2007 Annual Meeting Home

Final Program

Exhibits

Contacts

Sunday, November 4

8:00 - 10:30a

GEA/GSA Mini-Workshop Session
You are Teaching Students What About Race? Challenging the Hidden Curriculum: Development and Implementation Strategies for Controversial Curricular Topics

Organizer:
H. Carrie Chen, MD, MSEd
University of California San Francisco

Faculty:
Shelley Adler, PhD
University of California San Francisco

Rene Salazar, MD
University of California San Francisco

Jason M. Satterfield, PhD
University of California San Francisco

Purpose and Rationale: The purpose of this workshop is to help educators develop strategies and skills for the successful implementation and management of controversial curricular topics such as the role of race in medicine and the use of racial identifiers.

Medical education is a dynamic process that should respond to both the changing needs of society as well as continual advancements in knowledge. However, successful implementation of curricular changes can be challenging in even the best of circumstances. These challenges become amplified when the curricular change in question involves not only a controversial hot button topic but one that might push against institutional inertia, uncover personal biases, and require clinicians and teachers to change their behavior.

Historically, medicine has automatically included patient race as key information in the opening line of the clinical case presentation. Yet a growing body of evidence indicates that the use of race in the identification of patients may contribute to racial/ethnic health care disparities. In an effort to be intentional and thoughtful in the way racial and ethnic identifiers are used, one medical school decided to adopt a new approach recommending against the automatic inclusion of such information in the opening line of a case presentation and are developing guidelines on when and how racial identifiers might appropriately be used in medicine.

Using case examples from this medical school's experience, we will address the steps for successful implementation of controversial curricular topics, including planning, mobilization, implementation, and institutionalization. Participants will engage with each other in working through case scenarios to identify challenges and potential pitfalls and develop strategies to manage them. In addition, specific focus will be given to strategies for resident and faculty development and for the empowerment of students in the face of the hidden curriculum.

Specific Objectives: Upon completion of the workshop, participants will be able to:

1. Describe the current controversies around the use of race in medicine and a new approach to the use of racial and ethnic identifiers;
2. Identify underlying assumptions as well as previous evidence/data that support the existing practices around race in medicine;
3. Discuss the unique or additional challenges of implementing curricular change with a controversial topic such as race;
4. Identify potential pitfalls during curriculum implementation for a topic on which the stakeholders are not likely to reach consensus;
5. Develop strategies to manage the challenges or problems which may arise during curricular implementation;
6. Discuss strategies for resident and faculty development around the use of race in medicine and/or other controversial topics.;
7. Discuss strategies for teaching and empowering students around a controversial topic in preparation for their inevitable encounters with dissenting residents and faculty.

Intended Audience: Medical school leadership and faculty who have an interest in introducing curricular change related to a controversial topic and/or who have an interest in how to teach about the use of race in medicine.

Omni Hotel
Embassy

8:00 - 10:30a

GEA/GSA Mini-Workshop Session
MERC - Questionnaire Design and Survey Research

Brian Mavis, PhD Michigan State University College of Human Medicine

This workshop introduces participants to fundamental principles of educational program evaluation, and provides participants with a strategy for developing an evaluation plan.

At the end of the workshop participants will be able to:
1. Describe program evaluation and its purposes;
2. Identify barriers to program evaluation;
3. Identify models used in evaluation;
4. Describe the steps of an evaluation;
5. Develop an evaluation plan.

Marriott Wardman Park
Virginia C

8:00 - 10:30a

GEA/GSA Mini-Workshop Session
Peer Review of Teaching: A Step in the Process of Educational Scholarship

