News

IAMSE Winter 2019 WAS Session 3 Highlights

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

IAMSE Webinar Series, Winter 2019

Speakers: John Co, MD, MPH, CPPS, FAAP
Title: The Learning Environment During Residency
Series: The Learning Environment in Health Sciences Education

The IAMSE 2019 Winter Webinar Series, The Learning Environment in Health Sciences Education, continued on January 24, 2019, with a presentation by Dr. John Patrick Co, Director of Graduate Medical Education at Partners HealthCare and Co-Chair of the Clinical Learning Environment Review (CLER) Evaluation Committee for the ACGME. His webinar entitled “The Learning Environment During Residency” took listeners on an informative journey through the learning environment as viewed by the ACGME and CLER program.

Dr. Co began the webinar with a background on how the CLER program began and noted that the learning environment is foundational for everything that occurs within programs and institutions. When the learning environment is less than ideal, the learning that should occur does not occur efficiently and may not occur at all. CLER recognizes six focus areas: patient safety, healthcare quality, supervision, transitions in care, well-being, and professionalism. Dr. Co described three components to the CLER program. First, site visits are conducted to provide formative feedback to programs in each of the six focuses. Second, CLER tracks aggregate data from site visits over time to monitor progress in the six focuses at the national level. And third, CLER develops resources to support stakeholders in their progress toward improving the learning environment for graduate medical education (GME).

Dr. Co provided listeners with a description of the ins and outs of institutional CLER site visits. These site visits can be summarized as a look at how GME is integrated into patient care and education within an institution and what are the measures of success and areas of improvement identified by the institution. Dr. Co stressed that CLER site visits are not accreditation visits, but they are linked to ACGME accreditation in that sponsoring institutions must have a CLER visit every 18-24 months. While accreditation decisions are not made from CLER visits, identification of an egregious violation that would threaten patient and/or resident safety could result in an accreditation action.

CLER is currently in its third cycle of institutional visits. In the first cycle, 298 sponsoring institutions were visited between 2012-2015. These visits were restricted to those institutions with three or more core residency programs. The second cycle of site visits, which occurred 2015-2018, also included those ‘small programs’ with fewer than three core residencies. Site visits are conducted by a team of 1-4 site visitors over the course of 2-3 days. Visits include meetings with senior leadership (CEO and DIO attendance is required); group meetings with a broad representation of residents, core faculty, and program directors; and walking rounds.

Dr. Co went on in the webinar to describe the CLER Evaluation Committee, which he co-chairs. This committee, which is comprised of national experts in GME and the six focus areas mentioned above, meets quarterly to review data from CLER site visits. He then discussed the CLER Pathways to Excellence document, which provides guidance to GME leadership on the learning environment using synthesized input from experts in the field, published literature, and data from CLER visits. CLER National Report of Findings documents have also been released and are available for download. These documents summarize findings from each of the first two CLER site visit cycles.

The webinar continued with Dr. Co providing high-level data from the CLER site visits to the IAMSE community. He first noted a set of overarching themes gleaned from the CLER program.

  • Theme 1: Clinical learning environments (CLEs) vary in their approach to and capacity for addressing patient safety and health care quality.
  • Theme 2: GME is largely developed and implemented independently of the organization’s other areas of strategic planning and focus.
  • Theme 3: A limited number of CLEs have implemented educational programs to ensure all faculty and program directors have the knowledge, skills, and attitudes necessary for their respective roles in training GME learners in patient safety and quality improvement.
  • Theme 4: CLEs vary in the degree to which they coordinate and implement interprofessional learning in the context of delivering patient care.
  • Theme 5: In general, CLEs lack the mechanisms to identify and eliminate organizational factors that contribute to burnout.
  • Theme 6: Health care system consolidation and organizational changes create new challenges for CLEs to align GME with initiatives to improve patient care.

Dr. Co presented data comparing results of the first and second cycles of CLER site visits in the areas of patient safety, healthcare quality improvement, care transitions, and professionalism. While many positive trends were noted between the first and second visits, some lacked the magnitude of improvement perhaps expected, and some data indicated negative trends in specific areas such as care transitions. From these data, a group of challenges and opportunities have been identified for future focus.

Dr. Co concluded the webinar with a summary of recent changes and future directions for the CLER program. Included amongst these are the transition from a focus on fatigue management to more comprehensive examination at well-being, development of subprotocols in addition to the main site visit protocol, the pursuing excellence initiative, and a new focus area on ‘teaming’.

