[The following notes were generated by Will Brooks, PhD.]

IAMSE Webinar Series, Fall 2019

Speaker: David Rogers MD, MHPE, FACS, FAAP and Melissa Klein MD, MEd
Title: Innovative Faculty Development Programs: Two Case Studies
Series: Re-imagining Faculty Development in Health Professions Education

The IAMSE 2019 Fall Webinar Series, Re-imagining Faculty Development in Health Professions Education, continued on September 26, 2019 with a presentation by Dr. David Rogers, Senior Associate Dean for Faculty Affairs and Professional Development at the University of Alabama at Birmingham, and Dr. Melissa Klein, Professor of Pediatrics at the University of Cincinnati College of Medicine. Their webinar entitled “Innovative Faculty Development Programs: Two Case Studies” provided listeners with a close look at two longitudinal faculty development programs directed by the presenters.

Dr. Rogers led the webinar off with a description of the University of Alabama at Birmingham Healthcare Leadership Academy (HLA), which is co-sponsored by the UAB School of Medicine and Collat School of Business. The HLA was developed to provide leadership training to both faculty and staff who had the potential to take on leadership roles within the institution – emergent leaders. The program is funded through a philanthropic gift, which has prevented participants from needing to fund their own participation. The HLA operates with four educational goals:

• Teach participants about the history and operations of the health system and academic health centers.
• Enhance and develop the leadership abilities of the participants.
• Facilitate the development of strategic thinking skills, focusing on opportunities and challenges facing academic health centers.
• Activate participants’ evaluation of their own individual aspirations, strengths, weaknesses, and commitment to leadership.

Participants are selected by an advisory group from among nominations across multiple units within the academic medical center including the Schools of Medicine, Dentistry, Health Professions, Nursing, Optometry, and Public Health. Each cohort of participants represents a diverse group of faculty and staff including emergent and established leaders. Dr. Rogers noted that the diversity of each group is an enriching element of the program. To date, 260 individuals have taken part in the HLA in its first decade (2009-2019).

The HLA is a seven-month program that includes an opening weekend retreat held off-campus, monthly day-long sessions, individual readings, and small group projects. The opening weekend includes participation in physical challenges as part of a high-ropes course, which allows participants to step away from their professional identity and build trust and teamwork. Monthly meetings include a range of topics including leadership and strategic planning, communication, negotiation, building a vision, and academic medical center finance and operations. Time is also allocated at each monthly meeting for small group work and networking. Each small group conducts a project throughout the program that culminates in a group presentation and submitted white paper. Rather than scholarship, most projects address a practical problem faced by the medical center or one of its units. Individual readings are taken from the assigned book, The Leadership Challenge by James Kouzes and Barry Posner as well as journal articles.

Dr. Klein continued the webinar with a description of the Academic Pediatric Association’s Educational Scholar’s Program (ESP). The ESP was developed to provide training to academic pediatricians in the area of educational scholarship, which Dr. Klein defined as the dissemination of curricular innovations, evaluation tools, and teaching methodologies. Because the ESP is housed within a national professional association, mentorship, collaboration, and networking between individuals at different institutions have become an important element of the program.

The Educational Scholars Program was initiated in 2006. Scholars enrolled in the 3-year program complete a longitudinal curriculum and mentored educational research projects. Four key components comprise the ESP: educational scholarship skills, mentorship, an educator portfolio, and networking. The first year of the curriculum focuses on educational scholarship and includes a day-long session at the Academic Pediatric Association’s annual meeting, asynchronous online coursework, and monthly calls with peer groups. During this year scholars will identify their scholarly project. In year 2, the focus shifts to the nuts and bolts of educational research. Instruction in both quantitative and qualitative methodology occurs at the annual meeting and through online coursework. Year three focuses on scholarly dissemination, leadership, and networking; it includes a third full-day session at the annual meeting and additional online coursework.

