Faculty Development and the Emergency Medicine Educator: A National Needs Assessment.

BACKGROUND: Faculty development (FD) encompasses structured programming that aims to enhance educator knowledge, skill, and behavior. No uniform framework for faculty development exists, and academic institutions vary in their faculty development programming, ability to overcome barriers, resource utilization, and achievement of consistent outcomes. OBJECTIVE: The authors aimed to assess current FD needs among emergency medicine educators from six geographically and clinically distinct academic institutions to inform overall faculty development advancement in emergency medicine (EM). METHODS: This cross-sectional study assessed FD needs among EM educators. A survey was developed, piloted, and distributed to faculty via each academic institution's internal e-mail listserv. Respondents were asked to rate their comfort level with and interest in several domains of FD. Respondents were also asked to identify their previous experience, satisfaction with the FD they have received, and barriers to receiving FD. RESULTS: Across six sites, 136/471 faculty completed the survey in late 2020 (response rate of 29%): 69.1% of respondents reported being satisfied overall with the FD they have participated in, and 50.7% reported being satisfied with education FD specifically. Faculty report higher comfort levels and interest in several domains when satisfied with the education-specific FD they have received compared with those who report not being satisfied. CONCLUSIONS: EM faculty report generally high satisfaction with the overall faculty development they have received, although only half express satisfaction with their education-related faculty development. Faculty developers in EM may incorporate these results to inform future faculty development programs and frameworks.

Research Pioneers in Emergency Medicine-Reflections on Their Paths to Success and Advice to Aspiring Researchers: A Qualitative Study.

STUDY OBJECTIVE: Research in basic, translational, and clinical emergency medicine has made great strides since the formalization of emergency medicine as a specialty. Our objective is to identify and analyze strategies used by emergency medicine research pioneers to inform further advancement of research in emergency medicine, particularly for aspiring researchers and those in emerging areas, using emergency medicine medical education as one example. METHODS: This was a prospective, grounded-theory, qualitative study, using a constructivist/interpretivist paradigm. Leading basic science, translational, and clinical emergency medicine researchers who completed residency before 1995 were eligible for structured interviews. Thematic coding followed an iterative process until saturation was reached. A theoretic model was developed and analyzed. RESULTS: Research pioneers valued advanced methodological training and mentorship. Barriers to funding were lack of recognition of emergency medicine as a specialty, absence of a research history, and lack of training and funding resources. Deliberate interventions to improve emergency medicine research included educational sessions at national meetings, external (to emergency medicine) mentor pairings, targeted funding by emergency medicine organizations, and involvement with funding agencies. Pioneers facilitate research excellence by serving as mentors and allocating funds or protected time to develop researchers. To advance emerging subfields of research in emergency medicine, pioneers recommend advanced methodological training that is specific to the area, deliberate mentorship, and the formation of research consortia to conduct generalizable outcomes-based studies. CONCLUSION: Research pioneers in emergency medicine cite mentorship, advanced skills obtained through fellowship or graduate degrees, deliberate collaboration with experienced researchers, support from emergency medicine organizations, and forming networks as the cornerstones of success.

Examining Reliability and Validity of an Online Score (ALiEM AIR) for Rating Free Open Access Medical Education Resources.

STUDY OBJECTIVE: Since 2014, Academic Life in Emergency Medicine (ALiEM) has used the Approved Instructional Resources (AIR) score to critically appraise online content. The primary goals of this study are to determine the interrater reliability (IRR) of the ALiEM AIR rating score and determine its correlation with expert educator gestalt. We also determine the minimum number of educator-raters needed to achieve acceptable reliability. METHODS: Eight educators each rated 83 online educational posts with the ALiEM AIR scale. Items include accuracy, usage of evidence-based medicine, referencing, utility, and the Best Evidence in Emergency Medicine rating score. A generalizability study was conducted to determine IRR and rating variance contributions of facets such as rater, blogs, posts, and topic. A randomized selection of 40 blog posts previously rated through ALiEM AIR was then rated again by a blinded group of expert medical educators according to their gestalt. Their gestalt impression was subsequently correlated with the ALiEM AIR score. RESULTS: The IRR for the ALiEM AIR rating scale was 0.81 during the 6-month pilot period. Decision studies showed that at least 9 raters were required to achieve this reliability. Spearman correlations between mean AIR score and the mean expert gestalt ratings were 0.40 for recommendation for learners and 0.35 for their colleagues. CONCLUSION: The ALiEM AIR scale is a moderately to highly reliable, 5-question tool when used by medical educators for rating online resources. The score displays a fair correlation with expert educator gestalt in regard to the quality of the resources. The score displays a fair correlation with educator gestalt.