Organizer:
Janet P. Hafler, EdD
Tufts University School of Medicine

Faculty:
Wayne Altman, MD
Tufts University School of Medicine

Maria Alejandra Blanco, EdD
Tufts University School of Medicine

Ruth-Marie E. Fincher, MD
Medical College of Georgia School of Medicine

Heather Hageman, MBA
Washington University School of Medicine

Christopher B. White, MD
Medical College of Georgia School of Medicine

Purpose and Rationale: The work of faculty who teach is essential to the academic mission of medical schools. Over the past 20 years, academic institutions have begun to recognize faculty for their educational contributions. However, many faculty members and promotion and tenure committees are unclear about what constitutes evidence of educational scholarship and how the evidence should be evaluated. Medical school faculty and administrators have sought guidelines and reliable comprehensive evaluation systems to enable more effective assessment in order to reward faculty members' educational contributions in the areas of teaching, curriculum, assessment, leadership/administration, and mentoring. Student and resident evaluations of faculty teaching are useful, but additional sources of data, including peer evaluations, are needed for a robust system to evaluate the quality of teaching. Faculty should be trained to provide valid and reliable feedback on teaching.

Few faculty members receive any formal training in how to provide reliable and valid feedback on observing their peers teach. The goal of this workshop is to explore how to develop faculty members as peer reviewers of teaching. Participants will be able to identify and discuss what makes good teaching. They will have the opportunity to develop observation skills as they watch vignettes of teaching in a variety of formats. Participants will be able to identify and discuss the components of educational scholarship and how the evidence of scholarship can be peer reviewed.

Specific Objectives: The participants will explore components of educational scholarship, explore guidelines of effective teaching, begin to develop observation skills to provide feedback on teaching, practice how to peer review teaching.

Intended Audience: Educators and faculty who are involved in the scholarship of teaching, or want to explore how to develop trained peer reviewers.

Omni Hotel
Governors

8:00 - 10:30a

GEA/GSA Mini-Workshop Session
Is Medical Education a Medical Sub-Specialty?

Organizer:
David Blaney, MD, ChB, Bsc, Mmed, EdD, FRCGP, FRCPE
Association for the Study of Medical Education (United Kingdom)

Faculty:
Graham Buckley, MD, FRCGP, FRCPE
Association for the Study of Medical Education (United Kingdom)

Lesley Southgate, DSc, FRCGP
Association for the Study of Medical Education (United Kingdom)

Purpose and Rationale: Postgraduate medical training in the UK has undergone a significant change in the past year with the introduction of competency based specialist training programs. In the UK, many of the faculty involved in providing work based and theoretical training and education to doctors have limited formal training or qualifications in medical education. There is active debate in the UK and Europe about how we can begin to professionalize the discipline of medical education. The potential development in the UK of an Academy of Medical Educators raises the question as to whether medical education is, or should be considered, a specialty in its own right. If it should then what is the curriculum and what competencies are required of medical educators and how should they be trained and assessed?

Specific Objectives: The intended outcomes of the workshop include:

1. Providing the concepts of the specialty of medical education;
2. Defining medical educator; Realizing the career path and process and content of training for future medical educators;
3. Determining how training programs would be delivered, quality assured, and discussing the challenges to certifying and recertifying medical educators;
4. Clarifying what minimum standards should be set and how to obtain an international consensus on these.

Intended Audience: The workshop is intended for those who have an active interest in medical education and who are involved in faculty development.

Marriott Wardman Park
Wilson B

8:00 - 10:30a

GEA/GSA Mini-Workshop Session
Fostering Compliance of Title VI of the Civil Rights Act: An Educational Program

Organizer:
Clarence H. Braddock, III, MD, MPH
Stanford University School of Medicine

Faculty:
Sylvia Bereknyei, MS
Stanford University School of Medicine

Sheila Foran
Office of Civil Rights

Purpose and Rationale: The National Consortium for Multicultural Education for Health Professionals and the Office of Civil Rights are beginning an initiative to educate students and physicians in training on Title VI of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 (hereinafter Title VI). Title VI prohibits discrimination on the basis of race, color, and national origin by entities that receive federal funds (e.g., hospitals that receive Medicare and Medicaid funds from HHS.) This workshop proposes a novel curriculum to teach emerging physicians about the legal implications of Title VI and physicians' roles and responsibilities towards violations that occur in the healthcare setting. In the workshop, participants will have the opportunity to observe and reflect on case-based scenarios that have implications given Title VI. Participants will be challenged to determine appropriate responses and/or interventions for an observed civil rights violation. Our primary objective is to integrate knowledge of the Title VI of the Civil Rights Act in order to enable physicians to act as agents for social responsibility in the diverse settings in which they practice.