After 10 years (2006-2016), participants from 80 institutions had taken part in the first 8 cohorts of the ESP. Most of the 170 scholars were women and were at junior faculty ranks. The scholarship output from program participants has included research publications, publications in MedEdPORTAL, national presentations, and educational grants. 98% of graduates have reported at least 1 publication, funded grant, or educational leadership position.

[The following notes were generated by Andrea Belovich, PhD.]

IAMSE Webinar Series, Fall 2019

Speaker: Bonny Dickinson, PhD and Maria Sheakley, PhD
Title: Congratulations! You’ve been promoted! Introducing the IAMSE Educator Toolkit
Series: Re-imagining Faculty Development in Health Professions Education

The third installment of the Fall 2019 IAMSE Web Seminar Series, “Re-imagining Faculty Development in Health Professions Education,” was presented on September 19, 2019 by Dr. Bonny Dickinson, Associate Dean for Faculty Affairs and Professor of the Department of Biomedical Sciences at Mercer University School of Medicine and Dr. Maria Sheakley, Professor of Physiology and Vice Chair of the Department of Biomedical Sciences at the Western Michigan University Homer Stryker M.D. School of Medicine. In this webinar, “Congratulations! You’ve been promoted! Introducing the IAMSE Educator Toolkit,” Dr.’s Dickinson and Sheakley provided an overview of IAMSE resources available to medical educators who are looking to create and strengthen their educational portfolios for promotion and tenure applications.

The first portion of the presentation was given by Dr. Dickinson, who provided the background for the creation of the IAMSE Educator Toolkit. The Toolkit was developed by the Committee for the Advancement of Medical Science Educators (CAMSE), a subcommittee of the IAMSE Professional Development Committee. Instituted in 2015, CAMSE is charged with supporting the efforts of educators, facilitating communication about critical issues affecting medical education and educators, and examining the current state of institutional operationalization of guidelines for the recognition, reward, and promotion of educators. The work of CAMSE in developing the IAMSE Educator Toolkit, was, in part, a response to the widespread lack of knowledge surrounding the resources available to guide medical educator promotion and career development.

According to a 2017 IAMSE Member Survey (published in Medical Science Educator in 2018), faculty awareness of publications and guidelines meant to assist in promotion was modest and institutional adoption of such published guidelines for promotion was poor. In addition, the survey revealed that a majority of faculty are not aware of their own institution’s guidelines for promotion and tenure. These findings were identified as challenges to faculty promotion and tenure, in addition to several other major challenges identified in 2007, which faculty seeking promotion are still faced with today. These include lack of protected time for scholarship, lack of recognition for alternate forms of scholarship, differing perceptions of the relative value of educational contributions compared to others, lack of mentorship, lack of assistance in writing publications, and lack of understanding of how to publish or present educational work.

Dr. Dickinson concluded her portion of the webinar by summarizing the documentation that the IAMSE Educator Toolkit can provide to help faculty seeking promotion and tenure overcome the many challenges to advancement. he Toolkit helps educators develop portfolios beyond the curriculum vitae and the educational/teaching philosophy statement by framing (and documenting) their contributions in the five domains of educator activities: 1) Teaching, 2) Learner Assessment, 3) Advising and Mentoring, 4) Curriculum Development, and 5) Educational Leadership and Administration. Although not the focus of this webinar, Dr. Dickinson also mentioned that CAMSE has developed a companion toolkit, the Evaluator Toolkit, to provide guidance to those evaluating applications for promotion and tenure.

Dr. Maria Sheakley continued the webinar with a brief history of educational scholarship and the development of the Q2E model that gave rise to the IAMSE Educator Toolkit. In 1990, Boyer’s “Scholarship Reconsidered,” identified education as a true modality for promotion was advocated, efforts to promote the role of education as a true modality for promotion and scholarship became more widespread. In 2006, the AAMC GEA Consensus Conference on Educational Scholarship identified the five domains of educator activity (mentioned previously), which can be used to promote scholarship and excellence. Furthermore, to aid in illustrating the quality of these educational activities and relating them to scholarship, the Q2E (Quantity, Quality, and Engagement) model was designed to assess excellence and engagement for producing documentation for promotion. According to the Q2E model, “Excellence” can be assessed through both the quantity and the quality of the educational activities, and “Engagement” can be assessed through evidence of a Scholarly approach to activities (e.g., the work is informed by knowledge in the field) and through scholarship (e.g., contribution to the field’s knowledge through local, regional, national, and/or international dissemination).