An Extended Validity Argument for Assessing Feedback Culture.

UNLABELLED: NEGEA 2015 CONFERENCE ABSTRACT (EDITED): Measuring an Organization's Culture of Feedback: Can It Be Done? Steven Rougas and Brian Clyne. CONSTRUCT: This study sought to develop a construct for measuring formative feedback culture in an academic emergency medicine department. Four archetypes (Market, Adhocracy, Clan, Hierarchy) reflecting an organization's values with respect to focus (internal vs. external) and process (flexibility vs. stability and control) were used to characterize one department's receptiveness to formative feedback. The prevalence of residents' identification with certain archetypes served as an indicator of the department's organizational feedback culture. BACKGROUND: New regulations have forced academic institutions to implement wide-ranging changes to accommodate competency-based milestones and their assessment. These changes challenge residencies that use formative feedback from faculty as a major source of data for determining training advancement. Though various approaches have been taken to improve formative feedback to residents, there currently exists no tool to objectively measure the organizational culture that surrounds this process. Assessing organizational culture, commonly used in the business sector to represent organizational health, may help residency directors gauge their program's success in fostering formative feedback. The Organizational Culture Assessment Instrument (OCAI) is widely used, extensively validated, applicable to survey research, and theoretically based and may be modifiable to assess formative feedback culture in the emergency department. APPROACH: Using a modified Delphi technique and several iterations of focus groups amongst educators at one institution, four of the original six OCAI domains (which each contain 4 possible responses) were modified to create a 16-item Formative Feedback Culture Tool (FFCT) that was administered to 26 residents (response rate = 55%) at a single academic emergency medicine department. The mean score of each item on the FFCT (range = 0-100) was analyzed. Convergent and divergent properties of the four archetypes were assessed using a multitrait-multimethod matrix of Pearson's coefficients. Expecting that items in one archetype would diverge from the others, whereas items within an archetype should have strong convergent properties, convergent validity was assessed by comparing items across domains that all related to the same archetype. Similarly, divergent validity was assessed by comparing the correlation of items within an archetype to the correlations of those items within a hetero-domain block (i.e., to other items within the same domain). RESULTS: Three of the four domains of the FFCT (Overall Departmental Characteristics 35.4 ± 15.4, Departmental Foundation of Feedback 46.1 ± 16.7, and Departmental Emphasis of Feedback 30.3 ± 17.7) had the highest mean in the Market archetype (results/achievement oriented), whereas the final domain (Departmental Definition of Successful Feedback 34.8 ± 22.1) had the highest mean in the Clan archetype (personal growth/team achievement). Item responses in the Clan and Hierarchy archetypes had the strongest convergent and divergent validity, respectively. Item responses in the Adhocracy archetype had the weakest convergent and divergent validity. CONCLUSIONS: Although the sample size was small, this initial study demonstrates that a modified organizational culture assessment tool can feasibly be utilized to identify the primary formative feedback archetype of a cohort of residents. This may have future implications for measuring changes in culture after the implementation of strategic programs to address formative feedback. Future studies should examine the generalizability of the FFCT to other institutions, as well as address the weak validity evidence of the Adhocracy archetype in the FFCT.

Social media responses to the Annals of Emergency Medicine residents' perspective article on multiple mini-interviews.

