2006-2010

CORE Faculty Development Action Plan

by: 

Stephen Davis, Ph.D., Robbin Kirkland, Ph.D.,

and

Olivia Ojano Sheehan, Ph.D.

www.oucom.ohiou.edu/fd

====================================================================

Executive Summary

2006-2010 CORE Faculty Development Action Plan

CORE Faculty Development plays an important role in providing programs and services that contribute to achieving excellence in osteopathic medical education.  Following are some significant excerpts of the 2006-2010 Faculty Development Action Plan:

• Section I provides a brief history of CORE Faculty Development structure from 5 faculty development coordinators in 1995 to 2 faculty development coordinators in 2001-present.

• Section II includes a definition of faculty development and its domains.  Definition: Faculty development can best be described as a process by which CORE clinical faculty and residents work systematically to improve their education skills. 

Domains:

1) Education/Instructional Design/Curriculum Development;

2) Administration/Organization/Leadership;

3) Research/Writing/Scholarly Development;

4) Clinical Teaching; and

5) Personal/Professional Development.

• Section III lists the results of the 2005 Needs Assessment conducted among CORE program directors, preceptors, and educators.  For each of the 5 Faculty Development domains, specific content of programs and services have been identified and ranked according to the “urgency” or priority of the information required.  For example, within the category of Clinical Teaching, “Characteristics of the Millennium Learners” was ranked as the #1 “priority” and within the category of Education, Instructional Design, Curriculum Development, “Teaching and Evaluation Methodologies for Each of the Competencies“ was ranked as the #1 “priority”.  The 2005 Needs Assessment identified three topics that were previously delivered in 2002-2006 because respondents see the need for a repeat discussion.

• Section IV is the “Overview of CORE Faculty Development 2006-2010 Action Plan”.  It lists the many programs and services that will be provided (on-site, RPAC level, statewide), method of delivery, and measurable outcomes of these faculty development initiatives. 

• Section IV also describes the delivery of programs in each domain in multiple sites and venues over the next four years:

Ø      Programs delivered on-site at hospitals where needs are identified and where the site requests and arranges for faculty development presence.  This is focused on local faculty where RPAC affiliations are absent and for local faculty who are not part of the RPAC structure.

Ø      Videoconference programs scheduled (and also by request) for the convenience of sites and faculty who have scheduling preferences or needs that fit this mode best.

Ø      Faculty development programs delivered at the RPAC level.

Ø      E-learning with Blackboard for the convenience of sites and faculty who have scheduling preferences or needs that fit this mode best.

Ø      Statewide faculty development program delivered in conjunction with the Annual OOA Conference.

• Section V describes the evaluation and feedback mechanism that CORE faculty development will employ to drive the ongoing learning of CORE program directors, preceptors, and trainees and the improvement of CORE faculty development programs.

• Section VI describes the rewards and benefits that CORE faculty development (in conjunction with Ohio University College of Osteopathic Medicine) will continue to provide to CORE program directors, preceptors, and trainees (residents).

Table of Contents

I.          Introduction

II.          Faculty Development – Definition and Domains

III.         Overview of CORE Faculty Development 2005 Needs Assessment Survey

IV.        Overview of CORE Faculty Development 2006-2010 Action Plan

V.        Evaluation

VI.        Rewards and Benefits

VII.       Conclusion

I.          Introduction

This document is intended for CORE stakeholders, especially the Chief Executive Officers of the CORE hospitals.  As a communication piece, it describes what faculty development is, its domains, and the benefits gained from investing in it.  It also highlights the direction of faculty development for academic year 2006-2007, 2007-2008, 2008-2009, and 2009-2010.

