Dl. Elliot et al., How do you get to the improvement of teaching? A longitudinal faculty development program for medical educators, TEACH L MED, 11(1), 1999, pp. 52-57
Background: Among nonmedical educators, longitudinal faculty development pr
ograms most effectively increase teachers' abilities.' Despite most medical
settings providing little reinforcement for new instructional skills, reac
hing improvement programs infrequently have explicit ongoing activities.(2-
6) We carried our a longitudinal program for medical educators designed to
reinforce and firmly establish new teaching skills.
Description: We conducted a longitudinal (18 months of biweekly 1-hr meetin
gs) faculty development program. Its activities followed an initial structu
red seminar series, and the ongoing meetings involved reviewing videotapes
of participants' teaching, enacting and debriefing role-plays, and a modifi
ed Balint group for medical educators.
Evaluation: We assessed the program's process and outcomes using attendance
, self-reported teaching behaviors, perceived program usefulness, education
al administrative responsibilities, and qualitative analysis of audiotapes
and session notes.
Conclusions: Participants maintained high attendance during 18 months of me
etings. Ratings of usefulness were high, comparable to other faculty develo
pment activities with established utility, and qualitative data support uni
que benefits of the ongoing meetings. The longitudinal component built on t
he initial seminar series; it seemed to enhance collegial support, to allow
observation of instructional outcomes to reinforce new instructional skill
s, and to foster greater involvement in the institution's teaching activiti
es. Teaching improvement programs for physician educators have taken severa
l forms, from workshops and expert consultations to month-long minisabbati
cals.(2-6) However, mast are single or sequenced interventions, without an
explicit long-term component. We present the structure of an 18-month progr
am for clinician teachers and report observations supporting the program's
utility. We hope that this descriptive study promotes greater attention to
and subsequent prospective research of longitudinal faculty development.