Specific Objectives: In this module, participants will:

1. Gain familiarity with Title VI of the Civil Rights Act to and applicability in the healthcare setting;
2. Gain awareness of the Office for Civil Rights roles and responsibilities;
3. Determine appropriate actions to take when Title VI violations occur;
4. Understand physicians' roles as agents for social responsibility;
5. Apply educational materials at their home institution.

Intended Audience: Clinicians, clinician-educators, medical educators, residency program directors, clerkship directors, participants interested in learning about Title VI of the Civil Rights Act and applicability in health care are welcome to attend.

Marriott Wardman Park
Harding

8:00 - 10:30a

GEA/GSA Mini-Workshop Session
How to Introduce Team-Based Learning (TBL) into your Preclinical Curriculum

Organizer:
Paul Koles, MD
Wright State University Booonshoft School of Medicine

Faculty:
David Windus, MD
Washington University School of Medicine

B. Laurel Elder, PhD
Wright State University Boonshoft School of Medicine

Purpose and Rationale: This workshop demonstrates both principles and practical aspects of introducing team-based learning into medical curricula that have not previously employed TBL. It is assumed that participants already recognize the potential benefits of this method, but need a practical demonstration of how to start using TBL (part one), followed by a group-based application exercise that develops skills required of faculty in designing a high-quality TBL module (part two).

Specific Objectives: In this workshop, participants will:

1. Identify reasons for introducing TBL into preclinical curricula;
2. Recognize potential factors which may hinder the use of TBL in an institution's culture of teaching and learning;
3. Evaluate specific strategies which address obstacles to be overcome when introducing TBL;
4. Explain the purpose and practical necessity of each component of a complete TBL module, emphasizing outcomes achieved by the learner: a. advance assignment; b. individual readiness assessment test; c. group readiness assessment test; d. group application exercise
5. Explain how decisions made by faculty in designing the components of a TBL module affect the quantity and quality of learning achieved by students.

Intended Audience: Faculty who are significantly involved in preclinical medical education, faculty who are acquainted with the TBL principles and recognize its benefits, and faculty who have not yet gained experience in using TBL at their institution will benefit from this workshop.

Marriott Wardman Park
Coolidge

8:00 - 10:30a

GEA/GSA Mini-Workshop Session
Empowerment Evaluation: Collaborative Model for Evaluating Medical School Curriculum and Engaging Accreditation Standards

Organizer:
David Fetterman, PhD
Stanford University School of Medicine

Faculty:
Neil Gesundheit, MD, MPH
Stanford University School of Medicine

Jennifer Berry, MA
Stanford University School of Medicine

Purpose and Rationale: The purpose of this workshop is to introduce participants to a collaborative model of evaluation, empowerment evaluation, which has been effective at Stanford Medical School in the following ways:

1. Engaging faculty, staff members, and students in the collaborative act of assessing their own performance; 2. Contributing to substantive and evidence-based improvements in performance;
3. Helping to turn less than optimal courses into highly rated and improved educational experiences;
4. Facilitating a major curriculum reform at Stanford Medical School;
5. Engaging LCME accreditation standards to meaningfully enhance curricular design and implementation (in preparation for a recent site);
6. Holding faculty and administration accountable for sustained curricular improvement.

This workshop will build collaborative evaluation capacity, enhance evaluation skills, contribute to the development of reflective practitioners, create a climate of cooperation and collaboration, and contribute to a learning organization.

Specific Objectives: At the workshop's conclusion, participants will:

1. Understand what empowerment evaluation is and how theories and techniques can be used to encourage faculty collaboration and engagement with the evaluation process;
2. Understand and be able to apply the steps of empowerment evaluation to engage in a process of self-reflection regarding evaluation practices at their own institution. |
3. Have drafted a design to guide self-assessment at their own institution;
4. Have practiced effective communication of evaluation findings and received constructive feedback on their communication styles;
5. Have identified and shared best evaluation practices with participants at other institutions.