            In 1995, the CORE System had five Ph.D. Faculty/Curriculum Development Coordinators who delivered faculty development to attendings, residents, interns, and medical students.  In November 2001, re-organization at OUCOM changed the structure and focus of CORE Faculty Development which resulted in two Faculty/Curriculum Development Coordinators: Robbin Kirkland, Ph.D., located in Columbus, Ohio and Olivia Ojano Sheehan, Ph.D., located in Athens, Ohio.  These two coordinators focus their faculty development efforts to CORE medical education: predoctoral and graduate.  In April 2004, Stephen Davis, Ph.D., Director of Faculty Development was hired. 

II.         Faculty Development – Definition and Domains

A commonly accepted definition of faculty development has been

previously adopted by CORE.

Some examples of education skills are: developing a curriculum, evaluating trainees and programs, teaching one-on-one, presenting in large and small groups, facilitating case discussion, conducting research, managing programs, and leading staff.

According to Bland, et. al., the domains of faculty development include the following: Education, Administration, Research, Written Communication, and Professional Academic Skills.

III.        Overview of CORE Faculty Development 2005 Needs Assessment Survey to Determine Topics for 2006-2010 Faculty Development Action Plan

In 2005, the CORE Faculty/Curriculum Development Coordinators conducted a needs assessment with CORE program directors, preceptors (via CORE Administrators), and educators to ascertain what faculty development programs and services they would like to have in the next four years 2006-2010.  The most common venue for the needs assessment was the RPAC Program Directors Meeting where feedback was obtained.  In addition to this, a survey was sent to CORE preceptors asking for their preferred faculty development topics.

In the following tables, the results of the survey to prioritize faculty development topics are presented.  Overall, the respondents representing the CORE System ranked the faculty development topics as most preferred - 1, second most preferred - 2, third most preferred - 3, and least preferred - 4.  The results are as follows:

Table 1. Education, Instructional Design, Curriculum Development

Table 2. Administration, Organization, Leadership

Table 3. Research, Writing, Scholarly Development

Table 4. Clinical Teaching

Table 5. Personal and Professional Development

IV.       Overview of CORE Faculty Development 2006-2010 Action Plan

Purpose of CORE Faculty Development

The purpose of CORE Faculty Development is to assist preceptors and trainees by providing programs and services that constantly enhance the delivery of osteopathic medical education.  Since most preceptors have never received formal training regarding teaching and the delivery of education programs, there are major advantages to providing faculty development programs and services: 

·        First, preceptors who participate in these programs gain clinical teaching skills that enhance their ability to share their knowledge, skills, and experiences with trainees. 

·        Second, trainees will benefit from having competent faculty.  In essence, having clinical knowledge and having the skills required to share knowledge represent two distinct sets of skills required to be effective clinical teachers.

·        Third, combined with the excellent clinical experiences that are found at each of the CORE hospital sites, competent clinical faculty represent a key component in attracting top-notch trainees. 

·        Fourth, patients are primary beneficiaries of faculty development efforts and services since it could be expected that quality teaching and instruction could possibly result in a higher level of patient care.

How CORE Faculty Development Will Be Delivered

In addressing the diversity of interests that were identified from the 2005 Needs Assessment, the two Faculty/Curriculum Development Coordinators plan to provide faculty development programs in settings where many clinical faculty already meet on a regular basis, such as the RPAC Program Directors Meetings and Resident Education Days.  Also of major importance, programs geared towards addressing the unique education needs at a particular hospital will be provided at the request of DMEs, program directors, and trainees.  Overall, a variety of methods to deliver faculty development programs and services will be utilized such as:

·        Workshops and Seminars (Live and Videoconferences)

·        Individual Consultation (“One-on-One” sessions)

·        Individual Consultation (Telephone and E-mail)

·        E-learning (BlackBoard)

·        Faculty development materials for the purpose of self-instruction (e.g. CORE Resident Research Resource Guide, Clinical Teaching Information Packet, PowerPoint Manual, CDs, and comprehensive faculty development website (http://www.oucom.ohiou.edu/fd).

·        Statewide faculty development program via the Annual OOA Conference.

