scholarly journals 2494 Selectives: Implementing self-directed collaborative selectives as part of a curriculum for pre-health care professional students

2018 ◽  
Vol 2 (S1) ◽  
pp. 60-60
Author(s):  
Leonor Corsino ◽  
Stephanie A. Freel ◽  
Melanie Bonner ◽  
Joan Wilson ◽  
Christie McCray ◽  
...  

OBJECTIVES/SPECIFIC AIMS: To provide students an opportunity to select health care-oriented course work that reflects both their interests and the increasingly diverse spectrum of health professions education and health care careers. To increase the opportunity for students to enter professional schools and health care professions with enhanced engagement and experience. METHODS/STUDY POPULATION: The 4-credit elective (Selective) curriculum is a component of the 38 credit Duke School of Medicine Master of Science in Biomedical Sciences (MBS) program which is completed over 10.5 months. Students work closely with their advisors to choose activities that reflect their interests. Selectives are offered by an array of schools, institutes, and programs within Duke University, including: the School of Medicine, School of Law, Global Health Institute, Bioethics and Science Policy Master Program, Clinical Research Training Program, Center for Documentary Studies, and Medical Informatics. Students may also pursue directed studies in areas such as health policy, or an inter-professional trip to Honduras. In addition to the course-based Selectives, three research practicum options are offered: Community Engagement, Clinical Research (Duke Office of Clinical Research), and a self-selected mentored research experience. Finally, the MBS program offers 2 in-house specific Selectives: Fundamentals of Learning: Theory and Practice, and Planning for Health Professions Education. RESULTS/ANTICIPATED RESULTS: The MBS program accepted its first cohort of students in June 2015. Two cohorts have graduated and the third has begun (n=30, 2016; n=42, 2017; n=43 enrolled, 2018). Our students come from diverse background with a third from populations historically underrepresented in STEM due to race/ethnicity, and another third underrepresented due to other factors such as low socioeconomic status, first generation to college, LGBQT, and those from rural and immigrant communities. Thus far, Selective distribution has been: Clinical research practicum (7, 2016; 14, 2017; 9, 2018); Mentored research practicum (2, 2016; 1, 2017); Community engagement practicum (7, 2016; 4, 2017; 5, 2018); Planning for health professions educations (14, 2016; 32, 2017; 33, 2018), Fundamentals of learning: Theory and Practice (7, 2016; 17, 2017; 18, 2018); documentary film (1, 2016); inter-professional trip to Honduras (2, 2016, 2, 2017). Since the implementation of the curriculum, at least 53 of 70 students who have applied (76%) were admitted to health professions or other graduate schools despite having lower initial MCAT and undergraduate GPAs in aggregate than the average of students who matriculate to allopathic medical school programs: 41 to medical schools, 3 to dental school, 2 each to osteopathic and physician assistant schools and 1 each to physical therapy, business school and law school. Eighteen of the 2016 graduates, and 21 of the 2017 graduates work in research for their gap year following graduation, the majority being employed in our institution’s research programs providing a pipeline of trained research assistants and coordinators. DISCUSSION/SIGNIFICANCE OF IMPACT: Lessons learned by implementing our curriculum include the following: (1) students are eager to explore different areas of health care; (2) collaboration across schools, centers, departments, institutes, and offices increases our ability to identify common areas of interest; (3) implementing a diverse curriculum can be challenging due to the need for significant organization and planning; (4) the diversity of courses can be a source of confusion when there is a lack of standardization in learner expectations; (5) continued collaboration across, schools, centers, institutes programs, health professions and sections requires a significant amount of time and expertise. However, our programs demonstrate significant positive impacts both on students and at the institutional level. Our program shows that a diverse curriculum leads to a high number of students engaged in pursuing and successfully continuing a health profession education. Institutional benefits include a robust pipeline for a diverse research workforce.

Author(s):  
Zarrin Seema Siddiqui ◽  
Diana Renee D. Jonas-Dwyer

Recent technological advances have led to the adoption of mobile learning devices throughout the world and this is reflected in the articles that were reviewed in health professions education. Several criteria were used to review the selected articles, including the target group, phase of learning (undergraduate, postgraduate, or continuous professional development), the theoretical framework used, and the reported outcomes. The majority of the studies fit into Kirkpatrick’s first level of evaluation and report learners’ views of learning experiences. A smaller number of articles incorporated changes in learners’ behaviour, but only one reported benefits to the delivery of health care. To assist educators in using mobile learning as part of their teaching, an implementation framework including infrastructure, training, and ethical elements based on the literature reviewed is provided.