CAMSE then used the Q2E model to frame development of the IAMSE Educator Toolkit. The Toolkit was designed to assess Quantity and Quality of educational activities by quantitifying information about the activity (e.g., number of leaners taught, how often, how much time devoted to the activity, etc.). Viewing Quantity/Quality together with Engagement on a continuum, these values are documented through evidence of an informed approach to the educational activity, activity outcomes, reflective critique of that activity, and finally through dissemination of the work (scholarship).

Dr. Sheakley then discussed the role of the IAMSE Educator Toolkit in developing an educator portfolio for promotion. In contrast to the CV, which lists all activities, the purpose of the educator portfolio is to document and showcase achievements that are representative of the educator’s work, highlighting the depth, breadth, impact and accomplishments of the work for presentation to a promotion and tenure committee. To aid educators in highlighting their achievements and developing their portfolios, the CAMSE created worksheets to apply to each of the five domains of educator activities (Teaching, Learner Assessment, Curriculum Development, Mentoring and Advising, and Educational Leadership and Administration).

Dr. Sheakley finished the webinar by encouraging educators to study their institution’s Promotion and Tenure guidelines and determine if a template already exists. The IAMSE Educator Toolkit can be used as a template to create a portfolio narrative if none is available, or it can be used to identify important elements of the CV to highlight. After choosing activities to highlight and determining where they fall along the Q2E-continuum, educators can fill out the toolkit worksheets to create portfolios and narratives that encompass the quality, quantity, excellence, engagement, and scholarship of educator achievements.

The IAMSE Educator Toolkit and its companion, the IAMSE Evaluator Toolkit, will be available as free resources from the IAMSE website.

[The following notes were generated by Andrea Belovich, PhD.]

IAMSE Webinar Series, Fall 2019

Speaker: Darin Latimore, MD
Title: Recruiting, Retaining and Developing a Diverse Faculty
Series: Re-imagining Faculty Development in Health Professions Education

The Fall 2019 IAMSE Web Seminar Series entitled “Re-imagining Faculty Development in Health Professions Education,” is focused on providing participants with practical tips for developing their own skills as well as insight into how to become engaged with and possibly improve the faculty development culture within their institutions. The second installment of this series, entitled, “Recruiting and developing a diverse faculty,” was delivered by Dr. Darin Latimore, the Deputy Dean for and inaugural Chief Officer of Diversity and Inclusion at the Yale School of Medicine. Dr. Latimore holds leading roles in developing a comprehensive plan for furthering diversity, equity, and inclusion at the Yale School of Medicine, including a robust recruitment and retention program for faculty and students from historically underrepresented medical communities. During his talk, Dr. Latimore outlined the need for growing the underrepresented minority (URM) component of the physician workforce, explored best practices for robust recruitment of URM faculty in medicine, and summarized effective strategies medical schools have used to retain URM faculty.

Dr. Latimore first emphasized the need for recruiting and retaining URM faculty, which he defined to include Black/African American, Hispanic/Latinx, and Native American/Pacific Islander faculty. When comparing demographic data between United States medical school faculty1 and the general United States population2, there is a much lower percentage of URMs in faculty (especially in the ranks of associate and full professor1) compared to the general population. In particular, the percentages of faculty from URMs Dr. Latimore identified have not increased by even 1% over the last 15 years across all medical schools.

To underscore the value of diversity in medicine, Dr. Latimore discussed several studies across multiple fields (including business and academia) to show that teams rich in diversity produce higher quality of outcomes3,4,5,6,7. In addition, the patient-physician race concordance is highly relevant for medical care, as patients are more likely to visit physicians with a similar race/ethnicity as themselves8 and tend to perceive physician-patient communication as being poorer when there is a racial/ethnic discordance9. Dr. Latimore stated that URM physicians are also more likely to see underinsured or uninsured patients of all ethnicities, emphasizing the role URM physicians play in addressing healthcare inequity in the United States.