A Review from Medical Science Educator from Dr. Alice Fornari

I have selected to review this Medical Science Educator recent publication: A Delphi Study to Determine Leveling of the Interprofessional Competencies for Four Levels of Interprofessional Practice published in the December 2018 issue. From my own experience, the Delphi Method is a qualitative research technique that is very valuable to medical education and therefore it is worthwhile to review an article that used the method to gain a better understanding of all the steps required to achieve consensus from all participants. The other interesting aspect of this article is the application to interprofessional core competencies and practice, which is a very important part of medical education and clinical care. I anticipate all medical educators (UGME, GME and CPD) will be interested in the results and the application to interprofessional teaching, learning and practice.


 The article uses the IOM Interprofessional Education Collaborative core competencies as the framework for the research. These are internationally recognized competencies that guide interprofessional education and practice in an effort to build on their value for trainees entering clinical practice.


 This article addresses the importance of leveling interprofessional learners based on their experiences who work together on interprofessional teams. This helps faculty who plan and teach learning sessions to plan activities for learners who are at equivalent levels. The use of the IPEC competencies across different levels of learners needs to be assessed and if all 38 are appropriate for all learners working together on teams.


 The authors chose the Delphi technique as a consensus building method using an expert panel to achieve consensus. They divide learners into 4 different levels and align with different health professionals who are part of a team. The 38 competencies were judged against the 4 levels of learners. The goal was set as a minimum of 70 percent agreement of the experts on the 3 rounds used in the Delphi Technique. The goal to develop a working document to guide developmentally appropriate curriculum for IPE learners preparing for practice. 34/38 competencies achieved consensus for the 4 levels of learners. This research is a guideline to be used to implement the IOM core competencies, specifically the competency of working into professional teams.  

What is interesting is questions raised from the research: 
1.    Are all the 38 competencies critical to all learners? 
2.    Are the competencies well defined?
3.    Do all competencies need to be addressed at all 4 levels of learners?


 Most important this study contributes to the body of knowledge of interprofessional teaching and learning. The goal to establish guidelines for progressive organization and consistency in interprofessional learning activities using the IPE Competencies and ultimately strengthen teaching, learning and practice among health professionals.

Submit Your Manuscript to Medical Science Educator

Medical Science Educator, the peer-reviewed journal of the International Association of Medical Science Educators (IAMSE), publishes scholarly work in the field of health sciences education. The journal publishes four issues per year by Springer Publishing. We welcome contributions in the format of Short Communication, Original Research, Monograph, Commentary, and Innovation. Please visit our website www.medicalscienceeducator.org for a more detailed description of these types of articles.


I look forward to receiving your submissions.

IAMSE Winter 2019 WAS Session 2 Highlights

[The following notes were generated by Michele Haight, PhD]

IAMSE Webinar Series, Winter 2019

Speakers: Sean Tackett MD, MPH
Title: The Learning Environment: An International Perspective
Series: The Learning Environment in Health Sciences Education

  • Learning environment definition: “The learning environment refers to the social interactions, organizational culture and structures and physical and virtual spaces that surround and shape the learners’ experiences, perceptions and learning.” (Josiah Macy Jr. Conference, 2018)
  • Review of the four domains of Gruppen’s 2018 conceptual model for the learning environment:
    • Personal
    • Social
    • Organizational
    • Physical and Virtual Spaces

These domains correspond to the JHLES and DREEM frameworks.

DREEM is the most popular framework for measuring learning environment

perceptions.

  • The learning environment is messy, challenging and important. Given this, we should not back down from challenges of engaging with it.
  • The global medical education landscape:
    • 3000 medical schools in 185 countries with an estimate of >2million medicals students.
  • The US medical education landscape:
    • 183 medical schools with 0.09 million students.
    • Cost in US $300K/student (cost in China $14K/student).
  • Globally, the number of medical schools has been increasing while the ratio of medical schools to population has been decreasing. We need more medical schools.
  • Models of medical education systems vary a lot making the learning environment more complex and more difficult to measure.
  • Factors contributing to the overall complexity of learning environments in international medical education include the following:
    • rapidly growing number of medical schools
    • increasing institutional collaborations
    • increasing student migration
    • variation in curricular models
    • uneven coverage by regulatory/accreditation authorities (limit abilities to standardize medical education systems)
    • Uneven resources with exceptionally challenging situations
  • Understanding one individual’s learning environment is already complex. Complexity increases when measuring at an institution, health system and inter-health system levels.
  • A plurality of research done on the learning environment comes from high-income countries.
  • International comparison studies in learning environment perceptions appear to yield useful data. For example, in an international comparison study, learning environment perceptions associated with quality of life but did not strongly associate with empathy. Much more research needs to be done to strengthen the evidence.
  • Accreditation bodies need to spearhead research on the learning environment. There is a movement to standardize international accreditation and therefore standardize the data collection for accrediting purposes. This will enable research across institutions.