2020 ◽  
Vol 20 (S1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Jason R. Frank ◽  
◽  
Sarah Taber ◽  
Marta van Zanten ◽  
Fedde Scheele ◽  
...  

Abstract Background Accreditation is considered an essential ingredient for an effective system of health professions education (HPE) globally. While accreditation systems exist in various forms worldwide, there has been little written about the contemporary enterprise of accreditation and even less about its role in improving health care outcomes. We set out to 1) identify a global, contemporary definition of accreditation in the health professions, 2) describe the relationship of educational accreditation to health care outcomes, 3) identify important questions and recurring issues in twenty-first century HPE accreditation, and 4) propose a framework of essential ingredients in present-day HPE accreditation. Methods We identified health professions accreditation leaders via a literature search and a Google search of HPE institutions, as well as by accessing the networks of other leaders. These leaders were invited to join an international consensus consortium to advance the scholarship and thinking about HPE accreditation. We describe the consensus findings from the International Health Professions Accreditation Outcomes Consortium (IHPAOC). Results We define accreditation as the process of formal evaluation of an educational program, institution, or system against defined standards by an external body for the purposes of quality assurance and enhancement. In the context of HPE, accreditation is distinct from other forms of program evaluation or research. Accreditation can enhance health care outcomes because of its ability to influence and standardize the quality of training programs, continuously enhance curriculum to align with population needs, and improve learning environments. We describe ten fundamental and recurring elements of accreditation systems commonly found in HPE and provide an overview of five emerging developments in accreditation in the health professions based on the consensus findings. Conclusions Accreditation has taken on greater importance in contemporary HPE. These consensus findings provide frameworks of core elements of accreditation systems and both recurring and emerging design issues. HPE scholars, educators, and leaders can build on these frameworks to advance research, development, and operation of high-quality accreditation systems worldwide.


2015 ◽  
Vol 10 (1) ◽  
pp. 47-56 ◽  
Author(s):  
Jeff G. Seegmiller ◽  
Alan Nasypany ◽  
Leamor Kahanov ◽  
Jennifer A. Seegmiller ◽  
Russell Baker

ContextEvidence suggests widespread adoption of the entry-level doctorate among health professions, although little is known about how these changes have impacted associated professions and influenced education, collaborative practice, professional advancement, or professional salaries.ObjectiveThreefold: (1) What doctoral education models are currently utilized among health care professional education programs in the United States? (2) How do entry-level clinical doctorates in health care professions impact research training and productivity? (3) How do clinical doctorates among health professions influence practice opportunities and salary?DesignData were extracted from various sources including professional organizations, accrediting body Web sites, and the US Department of Labor database. Full-text articles published in English between the years 2001–2011 were extracted from a search of 38 databases in the University of Washington libraries. The remaining article abstracts were reviewed for compatibility with our research questions. Data were extracted using a standardized rubric and coded according to emergent themes.ResultsTwo-thirds of 14 examined health professions (n = 10) followed the medical model of postbaccalaureate entry-to-practice professional doctoral education. Less than a third (n = 4) of surveyed professions reserved doctoral-level education for advanced practice, and 1 profession maintains both entry-level and advanced practice doctorates. Only 4 of the 14 clinical doctoral degrees required completion of an original research project. Entry-level clinical doctorates may provide insufficient specialty training, necessitating further training after graduation.ConclusionsMost health care professions follow the medical model for professional preparation, though at reduced intensity with fewer clinical hours than physician training. Clinical doctorates are perceived to increase professional opportunities and are associated with higher salaries and doctoral education among health care professions has become the new educational standard, though research training, research productivity, diversity, and professional debt burden have been negatively impacted by this trend.


Author(s):  
Robin Washington

Foundations of Clinical Research: Applications to Practice is the third edition written by physical therapy professors at MGH Institute of Health Professions in Boston Massachusetts. The textbook is intended as the primary textbook for educational instruction related to research and critical thinking. The authors intended use of this text by physical therapists, occupational therapists, speech therapists, nursing, medicine, exercise physiologists and other health care related disciplines. This user-friendly textbook can be utilized by anyone interested in step-by-step illustrations for developing, implementing and disseminating research related activities.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document