likelihood ratio for one of the diagnostic tests you did. Why look at this? Well, the main reason is that doing so will help move you from your estimate of the likelihood the patient has a disc herniation (also called the pre-test probability) to a more accurate estimate (called the post-test probability of the target disorder). The likelihood ratio is a tool which moves us from pre-test probability to post-test probability.
Consider: the presence of a positive straight leg raise test is seen as indicative of a disc herniation. But it is not conclusive and there may be other possible explanations for its presence. But certainly, with the other information you have collected from your patient, a large likelihood ratio will likely move to you a more positive confirmation of disc herniation, and also may lead you to consider either diagnostic imaging or to a particular management protocol.
A likelihood ratio is the relative likelihood that a given test would be expected to be positive (or negative) in a patient with a disorder as opposed to one without (1). Likelihood ratios can be calculated easily from 2x2 contingency tables used to calculate sensitivity and specificity; a likelihood ratio is actually [Sensitivity/(1- Specificity)]. For the actual math involved, please see http://w3.palmer.edu/lawrence/RSCH841/Reliability%20and%20Validity.doc.
But here is the key to understanding a likelihood ratio. It indicates the extent to which a diagnostic test will increase (or decrease) the pretest probability of the target disorder. LRs of 1 mean that the pre and post-test probabilities are exactly the same; if greater than 1, it indicates an increase in the probability that the target disorder is present (and the greater this number, the greater the probability), while the converse is true for likelihood ratios of less than 1. With a likelihood ratio, you can use a nomogram (such as the one found at http://www.cebm.net/index.aspx?o=1161) to convert the pretest probability to a post-test probability.
In our case, let’s begin by assuming that the pre-test probability of the presence of herniated disc is 50%; this is based on our own clinical expertise plus any literature we may have read. From the paper we found, we see that the likelihood ratio for a straight leg raise is 12. Plugging this into the online nomogram shows us that the post-test probability of a disc herniation is now 94%. One could feel quite comfortable that this patient does indeed have a disc herniation, and can proceed accordingly.
You can find tables of likelihood ratios derived from the scientific literature, such as those seen in the Rational Clinical Examination series from JAMA. They are the most valuable test we have for the use of diagnostic tests.
References
1. Guyatt G, Rennie D, Meade MO, Cook DJ. Users’ Guides to the medical literature: a manual for evidence-based clinical practice, 2nd edition. New York, NY; McGraw Hill, 2008:426-430
2. Sackett D, Rennie D. The science of the art of the clinical examination. JAMA 1992;267:2650-2652
Monday, May 11, 2009
Preparing Tables in Your Journal Articles
One the great problems that journal editors face today is that anyone with a computer and a word processing program can create their own tables and graphics to accompany their journal submissions. But most who do so are unaware of the typesetting protocols that go into proper table preparation and make tables that are too complex, too large, too poorly organized or too large. With a little bit of thought, it is possible to construct tables that easily convey information; that is, of course, the entire reason to have one.
Tables need to be prepared so that the information they contain are accurately understood. Tables should be used for the presentation of only certain kinds of information, including information where the numerical values are important, where there is a large amount of numerical data in a compact form, where a summary of information is needed, or where the information cannot easily be summarized in text form. The 6th edition of Scientific Style and Format (1) offers the following guidelines for tables:
- Make them complete enough that the reader does not need to continually refer to the text.
- Make them as simple as possible, and if it is not possible to make them simple, make them logical and orderly.
- There needs to be a logical basis for how you organize columns and rows.
- The units used in a table should be consistent with those in the text (which I note is a common error we find in tables).
- Do not provide the same information in both table and text format.
- Don’t make a table if you can easily explain the findings in a few lines of text.
When you prepare tables for publication, in general they are placed at the end of the manuscript, and are placed on individual new pages of the manuscript, no matter how small any given table might be. If you have 5 tables, that would take at least 5 pages to print. Each table should have a title, which is coordinated to the table number in the text. Each table should be numbered consecutively according to order of occurrence, and each should have its own call-out (that is, words that direct the reader to look at that particular table, ie, “See table 1.”). Do not use numbering where you have variants (Table 1a, 1b, 1c, etc). It is okay to use abbreviations in a table, but you should also use a footnote to let the reader know what the abbreviation means. Doing so saves space, which makes the table less costly to print. You do not need to use more than 2 significant digits in printing numerical data, and you should always provide the unit for the table so the reader knows exactly the meaning of the numerical data. Each column of entries should be aligned with its respective heading, either flush left or centered. If you have no number larger than 9999, you do not need to separate the digits with a comma, but if you go above 9999, you will have to do so (ie, 10,350). If you use decimal points, you should align on the decimal. Footnotes are used when the information they contain does not fit into the logical order of the table. Superscripts are recommended now, as numerics, not as symbols (such as asterisk, dagger, etc.). People understand the order better this way.