Intended Audience: This workshop will benefit a wide array of medical educators, including:

1. Deans, faculty, evaluators, administrators, and students who are interested in using a more collaborative approach to curriculum evaluation in medical school;
2. Educators, evaluators, and administrators who would like to expand evaluation capacity or improve evaluation practices at their institution.

Marriott Wardman Park
Hoover

8:00 - 10:30a

GEA/GSA Mini-Workshop Session
Designing and Sustaining a Competency-Based Assessment System Utilizing a Portfolio Approach

Organizers/Faculty:
Christine Taylor, PhD
Case Western University Cleveland Clinic Lerner College of Medicine

Elaine F. Dannefer, PhD
Case Western University Cleveland Clinic Lerner College of Medicine

S. Beth Bierer, PhD
Case Western University Cleveland Clinic Lerner College of Medicine

Alan L. Hull, MD, PhD
Case Western University Cleveland Clinic Lerner College of Medicine

Purpose and Rationale: The concept of "competence" as a frame of reference to foster and assess proficiency is not new. Competency-based educational programs reflecting "back-to-basics" and "accountability" models emerged in the early 1970s and have been present as a significant part of the educational landscape ever since. The impetus then as now was public concern that the procedures and structure of the educational process result in desired habits of lifelong learning needed for competent, professional practice.

This concern with competency of practicing physicians has contributed to initiatives in both Europe and North America to define medical training in relation to key outcomes or competencies. In the U.S., for example, the Accreditation Council for Graduate Medical Education's (ACGME) six General Competency Domains (patient care, medical knowledge, professionalism, interpersonal and communication skills, practice-based learning and improvement and systems-based practice) have come to represent core domains for residency education. This paradigm shift towards competency based assessment (CBA) has also emerged in undergraduate medical education as more medical schools define and measure student performance in relation to specific outcomes. It should be recognized that moving to a CBA system represents a significant "reform" for educational programs and requires attention to strategic planning activities.

As we shift toward CBA models in graduate and undergraduate programs, we need to develop new tools that measure a wide range of skills and that take into account the complexity of medical practice. Portfolios provide a useful tool for CBA as they are a purposeful collection of assessment evidence that may be used to inform decisions about competence. More critically, portfolios accommodate a broad range of assessment evidence. Portfolios may also provide a vehicle for reflection to support self-directed learning and personal improvement.

The purpose of this workshop is to:

1. Guide the participant through the critical steps needed to design, implement and sustain a portfolio approach to a CBA system at his/her institution;
2. Provide practical materials (checklists, templates, etc.) appropriate for multiple medical education contexts.

Specific Objectives:

1. Provide an overview of CBA and why portfolios are an appropriate tool to document performance;
2. Describe the function and relationship between various components of a CBA system (governing principles, competencies, supporting standards, assessment evidence, etc.);
3. Use a systematic approach to develop a set of standards for one competency;
4. Design an assessment blueprint that measures learner performance for one competency across multiple instructional settings and sources using multiple methods;
5. Describe the principles that support a portfolio approach to CBA and use a checklist to determine the appropriateness of implementing a portfolio;
6.Identify the potential challenges inherent in adopting a portfolio approach.

Intended Audience: This workshop is intended for individuals in undergraduate or graduate medical education who are considering portfolios as a tool to document learner performance in relation to specific competencies and performance standards.

Marriott Wardman Park
McKinley

8:00 - 10:30a

GEA/GSA Mini-Workshop Session
Getting Students out of their Seats and into Learning - Pandemic Simulation

Organizers/Faculty:
John F. Mahoney, MD
University of Pittsburgh School of Medicine

Joe Suyama, MD
University of Pittsburgh School of Medicine

Rika Maeshiro, MD, MPH
Association of American Medical Colleges

Purpose and Rationale: Participants in this workshop will learn about a novel approach to introducing students to concepts in hospital-based pandemic response. This unique simulation exercise provides teams of students with an opportunity to treat overwhelming numbers of influenza patients in a mock hospital setting. When students assume the working roles of nurse, nursing assistant, and physician, they immediately gain insight into two difficult subjects to teach: 1) the potentially overwhelming nature of an infectious pandemic; and 2) the vital importance of teamwork, cooperation, interdisciplinary respect, and leadership in health care endeavors. This type of exercise can readily be generalized to other circumstances, health disciplines, and levels of ability.