To recruit URM faculty, Dr. Latimore suggested developing learners in the campus “pipeline” by intentionally developing an inclusive culture and allowing URM learners (medical students, residents, and fellows) opportunities to envision themselves (and/or remain) as faculty10. He also discussed examples of such efforts being implemented at Yale School of Medicine, including URM mentorship programs, curriculum revisions to focus on health equity, and mitigation of microaggressions, harassment, and discrimination more proactively when reported. Yale also provides several opportunities for URM learners to network and interact with URM faculty, including a lecture series given by MD, PhD, and resident Yale alumni. Anecdotally, Dr. Latimore discussed that post-exit interviews report that these interventions have led to greater engagement with Yale and the community.

Dr. Latimore next discussed strategies to recruit URM faculty through proactive prospecting. Prior to posting job opportunities, utilize existing faculty networks, NIH-funded grant databases, and conference activities to identify potential candidates10. Unconscious bias training, increasing diversity of search committees and charging search committees to identify candidates of diverse backgrounds can help identify qualified URM faculty candidates11. Contacting diversity subcommittees of organizations can also help when deciding where and how to advertise job postings or locate potential URM candidates. Finally, ensuring the candidate search process and the interview experience are equitable across all demographics is essential to successful recruitment11.

Dr. Latimore also discussed Yale University’s holistic approach to faculty recruitment packages. Rather than offering recruitment packages through individual departments, Yale utilizes a centrally located fund that allows for strategic application and flexibility to adjust funding priorities based on need. The Yale University 50 million Faculty Excellence and Diversity Initiative has facilitated 65 recruitments campus-wide over 3 years, and funds up to 50% of faculty salary (or non-salary requirements) for up to 3 years12.

One of the major challenges to recruiting diverse faculty is the lack of “critical mass” of URM faculty at medical schools to attract other potential candidates13. The cohort recruitment method encourages the recruitment of multiple URM faculty simultaneously to rapidly establish a diverse environment. This method of recruitment has been effective for institutions with very few URM faculty.

Shifting towards the retention of URM faculty, Dr. Latimore discussed two major factors as being important: fostering an inclusive culture at the institutional level and having formal programs geared towards URM professional development and networking at the individual level. Using the University of California San Diego School of Medicine as a case study, Dr. Latimore described a Junior faculty development program (National Center for Leadership in Academic Medicine: NCLAM) with an 87% (13/15) retention rate of participating URM faculty hired in 200514,15. For comparison, USCD has a 58% retention rate of all faculty recruited in 2005, including URM and women faculty subgroups15. This comprehensive program (with funding assistance from a center of excellence grant) provides structured mentorship and sponsorships to junior faculty and is especially proactive in including URM and women junior faculty. The program offers counseling, completion of a professional development project, and several sessions with mentors. Mentors agree to partner with their mentees on projects, critique scholarly work, promote mentees at networking events, advocate for leadership roles for mentees at conference sessions, and encourage invitations to submit manuscripts.

An example of a faculty retention program implemented at Yale is the Minority Organization for Retention and Expansion (M.O.R.E.), a self-run faculty organization supported by Dr. Latimore’s office and the Dean16. The organization offers network/community-building events and open lunches based on topics including appointments and promotion groups, increasing URM presence in leadership, internal and external grant opportunities, and resources to handle bias and discriminatory behavior. In addition to hosting an annual professional development retreat, each department is encouraged to have a junior URM faculty mentorship program run by senior URM faculty. Other initiatives at Yale to promote URM faculty development and retention include a pilot junior faculty coaching program, with a (1-5 year) professional development plan as an outcome, participation in AAMC minority professional development programs for junior and mid-career faculty, and coordinated sessions with media experts to help minority faculty increase career exposure and influence at the national level17.

