Promoting research in medical education at the University of California, San Francisco, School of Medicine.

Over the past seven years, educational innovations and scholarship have flourished at the University of California, San Francisco, (UCSF) School of Medicine. Prior to 1998, there was no infrastructure to support educational research and yet a few faculty members published in medical education journals and were active in national professional associations. With the initiation of curriculum reform in 1998, a great deal of excitement about education was generated and innovative new educational programs were envisioned. These changes became opportunities for educational scholarship. With the development of an Office of Medical Education in 1997 and the Haile T. Debas Academy of Medical Educators in 2001, the infrastructure was in place to expand educational research and the scholarship of teaching. The components of this support include educational leadership, faculty development, the Teaching Scholars Program, the Office of Educational Research and Development, the Academy, a Fellowship in Medical Education Research, collaborative research, and extramural grants. As a result of these investments, the number of UCSF faculty members who are involved in educational research has increased significantly. There has been a four-fold increase in peer-reviewed articles published in medical education journals and a greater increase in the publication of educational abstracts, editorials, chapters, and books, plus presentations at U.S. professional association meetings. In this article, the authors describe the changes that have occurred at UCSF to achieve these results.     

The Academy at Harvard Medical School: nurturing teaching and stimulating innovation.

The Academy at Harvard Medical School, established in 2001, was formed at a critical moment for medical schools in this country. Several decades of enormous growth in the biomedical research and clinical care activities of medical school faculty have resulted in great societal benefit. The unintended consequence has been a decline in faculty time and reward for the educational mission that is unique to a medical school. The impact of this decline is particularly felt now because the explosive growth in the science and technology relevant to medical practice, coupled with dramatic changes in the health care delivery system, calls for new models for the education of the next generation of physicians. The mission of the academy is to renew and reinvigorate the educational mission of Harvard Medical School (HMS). By bringing together a select group of some of the school's most talented and dedicated faculty and providing direct support for their work related to education, the academy has created a unique mechanism for increasing the recognition of teaching contributions of both academy members and the teaching faculty at large, fostering educational innovation, and providing a forum for the exchange of ideas related to medical education that cross departmental and institutional lines. The authors describe the academy's membership criteria, structure, governance, activities, institutional impact, and plans for long-term evaluation, and indicate challenges the academy will face in the future.     

The academy movement: a structural approach to reinvigorating the educational mission.

Despite its fundamental importance, the educational mission of most medical schools receives far less recognition and support than do the missions of research and patient care. This disparity is based, in part, on the predominance of discipline-based departments, which focus on the more sustainable enterprises of research and patient care. Where departmental teaching is emphasized, it tends to center on trainees directly associated with the department-leaving medical students unsupported. The authors argue that the ongoing erosion of the educational mission will never be reversed unless there are changes in the underlying structure of medical schools. Academies of medical educators are developing at a number of medical schools to advance the school-wide mission of education. The authors describe and compare key features of such organizations at eight medical schools, identified through an informal survey of the Society of Directors of Research in Medical Education, along with direct contacts with specific schools. Although these entities are relatively new, initial assessments suggest that they have already had a major impact on the recognition of teaching efforts by the faculty, fueled curricular reform, promoted educational scholarship, and garnered new resources to support teaching. The academy movement, as a structural approach to change, shows promise for reinvigorating the educational mission of academic medicine.     

Developing educational leaders: the teaching scholars program at the University of California, San Francisco, School of Medicine.

A Teaching Scholars Program (TSP) was established in 1998 in the University of California, San Francisco (UCSF), School of Medicine with the mission of building knowledgeable and skilled educational leaders, teachers, and scholars. Conducted through the Office of Medical Education (OME), the TSP is a 10-month program that accepts 12 scholars per year. Financial support for the program, including salary support for co-directors and staff, is provided by the OME. Scholars' departments are required to provide release time for one afternoon per week for 10 months. The TSP provides participants with an intensive weekly seminar series, collaborative learning experiences, mentored projects, and a network of educational colleagues. The weekly seminars use an interactive format to address topics within seven targeted areas: (1) learning theory; (2) teaching methods; (3) curriculum development/evaluation; (4) assessment of learning; (5) leadership and organizational change; (6) career development; and (7) educational research. Since its inception, 76 scholars have graduated from or are currently enrolled in the TSP. The majority are clinicians at assistant professor rank, although four basic scientists, two medical students, and three OME staff members have also participated in the program. The TSP is highly valued by participants, and preliminary evaluation data suggest that the program has resulted in an increase in educational research, scholarly activities, and the number of skilled and knowledgeable faculty with major leadership roles in medical education at UCSF. Challenges facing the TSP include scholar release time, mentoring time, and follow-up contact to encourage TSP graduates' postgraduation productivity, continuing educational development, and support.     