In May 2014, Annals of Emergency Medicine continued a successful collaboration with an academic Web site, Academic Life in Emergency Medicine (ALiEM) to host an online discussion session featuring the 2014 Annals Residents' Perspective article "Does the Multiple Mini-Interview Address Stakeholder Needs? An Applicant's Perspective" by Phillips and Garmel. This dialogue included Twitter conversations, a live videocast with the authors and other experts, and detailed discussions on the ALiEM Web site's comment section. This summary article serves the dual purpose of reporting the qualitative thematic analysis from a global online discussion and the Web analytics for our novel multimodal approach. Social media technologies provide a unique opportunity to engage with a diverse audience to detect existing and new emerging themes. Such technologies allow rapid hypothesis generation for future research and enable more accelerated knowledge translation.

Comparison of mailed vs. on-site emergency department patient satisfaction surveys.

BACKGROUND: Patient satisfaction is one measure of the quality of emergency department (ED) care. The impact of survey delivery method on patient satisfaction in the ED remains unknown. OBJECTIVE: We hypothesized that self-administered surveys in the ED would yield a higher response rate and different satisfaction compared to mailed surveys. METHODS: This observational study was conducted during a 2-month period in an urban, tertiary-care, university-based ED. Eligible patients were randomized to either complete an on-site satisfaction survey in the ED at discharge or to complete an identical survey mailed 1 week after discharge. The primary outcome was the reported overall satisfaction of on-site vs. mail-out surveys. Satisfaction was measured using Likert-type scales and dichotomized outcomes were compared using a χ(2) test and logistic regression. RESULTS: Two hundred and forty-two of 457 eligible patients randomized to the on-site group and 275 of 1152 patients in the mail-out group completed a survey (53% vs. 24%; p < 0.001). Compared with the mail-out group, on-site subjects reported higher overall satisfaction (79.6% vs. 68.9%; p = 0.006), significantly higher satisfaction with their nurses' (p < 0.001) and doctors' listening skills (p < 0.001), and were more likely to recommend this ED to friends or family (71.4%, vs. 56.6%; p = 0.001). CONCLUSIONS: We found that patients who completed satisfaction surveys in the ED reported higher satisfaction than those who received mailed surveys. In addition, measuring patient satisfaction by self-administered on-site surveys at the time of discharge from the ED yields a significantly higher response rate than measuring satisfaction using mailed surveys.

Teaching residents to teach: A pilot study for an innovative online curriculum.

Introduction: Resident-as-teacher (RAT) curricula have improved teaching behavior, ability, and confidence among resident participants. However, there are limited data on the appropriate format, length, and content. With teaching being a core residency competency and residents delivering one-third of student teaching in the clinical setting, properly training residents in clinical teaching is essential. We created a formal, scalable, asynchronous RAT curriculum. We report the pilot implementation of this curriculum along with feasibility, user acceptability, and preliminary knowledge outcomes. Methods: In this pilot pre-post interventional study, senior emergency medicine residents completed a formalized online education curriculum during their "teach month." The curriculum consisted of three online modules completed weekly over a 4-week rotation. Topics included adult learning, assessment and feedback, and group teaching. Several surveys were sent to residents before and after curriculum implementation. The surveys rated satisfaction and asked several education-specific knowledge questions to assess learning. Ratings were analyzed using means and confidence intervals (95%). Knowledge questions were graded and then analyzed by ANOVA and Fisher's LSD test. Results: After the online modules were completed, the intervention group residents' mean score on knowledge questions was significantly higher than that prior to the curriculum and significantly higher than that the control group (previous graduated residents; 6.00 vs. 2.70, p = 0.0001; and 6.00 vs. 3.00, p = 0.0003, respectively). This score was maintained 3 months after completing the online modules. Intervention group residents were more satisfied with the online education resources than the control group (p = 0.048). Conclusions: Residents participating in a formalized online curriculum during their teach month demonstrate a high comprehension of education concepts and increased satisfaction with the provided educational resources and report high satisfaction with the teach month. Our pilot study suggests that a short online education-focused curriculum is an effective method of providing RAT training and may be applicable to clinical teachers across specialties and experience levels.

