gms | German Medical Science

Beginning May this year the first international conference on faculty development in the health professions proceeded in Toronto [http://www.facultydevelopment2011.com/]. Initial doubts by Yvonne Steinert (McGill University, Montreal) and Ivan Silver (University of Toronto) who were co-chairing the conference that the interest in such a meeting might be low or that they would attract a North American crowd only, have been proven wrong. To the great delight of the organizers almost 350 participants from 28 countries made it to Canada, a large European fraction among them. According to this, the conference program was rich and diversified, embracing almost 200 short communications and posters, around 30 workshops as well as keynote lectures, symposia and discussion rounds.

One of the main topics addressed was the instructional design of faculty development initiatives. It soon became clear that the scope of these initiatives should well exceed mere teacher training [1]. In analogy to the evolution of medical education a shift is currently underway abandoning input orientation with its main focus on the content of isolated seminars or workshop [2]. This, of course, does not mean that specific competencies e.g. for clinical teaching are no longer important. However, it is more and more recognized that long-lasting changes can only be achieved by longitudinal programs that accompany the entire academic career of individuals. Thus, the issue is not just the development of competencies but one of identities [3].

Once again, the concept of learning in communities of practice proves crucial here. Communities of practice are groups of individuals who share a set of beliefs, values and procedures and who are focused on a specific task [4]. However, especially in an academic environment communities of practice conducive to the individual development of competencies with regard to teaching and learning are by no means self-evident. Thus, these communities have to be built to provide forums and platforms for cooperative exchange as well as opportunities for mutual support and learning. Academies of medical educators [5], [6], web-based solutions [7] and mentoring programs [8] are tangible examples of such initiatives. Unfortunately, positive role models and career perspectives for those who are primarily engaged in medical education are still missing in many places. One of the important challenges in this regard is the question how excellence in matters of teaching and learning can be measured and documented beyond mere quantitative parameters [9].

With regard to the content of faculty development initiatives, the focus was on competency based education in a dual sense: Firstly, in terms of the competencies needed by faculty to fulfill their different roles (e.g. as teachers, researchers, leaders) and how specific programs might offer support in this respect. Secondly, in terms of how the shift to competency based education in the health professions affects the roles and competencies of faculty [10]. Matters of assessment are especially important here [11].

Another issue of growing importance especially against the background of the concept of communities of practice is interprofessional collaboration [12], [13]. While e.g. in Germany there is still some reluctance to accept the idea of a division of labor and collaboration among the different health professions at eye level, the development in North America for instance is much more advanced. In accordance with the title of the conference that deliberately addressed the “health professions” and not just the medical profession, participants with a background in nursing or other health professions contributed significantly to the program. Thus, one consequence of the academization of these professions (which currently still faces some skepticism in Germany) could immediately be witnessed: Gaining partners whose scholarship from a different perspective is a tremendous asset to the overall discourse.

On the whole, it became quite clear during the conference that in many places high quality faculty development initiatives are offered, evaluated, and researched. However, especially with regard to research many questions still remain open [14]. This issue was addressed by two of the keynote lecturers who offered some advice. LuAnn Wilkerson (University of California, Los Angeles) one of the doyennes of faculty development stated very clearly that we have to learn more about the working principles and effects of faculty development. Thus, she called for more thoroughly planned studies using a sound design to amend our knowledge. In addition, she reminded her audience to be aware of the “ascholar syndrome” which manifests itself not only by acute procrastination when it comes to planning and implementing evaluation, but also by storing vast amounts of data in drawers instead of writing them up for publication. By referring to the BEME report on the effectiveness of faculty development programs published a few years ago [15], John Spencer (Newcastle University) further elaborated these arguments in demonstrating that especially studies exploring the effects of faculty development on the organizational level and on students’ learning are needed. Brian Hodges (University of Toronto) pointed to an interesting piece of evidence in this regard: The successful completion of a master’s degree program alone does not necessarily result in enhanced scholarly productivity. Much more is needed to achieve this: long-term institutional support, cooperative networking and ongoing developmental activities especially with regard to research methodology [16]. However, as all too often the most precious ingredient is enough protected time [17].

Taken together, this certainly was a very interesting conference on one of the central issues in health professions education and definitely worthwhile visiting. The sequel is planned for 2013 with the location yet to be announced.

The author declares that he has no competing interests.