A framework for the evaluation of continuing education short courses in dentistry

Development and Implementation of a Clinical Dental Faculty Evaluation Instrument

The aim of this study was to develop and test the reliability of an instrument to evaluate the quality of clinical teaching among dental school faculty. Fourth-year dental students' perspectives on effective clinical teaching were first collected in focus group meetings. An 11-item questionnaire to assess seven domains of clinical teaching was developed based on the collected student perspectives and a medical model. All 374 third- and fourth-year dental students at one U.S. dental school in 2015 were invited to evaluate four clinical instructors whom they felt were strong role models and four clinical instructors whom they felt would benefit from constructive criticism. The survey was completed by 139 students (37.2% response rate); they evaluated 96 dental instructors. The results showed that the survey demonstrated strong internal reliability, with Cronbach's alpha values of >0.95 for each of the seven domains. In addition, there was significant agreement between groups: the interclass correlation (ICC) ranged from 0.97 to 0.99. These results suggest that the clinical faculty evaluation instrument developed in this study is a reliable method that can be used to evaluate dental faculty members. This system can be a valuable guide for clinical faculty members and administrators in assessing and improving clinical teaching effectiveness.

Developing education tailored to clinical roles: genetics education for haemophilia nurses

BACKGROUND

Genetics is an important component of the clinical work of haemophilia nurses, but little was known about the genetic education needs of haemophilia nurses.

AIM

To develop, deliver and evaluate genetic education for haemophilia nurses, based on clinical roles.

METHODS

Perceived relevance of genetics to haemophilia nursing practice was explored using electronic voting (response rate 75%, 58/77). A follow-on questionnaire to a volunteer sample of participants explored educational preferences (response rate 41%, 17/41). Results informed development of a two-hour genetics workshop session, evaluated by questionnaire (response rate 67%, 47/70).

RESULTS

Genetic competences were considered relevant to the clinical practice of haemophilia nurses, and learning needs were identified. Preference was expressed for education focused on practical skills. During the subsequent workshop, participant confidence ratings significantly increased in the four areas addressed. Planned changes to clinical care and training were reported.

CONCLUSION

Within new areas of advanced nursing practice, learning needs can be addressed by: identifying relevant clinical activities and associated learning needs; creating a strategy and resources using preferred forms of delivery; implementing the strategy; and evaluating its effect. This will enable development of education that addresses the real needs of practising nurses, grounded in their daily clinical practice.

Quality systems in dentistry part 2. Quality assurance and improvement (QA/I) tools that have implications for dentistry

Both dental education and dental practice are affected by the increasing pressure for quality assurance/improvement in health care and the dental profession is expected to take more responsibility for the maintenance and improvement of quality of oral health care and service delivery. Dental professionals are expected to be familiar with various quality assurance/improvement systems or tools that are available and that have implications for dentistry and the crucial importance of their ethical implementation in the health care arena.

Development and evaluation of a questionnaire to evaluate clinical dental teachers (ECDT)

OBJECTIVES

To develop and test the psychometric properties (validity and reliability) of a questionnaire to evaluate clinical dental teachers.

METHODS

An item (question) pool was generated with the use of a literature review, feedback from faculty staff, and from focus group discussions with dental students. Following factor analysis the validity and reliability of a revised questionnaire was assessed. This involved 148 dental students and 453 assessments of 29 clinical dental teachers.

RESULTS

Effective clinical dental teaching (ECDT) scores were associated with 'global ratings' of the effectiveness of clinical dental teaching (P<0.01), indicating strong criterion validity. In comparison analysis there was strong agreement between students regarding ratings of individual clinical dental teachers, indicating good construct validity. Reliability was assessed by examining internal consistency of sub-scales and overall ECDT scale, and found to be good (Cronbach alpha's > 0.80).

CONCLUSION

A valid and reliable measure to evaluate clinical dental teachers has been developed for use in a clinical academia setting, and has potential use as a quality assurance measure.

1.1 Student selection and the influence of their clinical and academic environment on learning

Student selection and recruitment play a vital role in the successful outcome of dental education. To identify key issues and practices in selection and recruitment, the group assessed current processes, philosophies and practices from a range of different educational systems, although it was not possible to gather data from all countries or continents within the timeframe provided. Furthermore, the group explored the effect of the educational learning environment on the successful outcome of teaching dental students. It is clear that a wide variety of practices and philosophies exist and are used in different parts of the world. Measuring the success of any given process used for student selection remains a challenge. In some parts of the world, certain practices have become an integral part of the tertiary educational system, and have been applied in a similar way by many or all of the dental schools in that country. In other countries, methods vary from one dental school to another, often reflecting differences in the structure and philosophy of the educational system. There was great variation in the combinations of selection criteria used and in student recruitment strategies. However, it was clear that there was much to be gained by learning from the experiences of other dental schools in student selection. Lessons learned, best practices and philosophies used and supporting value systems proved to be very helpful for benchmarking the processes used. In the discussion of student selection, a number of important questions were raised which deserve further thought and reflection both in the ongoing debate and as part of the ever-changing world of dental education. Important new matters that require more debate and research include: a) ethical issues, including the nature of funding from the student perspective, and the concern that in some regions dentistry may become a profession only for the elite or wealthy students. b) Health standards of students entering dental school. c) How realistic is the applicant's sense of dentistry as a profession? d) How accurate is the students' sense of their career opportunities and the employment market upon graduation? Finally, the over-arching question remains, how valid, reliable and predictable are existing selection practices? Will it be practical and meaningful to standardize methods used, or will exchanging ideas as part of this global debate assist the thought process of dental leaders to improve selection practices by learning from the experiences of other schools in different parts of the world? The processes of open debate, sharing ideas and opinions and identifying sound practices across the globe is a powerful catalyst for developing innovative answers to the complex problems posed by student selection and recruitment. A 'virtual' global process with wide input from as many dental schools as possible should improve the efficacy of student selection, and allow dental educators to identify the 'potential' of prospective students and predict more accurately dental student outcomes. The debate that we have started will certainly contribute to providing a knowledge base which dental educators will be able to draw on when reviewing selection processes in their own schools.