Dr. Latimore also discussed the importance of developing diverse leaders who will not only mentor URM faculty to encourage individual development but also actively seek and advocate career advancement opportunities for their faculty as a sponsor18. For institutions looking to establish these sponsorship initiatives, it is important to consider the compatibility between mentors and mentees to promote faculty satisfaction with mentorship.

Dr. Latimore concluded by emphasizing the importance of working on institutional climates to promote successful inclusion and retention of URM faculty. Understanding and monitoring the institutional culture is challenging, but focus groups, one-on-one meetings, and exit interviews can help identify areas that need improvement. Since even the most excellent URM faculty may not be able to thrive in a culture of bias hostility or exclusion, inclusive environments are needed, and the environment must be developed as much as the individual faculty.

References (as provided by Dr. Latimore):
1. “Medical School Faculty by Sex and Race/Ethnicity” (2019). Association of American Medical Colleges
2. “United States Census” (2018.) United States Census
3. Hong L., Page SE., 2004
4. Rohner V., Dougan B., 2012
5. Dendon N., Chang MJ., 2019
6. Freeman, R., Huang W., “ Collaborating with People Like Me: Ethnic Coauthor ship within the United States.” J. Labor Economics, Vol. 33 (3) 2015.
7. Campbell L.G., et. al., “Gender-Heterogenous Walking Groups Provide Higher Quality Science.” PLUS-ONE, Vol. 8 (10) 2013.
8. Simon, A.E., et al., “Physician-Patient Race Concordance from the Physician Perspective,” J Natl Med Assoc. 105; 150-156; 2013.
9. Shen, M.J., et al., J. Racial & Ethnic Health Disparities March 2017.
10. Peek M.E., et al., “URM Candidate Are Encouraged to Apply: A national Study to Identify Effective Strategies to Enhance Racial and Ethnic Faculty Diversity in Academic Departments of Medicine”. Acad. Med. ; 88 (3) 405-412, March 2013.
11. Christopher D. Lee. Search Committees: A Comprehensive Guide to Successful Faculty, Staff, and Administrative Searches. 2nd edition. Sterling, VA: Stylus Publishing, 2014.
12. Faculty.yale.edu/faculty-excellence–and-diversity
13. Kaplan, S.E., et al., “Challenges in Recruiting Retaining and Promoting Racially and Ethnically Diverse Faculty,” J Natl Med Assoc, Vol. 110 (1) 58-65, 2018.
14. Assoc, Vol 111 (1) 44-53, 2019.
Daley S., et al., “ Improving the Retention of Underrepresented Minority Faculty in Academic Medicine,” J Natl Med Assoc, Vol 98 (9) 1435-1440, 2006.
15. Wingned D., et al. “ Faculty, Equity, Diversity Culture and Climate Change in Academic Medicine. A Longitudinal Study,” J Natl Med
16. https://medicine.yale.edu/more
17. https://medicine.yale.edu/diversity
18. Raphael J.L., “ The Role of Sponsorship in Achieving Workforce Diversity in Academic Pediatrics.” Pediatrics; 144 (2) 1-4, 2019.

[The following notes were generated by Andrea Belovich, PhD.]

IAMSE Webinar Series, Fall 2019

Speaker: Alice Fornari, EdD
Title: The Current Landscape of Faculty Development: Challenges and Opportunities
Series: Re-imagining Faculty Development in Health Professions Education

The Fall 2019 IAMSE Web Seminar Series entitled “Re-imagining Faculty Development in Health Professions Education,” is focused on providing participants with practical tips for developing their own skills as well as insight into how to become engaged with and possibly improve the faculty development culture within their institutions.

Presenter: Dr. Alice Fornari is the Associate Dean of Educational Skills Development at the Barbara & Donald Zucker School of Medicine (SOM) at Hofstra/Northwell, and serves as the is the Vice President of Faculty Development for the 23 hospitals of the Northwell Health organization.