Five Key Articles on Curriculum Development for Graduate Medical Educators.

Background Curriculum development is an essential domain for medical educators, yet specific training in this area is inconsistent. With competing demands for educators' time, a succinct resource for best practice is needed. Objective To create a curated list of the most essential articles on curriculum development to guide education scholars in graduate medical education. Methods We used a modified Delphi method, a systematic consensus strategy to increase content validity, to achieve consensus on the most essential curriculum development articles. We convened a panel of 8 experts from the United States in curricular development, with diverse career stages, institutions, gender, and specialty. We conducted a literature search across PubMed and Google Scholar with keywords, such as "curriculum development" and "curricular design," to identify relevant articles focusing on a general overview or approach to curriculum development. Articles were reviewed across 3 iterative Delphi rounds to narrow down those that should be included in a list of the most essential articles on curriculum development. Results Our literature search yielded 1708 articles, 90 of which were selected for full-text review, and 26 of which were identified as appropriate for the modified Delphi process. We had a 100% response rate for each Delphi round. The panelists narrowed the articles to a final list of 5 articles, with 4 focusing on the development of new curriculum and 1 on curriculum renewal. Conclusions We developed a curated list of 5 essential articles on curriculum development that is broadly applicable to graduate medical educators.

Better together: A multistakeholder approach to developing specialty-wide entrustable professional activities in emergency medicine.

Purpose: Entrustable professional activities (EPAs) are a widely used framework for curriculum and assessment, yet the variability in emergency medicine (EM) training programs mandates the development of EPAs that meet the needs of the specialty as a whole. This requires eliciting and incorporating the perspectives of multiple stakeholders (i.e., faculty, residents, and patients) in the development of EPAs. Without a shared understanding of what a resident must be able to do upon graduation, we run the risk of advancing ill-prepared residents that may provide inconsistent care. Methods: In an effort to address these challenges, beginning in February 2020, the authors assembled an advisory board of 25 EM faculty to draft and reach consensus on a final list of EPAs that can be used across all training programs within the specialty of EM. Using modified Delphi methodology, the authors came to consensus on an initial list of 22 EPAs. The authors presented these EPAs to faculty supervisors, residents, and patients for refinement. The authors collated and analyzed feedback from focus groups of residents and patients using thematic analysis. The EPAs were subsequently refined based on this feedback. Results: Stakeholders in EM residency training endorsed a final revised list of 22 EPAs. Stakeholder focus groups highlighted two main thematic considerations that helped shape the finalized list of EM EPAs: attention to the meaningful nuances of EPA language and contextualizing the EPAs and viewing them developmentally. Conclusions: To foreground all key stakeholders within the EPA process for EM, the authors chose within the development process to draft; come to consensus; and refine EPAs for EM in collaboration with relevant faculty, patient, and resident stakeholders. Each stakeholder group contributed meaningfully to the content and intended implementation of the EPAs. This process may serve as a model for others in developing stakeholder-responsive EPAs.

Development of entrustable professional activities for emergency medicine medical education fellowships: A modified Delphi study.

Background: It is essential that medical education (MedEd) fellows achieve desired outcomes prior to graduation. Despite the increase in postgraduate MedEd fellowships in emergency medicine (EM), there is no consistently applied competency framework. We sought to develop entrustable professional activities (EPAs) for EM MedEd fellows. Methods: From 2021 to 2022, we used a modified Delphi method to achieve consensus for EPAs. EM education experts generated an initial list of 173 EPAs after literature review. In each Delphi round, panelists were asked to make a binary choice of whether to include the EPA. We determined an inclusion threshold of 70% agreement a priori. After the first round, given the large number of EPAs meeting inclusion threshold, panelists were instructed to vote whether each EPA should be included in the "20 most important" EPAs for a MedEd fellowship. Modifications were made between rounds based on expert feedback. We calculated descriptive statistics. Results: Seventeen experts completed four Delphi rounds each with 100% response. After Round 1, 87 EPAs were eliminated and two were combined. Following Round 2, 46 EPAs were eliminated, seven were combined, and three were included in the final list. After the third round, one EPA was eliminated and 13 were included. After the fourth round, 11 EPAs were eliminated. The final list consisted of 16 EPAs in domains of career development, education theory and methods, research and scholarship, and educational program administration. Conclusions: We developed a list of 16 EPAs for EM MedEd fellowships, the first step in implementing competency-based MedEd.