The emergence of academies of educational excellence: a survey of U.S. medical schools.

PURPOSE: To identify existing organizations that recognize faculty members' excellence as educators (Academies) in the United States, and describe the organizations' characteristics. METHOD: A 31-item questionnaire inquiring about Academies or equivalent programs was sent to deans of medical education at all 125 U.S. medical schools in February of 2003. Variables examined were general Academy characteristics such as membership selection criteria, goals, benefits of membership, and budget, as well as, estimates of prestige of membership and influence on recruiting new and current faculty to educational activities. RESULTS: Twenty of 97 (21%) respondents reported an implemented Academy or equivalent program (eight begun prior to 2000 and 11 subsequently). Most Academies (75%) did not "cap" membership size, and most (65%) offered lifetime membership. Budgets ranged from 0 dollars to more than 100,000 dollars per year. Full-time faculty status (100%) and involvement in direct undergraduate teaching (95%) affected eligibility the most. Nominations for membership most often came from department or section chairs (89%) and from peers (74%), and learners were involved in the final selection process at 18 of the Academies. Benefits of membership included networking/collaboration, school-wide recognition, and mentoring for educational skills development. The benefit of protected time was offered at only three institutions and was associated with having a larger budget. Respondents believe Academies positively influence faculty participation in educational activities. CONCLUSIONS: Academies are formal organizations recognizing faculty contributions to medical education, and they are increasing in number. They offer important benefits to faculty members and the educational mission of an academic medical center.     

From novice to informed educator: the teaching scholars program for educators in the health sciences.

The Teaching Scholars Program for Educators in the Health Sciences at McGill University, in Montreal, Quebec, was designed to promote the professional development of health science educators by increasing their expertise in developing and implementing educational programs and taking on leadership roles in education. This program, which was initiated in 1997 and is tailored to the individual needs of the participants, consists of participation in: two university courses; a monthly seminar; a research study or an educational project, consisting of curriculum design and evaluation; and faculty-wide faculty development activities. As of 2006, 34 scholars have completed this program. Outcome data indicate that the majority of teaching scholars have taken on new roles and responsibilities in medical education; maintained the changes implemented in their teaching practices; continued to participate in faculty development activities; and presented their work at educational meetings. A number of scholars have also applied successfully for educationally related grants and have published their educational projects. Five of the scholars have pursued advanced studies. This program, which aims to move beyond the improvement of teaching skills by providing a foundation for educational leadership and scholarship, resembles many others in its emphasis on independent study, peer support, and the maintenance of ongoing responsibilities. It is innovative in that scholars participate in university courses and are encouraged to attend an "outside" conference or course. The overall benefits of this program, as noted by the scholars, include increased knowledge and skills, introduction to a "community of practice," and new career paths and opportunities.     

Making a case for the teaching scholar.

Medical schools are increasingly cognizant of their inability to critically evaluate faculty who support the core mission of education. To address this need, the Project on Scholarship was initiated by the Group on Educational Affairs (GEA) of the Association of American Medical Colleges. Building on and expanding previous definitions of scholarship and the associated criteria emerging in higher education, the project developed a set of "teacher as scholar" scenarios. These scenarios contained varied types of evidence for teaching scholarship and were discussed at the 1999 GEA regional meetings. Two major conclusions/recommendations emerged from these discussions: (1) the use of commonly accepted scholarship criteria (clear goals, appropriate methods, significant results, effective communication) provides a framework for identifying the types of evidence needed to document teaching scholarship, and (2) medical schools must create an infrastructure for promoting educational scholarship. This infrastructure must support the reliable and valid collection of evidence of educational scholarship and the continuous development of faculty as teaching scholars.     