A lot of thought goes into table construction and it is not quite as easy as it may initially seem. Style guides such as the one referenced here can provide guidance, as can reference to the Vancouver Accords of the International Committee of Medical Journal Editors (2).
References
1. Style Manual Committee of the Council of Biology editors. Scientific style and format: the CBE manual for authors, editors and publishers, 6th edition. New York, NY; Cambride University Press, 1994:677
2. http://www.icmje.org/
Monday, May 4, 2009
A Review of Teaching Scholar Programs
A special issue of Academic Medicine was devoted to reporting on teaching scholar programs across the United States. Rosenbaum and colleagues (1) were instrumental in developing and implementing a TSP in the Carver College of Medicine at University of Iowa (in fact, oen of the authors of this paper serves as a member of our R25 advisory council). Goals for that program included (1) promoting development of a cadre of faculty with the skills to implement faculty development in their departments, (2) increase departmental involvement in faculty development, (3) increase resources for dissemination of college-wide faculty development efforts, and (4) acknowledge the effort that faculty put into developing their skills and in helping train their colleagues. Interested faculty must apply for the program and must meet specific acceptance criteria. Incentives include a stipend to attend a medical education conference, support from program staff, receipt of a certificate at program end, and formal recognition as a teaching scholar in college publications. The program curriculum consists of (1) monthly half-day training sessions that focus on specific skills in either instructional design, teaching skills or professional development; (2) teaching self-improvement activities involving reflection; (3) videotaped performance evaluations in classroom; and (4) completion of a faculty development project.
Muller and Irby (2) developed a TSP for the University of California School of Medicine in San Francisco. Their overall goal was to produce educational leaders for UCSF, and therefore they offered accepted faculty learning experiences in 7 areas: learning theory, teaching methods, curriculum development and evaluation, assessment of learning, leadership and organizational change, career development, and educational research. This program requires a weekly 3-hour seminar, with reading assignments and writing exercises. Most sessions have a short initial presentation, followed by a writing experience on the topic. This is then followed by a seminar discussion, typically student-led. Faculty participants are also required to complete a scholarly project. The model offered for learning objectives for this program is one adaptable for use within the chiropractic college setting.
The program at McGill University was developed by Steinert and McLeod (3). This program is a year in length and focuses on 5 major educational themes: curriculum design and innovation, effective teaching methods and evaluation strategies, educational program evaluation, research in medical and health sciences education, and educational leadership. Its primary goal is to help faculty learn more about educational principles and methods, pursue scholarship in medical education, and prepare for educational leadership roles. Scholars admitted into the program are expected to devote one day per week to the activities required to complete the year-long program. The program includes 2 university-based courses from the faculty of education, a monthly seminar, an educational project and participation in faculty-wide development activities. In addition, the organizers have instituted a monthly educational journal club. Assessment has indicated this program is meeting its goals quite well.
The program at the University of Washington (4) was initiated by the same David Irby mentioned about with regarding UCSF. The mission for this program is defined as “to promote academic excellence through the development of a vibrant community of leaders in education who can innovate, enliven and enrich the environment at the University of Washington.” Scholars attend sessions one-half day per week for 10 months, with many of the sessions led by the scholars themselves. They work in collaboration with program leaders to decide upon course readings, but are responsible for teaching material to each other. Scholars are exposed to topics on educational research, leadership, team building, verbal communication, learning theory, curriculum development, creating and evaluating tests, etc. Each scholar is required to complete a capstone project prior to completing the program.
The mission of the Medical Education Scholars Program at the University of Michigan is to develop educational leadership, improve teaching skills, and promote educational scholarship among the medical school faculty (5) Their program follows the academic calendar and meets weekly from September through June for 3 hours per meeting. The curriculum is divided into 5 broad domains: teaching and learning topics; cognition topics; educational assessment topics; academic leadership sessions; research methods and methodology. Scholars in the program are also mentored by senior faculty, and are required to complete a scholar’s project. Faculty scholars lead workshops and then undergo what has been termed an ‘autopsy” examining their performance as workshop leader. A journal club is incorporated into this program as well.