Preparing for the PICU: A Qualitative Study of Residents as They Prepare for Their First Pediatric Critical Care Rotation.

Learning critical care medicine in the pediatric intensive care unit (PICU) can be stressful. Through semistructured interviews ( n = 16), this study explored the emotions, perceptions, and motivations of pediatric medicine (PM) and emergency medicine (EM) residents, as they prepared for their first PICU rotation. Qualitative data were collected and analyzed using the grounded theory method. Three resultant themes emerged: (1) residents entered the PICU with a range of intense emotions and heightened expectations; (2) they experienced prior history of psychologically traumatic learning events (adverse learning experiences or ALEs); and (3) informed by ALEs, residents prepared for their rotation by focusing heavily on their most basic level of physiological needs and adopting a survival mindset prior to the start of the rotation. These three themes led to a substantive, or working, theory that ALE-associated events may affect how residents approach upcoming learning opportunities. Consequently, adapting a trauma-informed approach as a component of medical education may improve resident learning experiences in the PICU and beyond.

Postgraduate Selection in Medical Education: A Scoping Review of Current Priorities and Values.

PURPOSE: The process of screening and selecting trainees for postgraduate training has evolved significantly in recent years, yet remains a daunting task. Postgraduate training directors seek ways to feasibly and defensibly select candidates, which has resulted in an explosion of literature seeking to identify root causes for the problems observed in postgraduate selection and generate viable solutions. The authors therefore conducted a scoping review to analyze the problems and priorities presented within the postgraduate selection literature to explore practical implications and present a research agenda. METHOD: Between May 2021 and February 2022, the authors searched PubMed, EMBASE, Web of Science, ERIC, and Google Scholar for English language literature published after 2000. Articles that described postgraduate selection were eligible for inclusion. 2,273 articles were ultimately eligible for inclusion. Thematic analysis was performed on a subset of 100 articles examining priorities and problems within postgraduate selection. Articles were sampled to ensure broad thematic and geographical variation across the breadth of articles that were eligible for inclusion. RESULTS: Five distinct perspectives or value statements were identified in the thematic analysis: (1) Using available metrics to predict performance in postgraduate training; (2) identifying the best applicants via competitive comparison; (3) seeking alignment between applicant and program in the selection process; (4) ensuring diversity, mitigation of bias, and equity in the selection process; and (5) optimizing the logistics or mechanics of the selection process. CONCLUSIONS: This review provides insight into the framing and value statements authors use to describe postgraduate selection within the literature. The identified value statements provide a window into the assumptions and subsequent implications of viewing postgraduate selection through each of these lenses. Future research must consider the outcomes and consequences of the value statement chosen and the impact on current and future approaches to postgraduate selection.

Top emergency medicine faculty development papers since 2000: A Delphi study.

Objectives: Faculty development is essential for academic emergency physicians to maintain clinical skills and succeed in administrative and leadership roles and for career advancement and satisfaction. Faculty developers in emergency medicine (EM) may struggle to find shared resources to guide faculty development efforts in a way that builds on existing knowledge. We aimed to review the EM-specific faculty development literature since 2000 and come to a consensus about the most useful for EM faculty developers. Methods: A database search was conducted on the topic of faculty development in EM from 2000 to 2020. After identifying relevant articles, we performed a modified Delphi process in three rounds, using a team of educators with a range of experiences with faculty development and education research, to identify articles that would be most useful to a broad audience of faculty developers. Results: We identified 287 potentially relevant articles on the topic of EM faculty development, 244 from the initial literature search, 42 from manual review of the references of the papers meeting inclusion criteria, and one by our study group's recommendation. Thirty-six papers met final inclusion criteria and underwent full-text review by our team. The Delphi process yielded six articles that were deemed most highly relevant over the three rounds. Each of these articles is described here, along with summaries and implications for faculty developers. Conclusions: We present the most useful EM papers from the past two decades for faculty developers seeking to develop, implement, or revise faculty development interventions.