Teaching medical education principles and methods to faculty using an active learning approach: the University of Michigan Medical Education Scholars Program.

The Medical Education Scholars Program (MESP) at the University of Michigan Medical School was established in 1998 to develop educational leadership, improve teaching skills, and promote educational scholarship among medical school faculty. The Department of Medical Education designed and implemented the program. Eighty-one scholars have completed the MESP, with 15 more currently enrolled. While most scholars have been clinical faculty, some have been basic science faculty or from other allied health fields. The selection process emphasizes potential for contributing to the educational mission of the medical school. Each cohort is limited to two participants per department. The curriculum of the MESP is designed to provide an overview of a wide range of topics in education. It is divided into five broad domains: principles and theories of education, teaching methods, educational research methods, assessment and evaluation, and educational leadership. During the sessions, active learning of content is expected and encouraged. For instance, scholars share responsibility with the session presenters for planning and evaluating individual program sessions. To graduate, scholars are expected to attend the sessions regularly, and to make a final presentation of their project, which demonstrates near-completion or substantial progress toward that goal. Over its eight years, the MESP has evolved in response to environmental changes and ongoing evaluation of the program. Overall, the Medical Education Scholars Program has proven effective in developing faculty skills and educational leadership locally at the University of Michigan Medical School and nationally.     

Promoting academic excellence through leadership development at the University of Washington: the Teaching Scholars Program.

The University of Washington Teaching Scholars Program (TSP) was established in 1995 to prepare faculty for local and national leadership and promote academic excellence by fostering a community of educational leaders to innovate, enliven, and enrich the environment for teaching and learning at the University of Washington (UW). Faculty in the Department of Medical Education and Biomedical Informatics designed and continue to implement the program. Qualified individuals from the UW Health Sciences Professional Schools and foreign scholars who are studying at the UW are eligible to apply for acceptance into the program. To date, 109 faculty and fellows have participated in the program, the majority of whom have been physicians. The program is committed to interprofessional education and seeks to diversify its participants. The curriculum is developed collaboratively with each cohort and comprises topics central to medical education and an emergent set of topics related to the specific interests and teaching responsibilities of the participating scholars. Core sessions cover the history of health professions education, learning theories, educational research methods, assessment, curriculum development, instructional methods, professionalism, and leadership. To graduate, scholars must complete a scholarly project in curriculum development, faculty development, or educational research; demonstrate progress towards construction of a teaching portfolio; and participate regularly and actively in program sessions. The TSP has developed and nurtured an active cadre of supportive colleagues who are transforming educational practice, elevating the status of teaching, and increasing the recognition of teachers. Graduates fill key teaching and leadership positions at the UW and in national and international professional organizations.     

Faculty development for educational leadership and scholarship.

The Medical Education Scholars Program (MESP) at the University of Michigan Medical School is designed to develop leaders in medical education. The program's goals are to enable faculty to provide curriculum direction, improved teaching, educational research, and development, and institutional leadership at all levels of medical education. This one-year program uses a variety of educational methods and provides a broad curriculum in educational theory, assessment and evaluation, research design and methods, teaching-skills development, and educational leadership. Faculty are admitted on a competitive basis and one half-day per week of release time is funded as part of the program. Salient outcomes of the program (promotions, educational research and development, curriculum leadership, and educational scholarship) were measured in a pre- and post-program design in which each scholar acted as his or her own control. There were major increases in promotions and educational awards, new educational responsibilities, and new educational programs. A particularly important outcome was the emergence of educational scholarship in the professional portfolios of the program scholars in the form of peer-reviewed presentations and publications and educational grant funding. A cost-outcome analysis indicates that these multi-year outcomes were obtained from a one-time investment of approximately $21,000 per graduating scholar. This evaluation indicates that intensive faculty development programs can have measurable impacts on the careers of the participants and the institutional environment.     

Expanding the view of scholarship: introduction.