Say Hello to Our Featured Member, Sateesh Arja!

Our association is a robust and diverse set of educators, researchers, medical professionals, volunteers and academics that come from all walks of life and from around the globe. Each month we choose a member to highlight their academic and professional career, and see how they are making the best of their membership in IAMSE. This month’s Featured Member is Dr. Sateesh Arja.

Sateesh Arja, MD, MPH, SFHEA, FAcadMEd, AFAMEE
Associate Professor of Clinical Skills and Medical Education
Executive Dean
Avalon University School of Medicine
Curacao, Caribbean

How long have you been a member of IAMSE?
I have a year of membership.

As a member of the 2019 Program abstract review team, what drew you to the role?
This is a way that we can evaluate abstracts but also we can learn from them. I like to review the other researchers then we can guide them and give them feedback, which I really wanted to do.

What has your experience been like with IAMSE and working on the 2019 program?
My experience with IAMSE has been wonderful. I joined last year because I like to engage in medical education. This year during review, the Program (Committee) sends us the abstracts to review independently. They sent me ten to review.

What is your assessment of the abstracts that you reviewed this year?
They were actually wonderful! There were a wide variety of abstracts including a lot of topics of interest given by these associates. The abstracts I reviewed were more focused on interprofessional education (IPE) and transprofessional education (TPE).

What interesting things are you working on outside the Association right now?
I am part of at least 10-13 organizations currently as well as the Society of Directors of Research in Medical Education(SDRME). They have opportunities for people working outside the US. Currently I am working on research project titled “Consequences of ECFGMG’s 2023 Directive on Caribbean Medical School’s Processes”. I led the change process of curriculum from a discipline-based curriculum to an integrated curriculum at our university which was published in Medical teacher journal titled “Integrated Curriculum and the Change Process in Undergraduate Medical Education”. I am the leading author for this research paper. My passion for education, especially in medical education, motivated me to join in Masters in Health Professions Education. I finished the post-graduation diploma in Health Professions Education by FAIMER, Center for Medical Education in the Context, and Keele University, UK and expecting to be graduated with Masters in the year 2019.

For more information on the poster, oral and workshop abstracts at the 2019 IAMSE Annual Conference, please visit our website at www.iamseconference.org.

IAMSE at GRIPE 2019 in New Orleans

The IAMSE booth will be exhibiting at the annual winter meeting of the Group for Research in Pathology Education (GRIPE) in New Orleans, LA on January 24-26, 2019. IAMSE Association Manager Julie Hewett will also be delivering a pre-conference workshop titled, “Using Social Media to Disseminate Your Scholarly Work.” If you plan on attending this meeting, don’t miss this session and do not forget to swing by the IAMSE booth and say hello!

Information on the GRIPE Meeting can be found here. We look forward to seeing you there!

IAMSE Winter 2019 Webinar Series: The Learning Environment System & Case Studies

The 2019 IAMSE Winter Webcast Audio Seminar Series just recently started! The 2019 winter series of the IAMSE webinar program will focus on the role of the learning environment in health science education. The significance and importance of the learning environment is based on the assumption that a poor environment is associated with poor student performance, burn-out and stress. For the Winter Series, we’ve lined up seven speakers to shine a light on the topic across multiple landscapes in medical education. Our final speaker is Dr. Dan Harrington, Vice President for Academic Affairs at Virginia Tech Carilion School of Medicine.

The Learning Environment System and Case Studies
Presenter: Dan Harrington, MD
Session: February 7, 2019 at 12 pm Eastern Time

The Liaison Committee on Medical Education has recognized the importance of a healthy learning environment for students to optimally learn, to promote well-being, and to develop professionalism. Since 1990 the LCME has used the Graduation Questionnaire (GQ) to survey graduating medical students about their experiences and perceptions of their school’s learning environment. Many schools’ GQ survey results have shown that students were less likely to report unprofessionalism and mistreatment while in school suggesting students are fearful of reporting while they are students. As a result, the LCME focuses on the learning environment in the accreditation surveys of medical schools. 

