Description of the Novel Networking, Open Discussion, Engagement, and Self-Promotion (NODES) Framework for the Advancement of Women Physicians on Social Media.

The Networking, Open Discussion, Engagement, and Self-Promotion (NODES) framework is a strategy that women in medicine can deploy at conferences to broaden their professional networks and engage with colleagues. The NODES framework was designed and implemented for use at the Women in Medicine Summit, an annual conference that unites women to combat gender inequality in medicine. Intentional use of social media at conferences using the NODES framework by women in medicine can increase the visibility of research projects and may lead to speaking engagements and awards.

An online discussion between students and teachers: a way forward for meaningful teacher feedback?

BACKGROUND: Student evaluation is an essential component in feedback processes in faculty and learner development. Ease of use and low cost have made paper evaluation forms a popular method within teaching programmes, but they are often seen as a formality, offering variable value towards the improvement of teaching. Students report poor motivation to engage with existing feedback tools whilst teachers describe receiving vague, contradicting, or irrelevant information. We believe that feedback for teachers needs to be a two-way process, similar to feedback for students, for it to be effective. An online feedback tool has been implemented for third-year medical students from Imperial College London to promote open discussion between teachers and students. The feedback tool is accessible throughout students' clinical attachment with the option of maintaining anonymity. We aim to explore the benefits and challenges of this online feedback tool and assess its value as a method for teacher feedback. METHODS: Qualitative data was obtained from both volunteer third-year medical students of Imperial College London and Clinical Teaching Fellows using three focus groups and a questionnaire. Data was analysed through iterative coding and thematic analysis to provide over-arching analytical themes. RESULTS: Twenty-nine students trialled this feedback tool with 17 responding to the evaluative questionnaire. Four over-arching themes were identified: reasons for poor participation with traditional feedback tools; student motivators to engage with 'open feedback'; evaluative benefits from open feedback; concerns and barriers with open feedback. CONCLUSION: This feedback tool provides a platform for two-way feedback by encouraging open, transparent discussion between teachers and learners. It gives a unique insight into both teachers and peers' perspectives. Students engage better when their responses are acknowledged by the teachers. We elaborate on the benefits and challenges of public open feedback and approaches to consider in addressing the self-censorship of critical comments.

Using Team Innovation and Networking to Respond to Rapid Changes in the Academy.

When COVID-19 shuttered schools across the nation, it propelled higher education institutions into uncharted territories. Institutions had to make rapid decisions in a short period of time with limited information or direction. In these uncertain and challenging times, pharmacy academics in the United States and around the world reached out to one another to discuss, share, and learn. What began with a few members of the Student Services Personnel Special Interest Group (SIG) grew to many members who banded together as a team through open discussions to innovative problem-solving. Working together through open discussions created a setting that promoted diverse ideas, multiple perspectives, and a depth of knowledge to address some of the most challenging issues faced by pharmacy education. When partnering together, institutions had a much greater resource of knowledge and support that could be leveraged to broadly benefit the Academy.