The Association of American Medical Colleges' Council of Academic Societies (CAS) has a long-standing interest in scholarship as it relates to research, education, and service, the traditional definition of the activities of medical school. The work of Ernest Boyer and Charles Glassick is highly respected for redefining scholarship and conceiving how scholarship as thus defined can be assessed. Because their ideas have been applied in other areas of the academy but not widely in medical faculties, the CAS Task Force on Scholarship collected a special set of papers on Boyer's four areas of scholarship as applied to medical school, including case studies and the perspective from the university. The four areas of scholarship defined by Boyer and Glassick are the scholarship of discovery, the scholarship of integration, the scholarship of application, and the scholarship of teaching. The scholarship of discovery-research-has for decades been the primary focus for promotion and tenure for medical school faculty, even though the faculty also had major and critical activities in the other areas of scholarship. The CAS hopes that the ideas put forth in this special theme issue will produce a continuing dialogue as faculty and administrators at medical schools reflect on the value of these different forms of scholarship, their application by medical school faculty, and their contributions to the individual missions of each medical school and teaching hospital. In addition, these articles will stimulate continuing discussions that will definite equitable methods for the continued assessment of the scholarly accomplishments of medical school faculty.     

Clinical academies: innovative school-health services partnerships to deliver clinical education.

During the past five years (2001-2006), the University of Bristol Medical School has developed and implemented a new model for delivering clinical education: the clinical academy. The principal features of the model are (1) having both in-Bristol and out-of-Bristol campuses for clinical education, (2) innovative partnerships with local health care providers, (3) local leadership of educational delivery, and (4) the recruitment and training of new cadres of clinical teachers.The seven clinical academies consist of two academies based in traditional acute-care teaching hospitals in the city of Bristol and five academies in the surrounding counties. The same Bristol curriculum is delivered in every clinical academy by locally recruited hospital specialists and family physicians. Each academy is led by an academy medical dean, who has local responsibility for program delivery, quality assurance, academic and personal support for students, and finances on behalf of the university.Medical students rotate between clinical academies every half academic year, alternately based in and outside of Bristol. They learn clinical medicine and develop clinical competence as apprentice members of a local multiprofessional learning community. The medical school now has enough high-quality clinical placements to accommodate increasing numbers of medical students whilst keeping a "human-scale" educational environment.Clinical academies are thus the key components of a decentralized system of curriculum delivery; they differ in concept and purpose from the new academies of medical educators in the United States that offer a centralized focus for the educational mission.     

Promoting fundamental clinical skills: a competency-based college approach at the University of Washington.

The focus on fundamental clinical skills in undergraduate medical education has declined over the last several decades. Dramatic growth in the number of faculty involved in teaching and increasing clinical and research commitments have contributed to depersonalization and declining individual attention to students. In contrast to the close teaching and mentoring relationship between faculty and students 50 years ago, today's medical students may interact with hundreds of faculty members without the benefit of a focused program of teaching and evaluating clinical skills to form the core of their four-year curriculum. Bedside teaching has also declined, which may negatively affect clinical skills development. In response to these and other concerns, the University of Washington School of Medicine has created an integrated developmental curriculum that emphasizes bedside teaching and role modeling, focuses on enhancing fundamental clinical skills and professionalism, and implements these goals via a new administrative structure, the College system, which consists of a core of clinical teachers who spend substantial time teaching and mentoring medical students. Each medical student is assigned a faculty mentor within a College for the duration of his or her medical school career. Mentors continuously teach and reflect with students on clinical skills development and professionalism and, during the second year, work intensively with them at the bedside. They also provide an ongoing personal faculty contact. Competency domains and benchmarks define skill areas in which deepening, progressive attention is focused throughout medical school. This educational model places primary focus on the student.     

Increasing the pool of educational leaders for UCLA.