Promotion and tenure letters: A guide for faculty.

Promotion and tenure (P&T) letters are a key component of the academic advancement portfolio. Despite their importance, many faculty are not trained to write these letters and there is limited literature describing the approach and key components. This paper reviews the role of P&T letters and provides general guidelines for writers. We present a step-by-step guide, which includes how to respond to requests, the role of institutional guidelines, providing context to the letter, evaluating candidates, and delivering an overall recommendation. Finally, we discuss current controversies in P&T letters. This paper is intended to help novice and more experienced writers to enhance their P&T letters, while also helping applicants for promotion understand what is being asked of their letter writers.

Beyond the CLAIM: A comprehensive needs assessment strategy for creating an Advanced Medical Education Research Training Program (ARMED-MedEd).

BACKGROUND: The health professions education (HPE) landscape has shifted substantively with increasing professionalization of research and scholarship. Clinician educators seeking to become competitive in this domain often pursue fellowships and master's degrees in HPE, but there are few resources for the continuing professional development (CPD) of those who seek to continue developing their scholarly practice within HPE. Acknowledging the multiple players in this landscape, the authors sought to design a new "beyond beginners" HPE research program using a novel needs assessment planning process. METHODS: The authors developed and conducted a new three-phase, five-step process that sets forth a programmatic approach to conducting a needs assessment for a CPD course in HPE research. The five steps of the CLAIM method are: Competitive analysis, Literature review with thematic analysis, Ask stakeholders, Internal review by experts, and Mapping of a curriculum. These steps are organized into three phases (Discovery, Convergence, and Synthesis). RESULTS: Over a 12-month period, the authors completed a comprehensive needs assessment. The CLAIM process revealed that longitudinal digital connection, diverse and in depth exposure to HPE research methods, skills around scholarly publishing, and leadership and management of research would be beneficial to our design. CONCLUSIONS: The CLAIM method provided scaffolding to help the authors create a robust curriculum that adopts a scholarly approach for developing a HPE research course. This needs assessment methodology may be useful in other CPD contexts.

Pediatric educational needs assessment for urban and rural emergency medical technicians.

OBJECTIVE: The objective of the study was to identify past experiences, present needs, barriers, and desired methods of training for urban and rural emergency medical technicians. METHODS: This 62-question pilot-tested written survey was administered at the 2008 Oregon EMS and 2009 EMS for Children conferences. Respondents were compared with registration lists and the state emergency medical services (EMS) database to assess for nonresponder bias. Agencies more than 10 miles from a population of 40,000 were defined as rural. RESULTS: Two hundred nineteen (70%) of 313 EMS personnel returned the surveys. Respondents were 3% first responders, 27% emergency medical technician basics, 20% intermediates, and 47% paramedics. Sixty-eight percent were rural, and 32% were urban. Sixty-eight percent reported fewer than 10% pediatric transports. Overall, respondents rated their comfort caring for pediatric patients as 3.1 on a 5-point Likert scale (95% confidence interval, 3.1-3.2). Seventy-two percent reported a mean rating of less than "comfortable" (4 on the scale) across 17 topics in pediatric care, which did not differ by certification level. Seven percent reported no pediatric training in the last 2 years, and 76% desired more. The "quality of available trainings" was ranked as the most important barrier to training; 26% of rural versus 7% of urban EMS personnel ranked distance as the most significant barrier (P < 0.01). Fifty-one percent identified highly realistic simulations as the method that helped them learn best. In the past 2 years, 19% had trained on a highly realistic pediatric simulator. One to 3 hours was the preferred duration for trainings. CONCLUSIONS: Except for distance as a barrier, there were no significant differences between urban and rural responses. Both urban and rural providers desire resources, in particular, highly realistic simulation, to address the infrequency of pediatric transports and limited training.