The program at the University of Arkansas (6) evolved over a period of years but has at its center a series of monthly 3-hour workshops related to teaching and educational research, combined with lectures from nationally well-known health science educators. Scholars are required to complete a project, similar to the other programs noted above.
References
1. Rosenbaum ME, Lenoch S, Ferguson KJ. Increasing departmental and college-wide faculty development opportunities through a teaching scholars program. Acad Med 2006;81:965-968
2. Muller JH, Irby DM. Developing educational leaders: the teaching scholars program at the University of California, San Francisco, School of Medicine. Acad Med 2006;81:959-964
3. Steinert Y, McLeod PJ. From novice to informed educator: the teaching scholars program for educators in the health sciences. Acad Med 2006;81:969-974
4. Robins L, Ambrozy D, Pinsky LE. Promoting academic excellence through leadership development at the University of Washington: the teaching scholars program. Acad Med 2006;81:979-983
5. Frohna AZ, Hamstra SJ, Mullan PB, Gruppen LD. Teaching medical education principles and methods to faculty using an active learning approach: the University of Michigan Medical Education Scholars Program. Acad Med 2006;81:975-978
6. Moses AS, Heestand DE, Doyle LL, O’Sullivan PS. Impact of a teaching scholar program. Acad Med 2006;81:S87-S90
Muller and Irby (2) developed a TSP for the University of California School of Medicine in San Francisco. Their overall goal was to produce educational leaders for UCSF, and therefore they offered accepted faculty learning experiences in 7 areas: learning theory, teaching methods, curriculum development and evaluation, assessment of learning, leadership and organizational change, career development, and educational research. This program requires a weekly 3-hour seminar, with reading assignments and writing exercises. Most sessions have a short initial presentation, followed by a writing experience on the topic. This is then followed by a seminar discussion, typically student-led. Faculty participants are also required to complete a scholarly project. The model offered for learning objectives for this program is one adaptable for use within the chiropractic college setting.
The program at McGill University was developed by Steinert and McLeod (3). This program is a year in length and focuses on 5 major educational themes: curriculum design and innovation, effective teaching methods and evaluation strategies, educational program evaluation, research in medical and health sciences education, and educational leadership. Its primary goal is to help faculty learn more about educational principles and methods, pursue scholarship in medical education, and prepare for educational leadership roles. Scholars admitted into the program are expected to devote one day per week to the activities required to complete the year-long program. The program includes 2 university-based courses from the faculty of education, a monthly seminar, an educational project and participation in faculty-wide development activities. In addition, the organizers have instituted a monthly educational journal club. Assessment has indicated this program is meeting its goals quite well.
The program at the University of Washington (4) was initiated by the same David Irby mentioned about with regarding UCSF. The mission for this program is defined as “to promote academic excellence through the development of a vibrant community of leaders in education who can innovate, enliven and enrich the environment at the University of Washington.” Scholars attend sessions one-half day per week for 10 months, with many of the sessions led by the scholars themselves. They work in collaboration with program leaders to decide upon course readings, but are responsible for teaching material to each other. Scholars are exposed to topics on educational research, leadership, team building, verbal communication, learning theory, curriculum development, creating and evaluating tests, etc. Each scholar is required to complete a capstone project prior to completing the program.
The mission of the Medical Education Scholars Program at the University of Michigan is to develop educational leadership, improve teaching skills, and promote educational scholarship among the medical school faculty (5) Their program follows the academic calendar and meets weekly from September through June for 3 hours per meeting. The curriculum is divided into 5 broad domains: teaching and learning topics; cognition topics; educational assessment topics; academic leadership sessions; research methods and methodology. Scholars in the program are also mentored by senior faculty, and are required to complete a scholar’s project. Faculty scholars lead workshops and then undergo what has been termed an ‘autopsy” examining their performance as workshop leader. A journal club is incorporated into this program as well.
The program at the University of Arkansas (6) evolved over a period of years but has at its center a series of monthly 3-hour workshops related to teaching and educational research, combined with lectures from nationally well-known health science educators. Scholars are required to complete a project, similar to the other programs noted above.