Dr. Fornari’s talk, “The Current Landscape of Faculty Development: Challenges and Opportunities,” provided a literature-rich overview of the field of faculty development (FD). This review addressed three major considerations, including reasons why FD has grown substantially in the last ten years, factors that either work well or need to be strengthened in current FD programs, and an examination of the future directions, challenges, and opportunities that must be considered by faculty developers and future FD programming over the next ten years. Throughout the talk, Dr. Fornari outlined several resources, ideas, approaches for faculty and faculty developers to consider.

As a field, FD has grown substantially due to its importance in promoting educational excellence and success and contributing to faculty vitality, job satisfaction, and retention. While investment in the growth and development of faculty skills are necessary to promote innovation, one of the most important aspects of FD to recognize as a faculty developer is that FD shapes and supports identity formation for faculty (Steinert et al, 2016; Irby et al, 2016). As such, FD should aim to support the integration of the role of educator into all other areas of faculty responsibilities.

As it exists today, FD is an essential component of Professional Development in healthcare education, which includes all learning activities needed for health professionals to fulfill their roles in healthcare and learning environments. FD and faculty developers influence growth of faculty skills and behaviors in the domains of teaching effectiveness, leadership and management, research capacity building, academic and career (identity) development, and organizational change (Steinert, 2014). Important stakeholders of faculty development include not only current faculty and administrators but also students and learners who will become future educators. Dr. Fornari also emphasized the importance of developing the developers—recognizing that peers and colleagues who are or are becoming faculty developers also need support and development.

Delivery systems for FD that contribute particular value include longitudinal programs, pedagogical consultation, and objective structured teaching encounters (OSTEs). Similar to the Objective Structured Clinical Encounter (OSCE), the OSTE provides the educator with an opportunity to practice teaching skills and to receive feedback. With an eye towards the year 2030 and beyond, Dr. Fornari believes that technological methods (including infographics, podcasts, and social media) will be extremely important in delivering FD programs to audiences, although these methods present their own challenges in terms of creating interactive, group experiences and fostering relationships between faculty.

Key features of successful FD programs include (a) application of situational and experiential learning (active learning principles), (b) application of the “Science of Learning,” (c) support of effective peer and colleague relationships, (d) well-designed interventions, (e) programmatic systems of evaluation, (e) advanced education for faculty developers as role models, and (e) dissemination of faculty development as scholarship.

An excellent and effective strategy/learning environment for implementing FD is the Community of Practice, or CoP (Buckley et al, 2019). The CoP is defined as a group of people who share a craft or profession (Wenger, 1998).  Serving as a psychologically safe, social space where learning is inherent to membership, a healthy CoP builds relationships between members over time, facilitates work on common passions, and allows sharing of resources between members (Buckley et al, 2019; Smith, 2003). CoP’s are valued for facilitating mentorship relationships, promoting collaborative innovations, serving as a mechanism for knowledge management/enhancement (including tacit knowledge) and best practices, and for being a venue to share resources and social capital to achieve common goals. Furthermore, the CoP allows effective FD even when the faculty developer cannot claim competence in all practices of the diverse membership (Buckley et al, 2019). Finally, the CoP and the faculty developers who promote it contribute to faculty resilience, engagement, and ability to find meaning and joy in the workplace. Dr. Fornari outlined 12 practical tips for implementing a community of practice in FD, as developed by Marco Antonio de Carvalho-Filho and colleagues (2019).

Dr. Fornari next identified several opportunities and challenges for disseminating FD as scholarship. FD research should not only focus on individual faculty members and FD community, but also on the workplace communities of faculty in alignment with the CoP model of scholarship (O’Sullivan and Irby, 2011). Researching the effectiveness of FD programming should focus on process, outcomes, and relationships within the program and the participants’ workplace(s), with a focus on improving the workplace environment in a collaborative manner (O’Sullivan and Irby, 2011). Other opportunities include developing humanistic mentors to younger learners (students, residents, junior faculty) (Fornari et al, 2018), and creating entrustable professional activities for faculty. Other opportunities include re-conceptualizing FD as identity development and promoting renewal and reflection on personal and professional growth to allow space for faculty to develop identity, resilience and well-being. Teachers also need to be rewarded as master educators and innovators to allow for career development and advancement through scholarship.