Planning for diverse, equitable, inclusive research in health professions education: An integral thread in the ARMED MedEd research course.

Racism in medicine affects patients, trainees, and practitioners and contributes to health care inequities. An effective strategy to actively oppose the structural racism ingrained in the fabric of medicine is to intentionally and systematically address diversity, equity, and inclusion (DEI) in medical education and research. As part of ARMED MedEd, a new longitudinal cohort course in advanced research methods in medical education, sponsored by the Society for Academic Emergency Medicine, the leadership team deliberately included a nested DEI curriculum. The goal of the DEI curriculum is to reduce bias in development, recruitment, and implementation of education research studies to promote equity and inclusion in medical education, research, and ultimately, patient care. A team of medical educators with expertise in DEI developed curricular elements focusing on DEI in education research. The two major components are a didactic curriculum (including implicit bias training) to teach researchers to consider equity as they design studies and a consultative service to refine research protocols to address lingering unintended bias. A dedicated focus on DEI can be incorporated into an advanced education research methodology course to raise awareness and provide tools to avoid bias in research design and implementation of interventions. Over time, the network of education researchers who are trained in DEI awareness will grow and provide equitable offerings to their learners to mitigate health inequities.

Bias in assessment: name, reframe, and check in.

Cognitive bias permeates almost every learner assessment in medical education. Assessment bias has the potential to affect a learner's education, future career and sense of self-worth. Decades of data show that there is little educators can do to overcome bias in learner assessments. Using in-group favouritism as an example, we offer an evidence-based, three-step solution to understand and move forward with cognitive bias in assessment: (1) Name: a simple admission about the presence of inherent bias in assessment, (2) Reframe: a rephrasing of assessment language to shed light on the assessor's subjectivity and (3) Check-in: a chance to ensure learner understanding and open lines of bidirectional communication. This process is theory-informed and based on decades of educational, sociological and psychological literature; we offer it as a logical first step towards a much-needed paradigm shift towards addressing bias in learner assessment.

Coaching educators: Impact of a novel national faculty development program for didactic presentation skills.

BACKGROUND: Didactic lectures remain common in medical education. Many faculty physicians do not receive formal training on public presentations or leading instructional sessions. Coaching has emerged in medical education with the potential to positively impact skills. We sought to evaluate a novel, national faculty peer-coaching program created to improve lecture presentation skills and foster career development. METHODS: This was a mixed-methods study of participant and faculty perceptions after completing the Council of Residency Directors in Emergency Medicine Academy Coaching Program. Participants completed an online evaluative survey consisting of multiple choice and Likert-type items. Program coaches participated in semistructured interviews. Descriptive statistics were reported for survey data. Thematic qualitative analysis by two independent reviewers was performed on interview data. RESULTS: During 2012 to 2017, a total of 30 participants and 11 coaches from 37 residency programs across the United States engaged in the program. Twenty-four (80%) participants completed the survey. Eight (73%) coaches participated in semistructured interviews. Data were collected between October and December 2018. The mean ± SD numbers of national presentations participants had given before and after the coaching program were 6.92 ± 7.68 and 16.42 ± 15.43, respectively. Since their coaching, most participants (87.5%) have been invited to give a lecture at another institution. Many participants felt that the program improved their lecture evaluations, public speaking, ability to engage an audience, and professional development. Almost all (92%) would recommend the program to a colleague. The coaches perceived multiple benefits including improved skills, self-reflection, networking, career advancement, and personal fulfillment. Suggestions for improvement included improved administrative processes, more clear expectations, increased marketing, and increased participant and coach engagement. CONCLUSION: Participants and coaches perceived multiple benefits from this novel, national faculty coaching program. With identification of the success, challenges, and suggestions for improvement, others may benefit as they develop coaching programs in medical education.