The "Medical Education Roadshow:" Delivering Faculty Development to Busy Clinician Educators When They Least Expect It.

INTRODUCTION: Designing impactful faculty development for busy clinicians is challenging. Many may not recognize their impact on the learning environment or prioritize their development as educators. Our objective was to evaluate the feasibility and acceptability of a faculty development approach, the "Medical Education Roadshow," which delivered succinct, actionable faculty development at regularly scheduled, departmental clinical business meetings. METHODS: Between October 2018 and October 2019, we conducted six 15-minute "roadshows" for the Obstetrics and Gynecology faculty at one academic medical center. Each roadshow addressed a foundational education topic in an interactive manner with an emphasis on one take-away skill in teaching behavior. We utilized a simple, anonymous evaluation tool to obtain participant feedback and analyzed quantitative data descriptively and qualitative data thematically. RESULTS: A total of 174 of 265 evaluations were returned (65.6% response rate). Participants indicated that the roadshows helped them think about teaching more effectively and offered one or more practical daily practice tips. Qualitative findings coalesced into two themes. First, participants identified multiple intended practice changes, including using more effective teaching strategies, being more deliberate about feedback, and modeling exemplary professional behavior. Second, participants recommended multiple improvement opportunities and future topics. DISCUSSION: Busy clinical faculty were highly receptive to opportunities to improve as educators through the "roadshow" approach.

Faculty perspectives on the use of standardized versus non-standardized oral examinations to assess medical students.

OBJECTIVES: To determine if faculty perceive standardized oral examinations to be more objective and useful than the non-standardized format in assessing third-year medical students' learning on the obstetrics and gynecology rotation. METHODS: Obstetrics and gynecology faculty at three teaching hospitals were sampled to complete a survey retrospectively comparing the standardized oral examination (SOE) and non-standardized or traditional oral examinations (TOE).  A Likert scale (0-5) was used to assess satisfaction, objectivity, and usefulness of SOE and TOE.  Wilcoxon signed rank test was performed to compare median Likert scale scores for each survey item. A Spearman's correlation coefficient was used to investigate the relationship between the perceived level of objectivity and SOE characteristics. For qualitative measures, content analysis was applied. RESULTS: Sixty-six percent (n=25) of eligible faculty completed the survey. Faculty perceived the standardized oral examination as significantly more objective compared with the non-standardized (z=-3.15, p=0.002). Faculty also found SOE to be more useful in assessing overall clerkship performance (z=-2.0, p<0.05). All of the survey participants were willing to administer the standardized examination again.  Faculty reported strengths of the SOE to be uniformity, fairness, and ease of use. Major weaknesses reported included inflexibility and decreased ability to assess students' higher order reasoning skills. CONCLUSIONS: Faculty found standardized oral examinations to be more objective in assessing third-year medical students' clinical competency when compared with a non-standardized approach.  This finding can be meaningfully applied to medical education programs internationally.