Where CORE Faculty Development Will Be Delivered

The plan includes delivery of programs in each domain in multiple sites and venues:

 

1.                  On-Site Programs/Services: Programs will be delivered on-site at hospitals where needs are identified and the site requests and arranges for faculty development presence.  This method is focused on:

a.      Program directors and local faculty where RPAC affiliations are absent and

b.      Providing support for local faculty in RPAC-related programs (the program directors will have their own faculty development programs through the RPAC structure).

Requests from different CORE sites for faculty development programs and services will be sent to the two CORE Faculty/Curriculum Development Coordinators and managed jointly with the site as follows: 

2.                  Videoconference Programs/Services: Videoconference programs scheduled (and also by request) will be delivered for the convenience of sites and faculty who have scheduling preferences or needs that fit that mode best.  This venue is designed for those busy physicians whose schedules do not allow them to meet for faculty development at live sessions.  Videoconference sessions will also be scheduled on request within the resource limits of personnel time and equipment availability.  Requests from CORE sites for these faculty development videoconferences will be sent to the two CORE Faculty/Curriculum Development Coordinators and managed jointly with the site as follows:

3.                  RPAC Program Directors: Faculty development programs will be continued at the RPAC level (as originally described and required by CORE policy). 

4.                  Individual Learning Support: E-learning, informational/teaching materials (e.g. Preceptor Communiqué and online journals), OUCOM faculty development website, and CDs will be made available to serve those physicians who need to complete faculty development on their own time.  Coordinators will be available by telephone and e-mail for one-on-one consultation and discussions to support this activity.

 

5.                  Research Support: Faculty development will continue to play an important role in growing the research culture by providing assistance in RPAC Research Education Day.

6.                  Statewide Faculty Development Program: A faculty development program will be provided for osteopathic physicians who attend the Annual OOA Conference.  The benefits of providing a statewide faculty development program include: 1) opportunity for physicians to obtain CME credit, 2) promoting CORE presence and visibility, and 3) possible recruitment of new physicians to the CORE.

2006-2010 Action Plan of CORE Faculty Development Programs/Services

2006-2007

2007-2008

2008-2009

2009-2010

V.        Evaluation

Evaluation and feedback are important components in any educational undertaking.  CORE faculty development will employ different evaluation and feedback mechanisms to drive the ongoing learning of CORE program directors, preceptors, and trainees and the improvement of CORE faculty development programs.

In previous years, CORE faculty development has given an evaluation sheet (rating form) for the residency directors, preceptors, and trainees to complete after a program.  For the 2006-2010, the evaluation form will be completed either on paper (via RPAC Office) or electronically.  Ratings of 3 (Good) and above are expected in 85% of the total workshops.  In addition, CORE faculty development has completed logs (monthly faculty development reports) that quantify faculty development programs and services.  In addition to these two evaluation and feedback mechanisms, CORE faculty development will conduct structured group discussions twice each year to gather suggestions for improvement of faculty development programs.  An evaluation sheet (measuring outcomes rating form) will be given to measure the value and application of faculty development workshops to participants’ work settings.  Positive ratings are expected.  Contact with Dr. Linda Heun (Society of Osteopathic Medical Educators) to discuss evaluation tools and mechanisms will be pursued.

VI.       Rewards and Benefits

                        As of June 2006, the CORE has close to 2,000 clinical and non-clinical teachers who have Preceptor appointment and Group IV faculty appointment with Ohio University.  Check the faculty development website (www.oucom.ohiou.edu/fd) for application process, faculty development requirements, and privileges of preceptors and Group IV faculty.

VII.      Conclusion

Faculty development experts agree that leadership support is necessary to a program’s success and the way to obtain this support is to make faculty development programs useful and relevant.  Our four-year plan integrates relevant and practical faculty development programs because it is based on the needs assessment survey and relies on the input from the “people on the trenches”.  This four-year plan continues the faculty development efforts we have been doing in promoting excellence in osteopathic medical education.