Challenges to scholarship include institutional support (financial and cultural), lack of protected time and resources, identifying and assessing short- and long-term outcomes and impact on multiple stakeholders, assessing the durability of change, and justifying educational outcomes. Strong advocacy by faculty developers and a culture of change (i.e., developing institutional policies that support and reward excellence, innovation, and scholarship) can help to overcome these challenges (Irby and O’Sullivan, 2018).

Programmatic features that lead to creating successful FD initiatives include (i) evidence-informed educational design and measurement of outcomes, (ii) relevant content to faculty, (iii) experiential learning and opportunities for practice and application, (iv) opportunities for feedback and reflection, (v) collaborative educational projects as an outcome, (vi) intentional community building, (vii) longitudinal program design, and (viii) institutional support at all levels. Longitudinal programs are recognized as important but are challenging to implement and assess.

Showing support of joy and engagement in faculty work, using evidence-based evaluation criteria to assess behavior changes and larger societal impact (including end receivers of faculty development), and workplace learning provide benefits to the institution as a whole. Dr. Fornari finished by discussing the financial benefits of FD programming to academic medical centers, including increased job satisfaction of faculty (and reduced turnover), increasing retention of minority and female faculty members, generating increased internal/external grant funding and publications, and the benefit of improving communication with patients, and ultimately improving patient care (Topor and Roberts, 2016). Demonstrating to an administration that there are benefits to FD through scholarship and data will help communicate the importance of FD to senior stakeholders who have the budgetary authority to mitigate the cost. Ultimately, the true value of FD lies in educational excellence, faculty well-being, and increased quality of care to the ultimate stakeholders of FD: patients and general society.

References (as provided by Dr. Fornari):

• Cruess RL, Cruess SR, Steinert Y. Medicine as a Community of Practice: Implications for Medical Education. Acad Med. 2017.
• Lave J, Wenger E. Situated Learning. Legitimate peripheral participation. Cambridge: University of Cambridge Press; 1991.
• Schreurs M-L, Huveneers W, Dolmans D. Communities of teaching practice in the workplace: Evaluation of a faculty development program. Med Teach. 2015; 38 (8):808-14.
• Smith, M. K. (2003) ‘Communities of practice’, the encyclopedia of informal education. www.infed.org/biblio/communities_of_practice.htm
• Steinert Y. Faculty development: From workshops to communities of practice. Med Teach. 2010; 32: 425–428.
• Buckley H, Steinert Y, Regehr G, Nimmon L. When I say . . . community of practice. Medical Education 2019.
• Steinert Y. Faculty Development in the Health Professions: A Focus on Research and Practice. NY: Springer, 2014; p.4.
• Wenger E. Communities of Practice: Learning, Meaning, and Identity. New York: Cambridge University Press; 1998.
• Yvonne Steinert, Karen Mann, Brownell Anderson, Bonnie Maureen Barnett, Angel Centeno, Laura Naismith, David Prideaux, John Spencer, Ellen Tullo, Thomas Viggiano, Helena Ward & Diana Dolmans (2016) A systematic review of faculty development initiatives designed to enhance teaching effectiveness: A 10-year update: BEME Guide No. 40, Medical Teacher, 38:8, 769-786
• Marco Antonio de Carvalho-Filho, René A. Tio & Yvonne Steinert (2019): Twelve tips for implementing a community of practice for faculty development, Medical Teacher,
• Irby D, O’Sullivan P. Developing and rewarding teachers as educators and scholars: remarkable progress and daunting challenges. Medical Education (2018) 52: 58–67
• Topor D, Roberts D. Faculty Development Programming at Academic Medical Centers: Identifying Financial Benefits and Value. Med.Sci.Educ. (2016) 26:417–419
• O’Sullivan P, Irby D. Reframing Research on Faculty Development. Acad Med. April 2011
• O’Sullivan P. What Questions Guide Investing in our Faculty? Acad Med. Published ahead of print