Following Virginia Tech Carilion School of Medicine’s (VTCSOM) 2013 LCME accreditation visit, the school established the Learning Environment Advocacy Committee (LEAC), a multidisciplinary committee that serves as the clearinghouse for learning environment concerns from students. The learning environment concerns are reviewed by the committee, recommendations are made to investigate the concerns, and the concerns are addressed in the departments where the unprofessionalism or mistreatment occurred. The LEAC raises awareness of the importance of a healthy learning environment for students, faculty, residents, nurses, and staff at VTCSOM and its clinical affiliate. 

This seminar will review the process of developing the LEAC, the activity of the LEAC since the committee was established, and the results of an organizational wide learning environment survey.

Registration for the 23rd Annual IAMSE Meeting is Now Open!

We are pleased to announce that registration for the 23rd Annual Meeting of IAMSE, to be held June 8-11, 2019 in Roanoke, VA, USA, is now open. At this annual meeting of the International Association of Medical Science Educators (IAMSE) faculty, staff and students from around the world who are interested in medical science education join together in faculty development and networking opportunities. Sessions on curriculum development, assessment and simulation are among the common topics available at the annual meetings.


Featured plenary speakers include Don Cleveland, Claudia Krebs, Craig Lenz and Geoff Talmon.


Additional meeting details and registration can be found at http://www.iamseconference.org.

IAMSE Winter 2019 WAS Session 1 Highlights

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

IAMSE Webinar Series, Winter 2019

Speakers: Larry Gruppen, PhD
Title: An Overview and Introduction to the Learning Environment
Series: The Learning Environment in Health Sciences Education

The IAMSE 2019 Winter Webinar Series, The Learning Environment in Health Sciences Education, kicked off to a strong start on January 10, 2019 with a presentation by Dr. Larry Gruppen, Professor in the Department of Learning Health Sciences at the University of Michigan Medical School. His webinar entitled “An Overview and Introduction to the Learning Environment” provided a framework on the topic upon with other speakers in the series will build in the coming weeks.

Dr. Guppen began with an acknowledgment of the recent scoping review of literature on the learning environment for the Josiah Macy Foundation in 2018 from which much of the webinar would be based. He noted that the learning environment and associated concepts are defined variably by individuals and that theories and measurements surrounding the topic have not yet been fully established. The AMA defines the learning environment as a social system that includes the learner (including the external relationships and other factors affecting the learner), the individuals with whom the learner interacts, the setting and purposes of the interaction, and the formal and informal rules/policies/norms governing the interaction (AMA, 2007). However, a modified definition was put forth by the Josiah Macy Conference in 2018: the social interactions, organizational culture and structures, and physical and virtual spaces that surround and shape the learners’ experiences, perceptions, and learning.

A challenge faced by those exploring the learning environment is that virtually anything could be considered a part of it including physical facilities, faculty, the patient population, curriculum, institutional culture, assessments, clinical settings, etc. As Dr. Gruppen stated, “If everything is part of the learning environment, then effectively nothing is part of the learning environment.” Another challenge lies in the absence of a common language; educational climate, social environment, and work environment are all synonyms in common use. Dr. Gruppen contrasted the hidden curriculum from the learning environment as separate entities, though some literature may equate the two.

As the root word environ means ‘to surround’, the learning environment can be considered those factors which surround learning. Five dimensions of the learning environment grouped into three domains were defined by Dr. Gruppen: in the Sociocultural Domain, (1) person, (2) social, and (3) organization; within the Spatial Domain, (4) the physical environment; and in the Technology Domain, (5) the virtual learning spaces.

Differences within the person such as personality, resilience, and life experiences all influence how one learns and thus affect the learning environment. Interactions between the learner and his/her peers, faculty, patients, and interprofessional colleagues all impact the social dimension of the learning environment. The organizational level is often blamed for toxic learning environments due to factors including work load, stress, etc. Physical spaces including classrooms, meeting rooms, and their furnishings in addition to critical general features such as new versus old facilities and the proximity of spaces all comprise the spatial domain. Virtual patients, electronic health records, online learning, and technology driven simulation affect the virtual dimension of the learning environment.

A variety of instruments have been utilized to measure the learning environment, but all depend upon self-reporting of the learner through survey questionnaires. As such, data collected to date have been dependent on learner perspectives.