Workshop participants will learn about the capabilities of this method by actually participating in the exercise, including caring for mock patients and functioning in interdisciplinary teams. Participants in this workshop will take home a new set of approaches to delivering this curricular content in a highly engaging fashion.

Specific Objectives: Participants will develop an understanding of:

1. How to develop and conduct a hospital simulation exercise to address general disaster management principles and emphasize those pertinent to pandemic planning;
2. How to use alternative educational methods to teach about systems-based care and emphasize interdisciplinary teamwork;
3. How to take advantage of opportunities that exist in their curricula to enhance learning across the continuum of learners through the application of simulations and hands-on techniques.

Intended Audience: This workshop will appeal to faculty with the full spectrum of expertise in developing and implementing curricula and new instructional methods, and serve curricular leaders, including deans and curriculum committee chairs, who are seeking alternative approaches to demonstrating relevance and inspiring interest in pandemic and disaster preparedness among students and faculty. Faculty who are interested in accelerating students' growth in core competency domains such as system-based care will also benefit, by learning about alternative models that promote development of insights about teamwork, leadership and inter-professional cooperation. Faculty with a focus on residency training and from other disciplines will find that the information from this workshop is readily generalizability to the complete spectrum of healthcare learners.

Omni Hotel
Calvert

8:00 - 10:30a

GEA/GSA Mini-Workshop Session
The Lived Experience of Patients, Doctors, and Students

Organizer:
Rita Charon, MD, PhD
Columbia University College of Physicians and Surgeons

Faculty: Richard Frankel, PhD
Indiana University School of Medicine

Paul Haidet, MD, PhD
Baylor College of Medicine

Deborah Swiderski, MD
Albert Einstein College of Medicine

Purpose and Rationale: The care of the sick is complicated by the opacity of individuals' lived experiences. Patients' social, cultural, and emotional situations are often not recognized by health care professionals, and professionals' commitment to their patients, sadly, can often fail to be conveyed. Health care professionals' and trainees' capacity to wonder about, envision, and imagine their patients' lived experience may improve their knowledge of their patients' lives, and disciplined reflection on their own doctor experiences can make their own investment to their patients more visible. The sturdy patient-professional affiliation that results from greater transparency-in both directions-in the clinical relationship, through the intermediates of compliance and fidelity, may improve the chances of delivering timely, fitting, satisfying, and ultimately more effective care.

This session will present three simultaneous skills-building, highly interactive workshops to equip participants with methods of finding out about lived experience. The three sections of this workshop will demonstrate methods to expose students' experiences of their hidden curriculum; to guide students in narrative exploration of their evolving ideals of professionalism; and to facilitate clinical faculty members' efforts to reflect on their patients' lived experience. Each participant of this mini-workshop will select one of the three sections for his or her participation. All faculty for these workshops are members of their schools' NIH K07 projects, "Enhancing Social and Behavioral Sciences in Medical School Curricula," and members of the project's Lived Experience Sub-Committee. This federally funded research and teaching project supports nine US medical schools to collaborate in the development and national dissemination of innovative methods of pedagogy and practice in these areas.

Specific Objectives:

1. To train medical school faculty in qualitative pedagogic methods that reveal and make sense of individual patients' or health care professionals' lived experience;
2. To give participants hands-on exposure to such methods and guidelines for adapting them in their own teaching;
3. To discuss means of evaluating the use of these methods and of following the outcomes of such interventions over time;
4. To identify for participants national networks of medical educators researching and using qualitative methods of engaging these dimensions of students' medical school careers.

Intended Audience: Medical school faculty and educators.