References
1. Rosenbaum ME, Lenoch S, Ferguson KJ. Increasing departmental and college-wide faculty development opportunities through a teaching scholars program. Acad Med 2006;81:965-968
2. Muller JH, Irby DM. Developing educational leaders: the teaching scholars program at the University of California, San Francisco, School of Medicine. Acad Med 2006;81:959-964
3. Steinert Y, McLeod PJ. From novice to informed educator: the teaching scholars program for educators in the health sciences. Acad Med 2006;81:969-974
4. Robins L, Ambrozy D, Pinsky LE. Promoting academic excellence through leadership development at the University of Washington: the teaching scholars program. Acad Med 2006;81:979-983
5. Frohna AZ, Hamstra SJ, Mullan PB, Gruppen LD. Teaching medical education principles and methods to faculty using an active learning approach: the University of Michigan Medical Education Scholars Program. Acad Med 2006;81:975-978
6. Moses AS, Heestand DE, Doyle LL, O’Sullivan PS. Impact of a teaching scholar program. Acad Med 2006;81:S87-S90
Monday, April 27, 2009
Teaching Scholar Programs
Over the course of the past 20 years, there has been growing acknowledgement that there is a significant need to provide faculty development which enhances the teaching skills and scholarship of the medical education community. This is certainly equally true within the chiropractic profession but far less research exists which specifically is addressed to the needs of the chiropractic academic community. As noted by Rosenbaum et al (1), a number of challenges exist in providing opportunities for faculty to obtain training in teaching skills. These include the need for there to be someone with faculty development expertise to lead such a program, lack of locally-based advanced educational training programs, interest solely coming from highly motivated educators and lack of departmental members who can assist or take on such training opportunities. They conclude that institutions need to seek ways to expand resources available for training. They recommend increasing the number of faculty with advanced expertise in education, and to use peers to offer training once they have gained that expertise.
Few programs have been reported in the medical literature with the specific purpose of helping faculty develop expertise in providing teaching skills to their peers. Most follow train-the-trainer models (2). As part of Palmer’s R25 grant award, we are using a train-the-trainer model for implementing enhanced use of evidence-based methods in the classroom setting. We are working with a small number of faculty interested in the use of EBP; those individuals will then be give opportunity to provide training to their peers.
But it is important to note that most faculty development program still focus on developing participant skills for their own teaching. The goal of the program in development is to combine teaching effectiveness training with leadership skills so that we develop a cohort of teachers with enhanced personal skills who can then transmit them to their peers. This is already being done with the Excellence in Teaching program coordinated in part by Rita Nafziger of the Davenport campus through the Quad City Professional Development Network. Priority in this program is being given to faculty in their probationary period (new and recent hires), for those whom specific improvement plans may be in place and others as space and interest allows. This set of courses will provide foundational information on teaching and learning. The Teaching Scholar Program is designed to provide skills more directed at the higher level components of health care education as opposed to general education theory and methodologies, and thus will serve as a means of providing advanced teacher training beyond the probationary period.
Future blog posts will provide information on similar programs at other health care institutions.
References
1. Rosenbaum ME, Lenoch S, Ferguson KJ. Outcomes of a Teaching Scholars Program to promote leadership in faculty development. Teach Learn Med 2005;17:247-253
2. Steinert Y. Faculty development in the new millennium: key challenges and future directions. Med Teacher 2000;22:44-50
Few programs have been reported in the medical literature with the specific purpose of helping faculty develop expertise in providing teaching skills to their peers. Most follow train-the-trainer models (2). As part of Palmer’s R25 grant award, we are using a train-the-trainer model for implementing enhanced use of evidence-based methods in the classroom setting. We are working with a small number of faculty interested in the use of EBP; those individuals will then be give opportunity to provide training to their peers.
But it is important to note that most faculty development program still focus on developing participant skills for their own teaching. The goal of the program in development is to combine teaching effectiveness training with leadership skills so that we develop a cohort of teachers with enhanced personal skills who can then transmit them to their peers. This is already being done with the Excellence in Teaching program coordinated in part by Rita Nafziger of the Davenport campus through the Quad City Professional Development Network. Priority in this program is being given to faculty in their probationary period (new and recent hires), for those whom specific improvement plans may be in place and others as space and interest allows. This set of courses will provide foundational information on teaching and learning. The Teaching Scholar Program is designed to provide skills more directed at the higher level components of health care education as opposed to general education theory and methodologies, and thus will serve as a means of providing advanced teacher training beyond the probationary period.
Future blog posts will provide information on similar programs at other health care institutions.
References
1. Rosenbaum ME, Lenoch S, Ferguson KJ. Outcomes of a Teaching Scholars Program to promote leadership in faculty development. Teach Learn Med 2005;17:247-253
2. Steinert Y. Faculty development in the new millennium: key challenges and future directions. Med Teacher 2000;22:44-50
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