Dr. Gruppen completed the webinar with a discussion of ideas currently circulating in health professions education and in the literature on how to fix the learning environment. The first discussed was curricular change. A publication was discussed which detailed the effects on the learning environment of a comprehensive curricular change that included transition to an organ system-based structure with pass/fail grading. This intervention yielded a moderate to large effect size on the learning environment, but it cannot be possible to pinpoint which factors were most important for the improvement, underscoring the complexity of the issue. Secondly, a Dutch study that examined key factors predicting work engagement among faculty was discussed. This study highlights the fact that faculty engagement and faculty satisfaction impact the learning environment. Faculty are both contributors to and recipients of the learning environment. Faculty development is thus an important cog to consider when thinking about improving the learning environment. Finally, Dr. Gruppen noted that much of the literature on the learning environment centers on student experiences and mistreatment.

While the learning environment is a complex and still poorly defined topic, its importance in medical and health professions education cannot be understated. It is critical for issues related to stress, burn-out, and suicide; it impacts productivity and patient care; and failures in the learning environment can have punitive financial consequences for an organization.

IAMSE 2018-2021 Strategic Plan

Greetings to everyone! Please find on the IAMSE website the 2018-2021 IAMSE Strategic Plan approved by the Board of Directors and Committee Chairs in December of last year. If you have any additional suggestions please send them to me and we will consider them at our next on-site BOD meeting in Roanoke in June 2019. We will be reviewing our progress towards this plan at that time. These are such exciting times for IAMSE and on behalf of the BOD please accept our appreciation for all that you do for IAMSE.

With warmest regards!
Rick Vari
President, IAMSE

Last Call for Educational Scholarship and Student Grant Applications – Due January 15 –

The application deadline for Educational Scholarship grant proposals is quickly drawing near! The deadline for submitting applications is January 15, 2019. Applications are to be submitted on thesubmission page found here before the deadline. Instructions for grant proposals may be found on the grant submission page.

All IAMSE members are eligible to submit a grant proposal. Preference will be given to new projects, and must be relevant to the mission of IAMSE. The results of funded projects must be presented at a future IAMSE meeting. The initial funding award will be announced via email, and at the 2019 IAMSE meeting.

Information regarding the ScholarRx-IAMSE Educational Research Grant Program for Students, including the application process, eligibility, proposal format, and evaluation criteria, can be found on the IAMSE website here.

Applications are to be submitted on the submission page found here by 11:59 PM Eastern Time on January 15, 2019.

IAMSE Winter 2019 Webinar Series: The Learning Environment Panel Discussion

The 2019 winter series of the IAMSE webinar program focuses on the role of the learning environment in health science education. The significance and importance of the learning environment is based on the assumption that a poor environment is associated with poor student performance, burn-out and stress. Our fourth session in the series will be a panel discussion featuring Luke Mortensen, PhD, FAHA, FNAOME; Cindy Anderson, PhD, RN, APRN-CNP, ANEF, FAHA, FNAP, FAAN; and Karen Hills, MS, PA-C.

The Learning Environment Panel Discussion
Presenters: Luke Mortensen, Cindy Anderson and Karen Hills
Session: January 31, 2019 at 12pm Eastern TimeThe panel will include a brief overview of the Learning environment from three different perspectives: nursing, osteopathic and PA education. Following those overviews, the panelists will engage in a live Q&A with the moderator and audience.

From Dr. Mortensen: Within the osteopathic medical learning environment, the considerations – not unlike those of other health education learning paradigms – encompass social, academic, professional, psychological, and physical settings and frameworks as they influence how people learn, organize, and collaborate together. We will discuss different approaches and on-going concerns within the academic setting to positively affect teaching and learning.

From Dr. Anderson: At the Ohio State College of Nursing, our learning environment is illustrated by our commitment to LIVE WELL (Lead, Innovate, Vision, Execute, be Wellness-focused, Evidenced-based, Lifelong learnings and Lights for the world, locally and globally). Evidence for our successful establishment of an effective environment for student learning in Nursing is our redesignation as a National League for Nursing Center of Excellence, recently awarded for our contributions to the development of an environment that promotes student learning and professional development. Process and outcome evaluation informs efforts to refine approaches and promote an effective learning environment.

From Ms. Hills: Using the Gruppen review article as a backdrop, this portion of the webinar will focus on learning environment in PA programs. At the conclusion of the webinar, attendees will be able to discuss the components of how PA programs consider learning environment through personal, social, organizational, physical and virtual lens, thus adding to the interprofessional dialogue allowing for the identification of the elements of learning environments that are shared across the health professions. New accreditation standards for PA programs are being released Fall of 2018. This presentation will describe the role the learning environment has in program accreditation.