The dual goals of the faculty Fellowship in Medical Education (MEF) program at the David Geffen School of Medicine at UCLA, established in 1992, are to prepare excellent teachers to serve as clerkship chairs, course chairs, or residency program directors while strengthening their dossiers for promotion based on a scholarly approach to curriculum development, implementation, and evaluation. Fellows are nominated from their departments and must demonstrate a strong interest in assuming educational leadership in their respective specialties. A total of eight fellows are accommodated each year based on interviews with the MEF faculty. The two-year program consists of two seminars and two projects focused on four objectives: to critique teaching and testing practices in medical education in light of current theories of learning; to develop and implement curricula that reflect these theories; to improve personal teaching skills through reflection and feedback; and to design and conduct an educational research or program evaluation study. An analysis of the curricula vitae of faculty members who have completed the fellowship suggest that this program continues to provide educational leaders for the school as originally intended. Of the 71 medical school faculty members who completed the MEF between 1993 and 2004 and have remained at the university, 43 (61%) have assumed new leadership roles in medical education. The evaluation data strongly suggest that the MEF has had a major role since its inception in creating a pool of faculty members with the confidence to manage the tasks of educational planning and implementation.     

A teaching scholars program to develop leaders in medical education.

The authors describe a year-long faculty development initiative to develop leaders in medical education. The Teaching Scholars Program for Educators in the Health Sciences at McGill University enables faculty to improve their educational knowledge and skills while maintaining their clinical, teaching, and research responsibilities. The program, tailored to the participant's individual needs, consists of five main components: two university courses; independent study; participation in faculty-wide faculty development workshops and medical education rounds; a monthly seminar; and attendance at a national or international conference or course. Since its inception in 1997, 22 faculty members have completed the program; four are currently participating in it. This report discusses the experience of 15 scholars who completed the program by September 2000. Evaluations indicate that the scholars achieved most of their stated objectives. The university courses provided a foundation in educational principles and methodology; independent study allowed them to work on educational projects relevant to their disciplines; and the monthly seminars, faculty development workshops, and outside courses offered opportunities for skill acquisition and reflection. Participants also appreciated the opportunity to meet others interested in medical education and to become aware of available educational resources. A year after completing the program, many had joined new educational committees, taken on new leadership roles in medical education, and developed new courses for students and residents. Some of their projects had been presented at national meetings and were being prepared for publication. Two scholars had pursued further study at a master's level. Despite the ongoing challenge of protecting time for educational pursuits, this program has been beneficial in helping to develop educational leaders in the Faculty of Medicine.     

An initiative in mentoring to promote residents' and faculty members' careers.

Internal medicine trainees and faculty recognize the value of effective mentoring to help meet the personal and professional needs of residents. However, the paradigm of the mentor-trainee relationship is seriously threatened by increased clinical, research, and administrative demands on both faculty and housestaff. Moreover, the current criteria for promotion in most teaching hospitals emphasize scholarship, rather than citizenship, so activities such as mentoring devolve to a lower priority. In 2000, the Department of Medicine at Brigham and Women's/Faulkner Hospital initiated a program to improve the effectiveness of housestaff mentoring and recognize faculty contributions to resident career development. The authors report the feedback received from a survey of the 2002-03 medical housestaff (74% response rate) and describe their experiences with the initiation of this program. Over 90% of the housestaff respondents thought it important that the Department assigns an individual faculty mentor. In practice, time-consuming professional responsibilities made meetings difficult, but most pairs supplemented their interactions with e-mail. Discussions primarily focused on career advice and support. Housestaff thought mentors were helpful and available when needed. The department has established new metrics for recognizing faculty mentoring and now publicly rewards mentoring excellence. Of note, unassigned mentoring has increased since the initiation of this program. The authors conclude that the formal mentoring program has ensured that all trainees are provided with a mentor, which has facilitated faculty-housestaff interactions and increased recognition of faculty contributions to mentoring.     

The Mayo Clinic's Clinician-Educator Award: A program to encourage educational innovation and scholarship.

In 1998, the Board of Governors of the Mayo Clinic requested that the Education Committee design and implement a program to grant time and resources to clinical faculty to support the development of educational projects. The essence of the resulting Clinician-Educator Award Program is the concept of using funding to award time and resources for educational projects judged to be meritorious by an impartial, peer-review-based faculty mentoring process. The authors report early experiences with the program, which was enthusiastically accepted by faculty, to provide a model to help other academic health centers, especially those with salary-based faculty, to facilitate educational innovation and scholarship despite the growing constraints on academic clinicians' time and resources.