Marriott Wardman Park
Wilson C

Tuesday, November 6

1:00 - 3:00p

GEA/GSA Mini-Workshop Session
The Culture of Medicine: The Role of the Physician in Teams and Organizations

Organizer:
Clarence H. Braddock, III, MD, MPH
Stanford University School of Medicine

Faculty:
Sylvia Bereknyei, MS
Stanford University School of Medicine

Kambria M. Hooper, MEd

Purpose and Rationale: Contemporary medical practice does not employ clear cultural guidelines. Although physicians are taught to interact effectively with patients, many never learn how to build effective relationships and communication skills with colleagues and medical institutions. This workshop explores medical culture through examining the relationship between the physician and medical teams/institutions.

This workshop will explore the role of the physician in effective interdisciplinary teams and organizational structures in contemporary practice. It will review specific roles and features that make for an effective team. Participants will investigate team formation and conflict management strategies. After participants gain a greater awareness of group dynamics, they will learn how to apply that framework to understanding organizational culture. Participants will learn the stages of negotiation for successful communication with team members and medical institutions. Participants will also learn how to teach teamwork and communication skills, as well as how to assess these skills in medical education.

Specific Objectives: In this module, participants will:

1. Describe the relationship between the physician and medical teams/institutions;
2. Understand the physician's evolving role in medical teams and within the medical institution;
3. Utilize frameworks and tools to better understand group dynamics and organizational culture;
4. Develop skills to communicate and negotiate effectively in a variety of team and organizational settings;
5. Describe methods for teaching these concepts in medical education settings.

Intended Audience: Clinicians, Clinician-Educators, Medical Educators, Residency Program Directors, Clerkship Directors, participants interested in teaching cultural competence and reflective practice techniques.

Marriott Wardman Park
McKinley

1:00 - 3:00p

GEA/GSA Mini-Workshop Session
Improving the Quality of Your Manuscript: A Hands-on Approach

Organizer:
David A. Cook, MD, MHPE
Mayo Clinic College of Medicine

Faculty:
Thomas J. Beckman, MD
Mayo Clinic College of Medicine

George Bordage, MD, PhD
University of Illinois at Chicago

Purpose and Rationale: Medical education is a rapidly growing field of study. However, evidence indicates that the quality of reporting of medical education research is at best inconsistent, and often poor. For example, a systematic review was recently done and shows that several essential elements of scientific reporting, including statement of study design, acknowledgement of human subject rights, critical discussion of the literature, and conceptual framework, were frequently missing from reports of medical education experiments. Furthermore, abstracts for these reports frequently omitted essential elements such as rationale, study design, setting, participants, study interventions and controls, and data. Other reviews have found infrequent reporting of the validity evidence supporting key outcomes.

Although several authors have proposed guidelines defining characteristics of good reporting for medical education research, evidence from the clinical literature suggests that guidelines alone will be insufficient. Current evidence suggests that the peer review and editing processes have the best chance to improve reporting quality.

Specific Objectives: At the completion of this workshop, participants will be able to:

1. Describe essential elements of published scholarship;
2. Identify deficiencies in the quality of research reporting, including failure to report a critical literature review, conceptual framework, statement of study intent, study design; control group experience, attention to ethical concerns, and informative abstract and title.
3. Draft and revise their own manuscript to fulfill essential elements of reporting, with particular attention to known deficiencies in the literature;
4. Prepare an abstract containing necessary informative elements.

Intended Audience: All scholars seeking to improve the quality of their reporting will benefit. We anticipate targeting beginner and intermediate-level authors, although more experienced authors are welcome and will enrich the discussion. Participants should bring with them a draft of a manuscript to edit.

Marriott Wardman Park
Coolidge

1:00 - 3:30p

GEA/GSA Mini-Workshop Session
A Practical Approach to Improving Integration in Your Curriculum

Organizer:
Tracy B. Fulton, PhD
University of California San Francisco School of Medicine

Faculty:
Susan B. Masters, PhD
University of California San Francisco School of Medicine

Purpose and Rationale: "Integration" is a popular buzzword in medical education, but what does it really mean, and is it always worth the effort? A helpful approach to this complex topic is to consider a continuum of progressive levels of integration, instead of viewing integration as an all-or-none endeavor. In 2000, Dr. Ronald Harden proposed an integration "ladder," with rungs representing ascending levels of complexity that begins with simple awareness of the content outside of one's own discipline or course, and culminates in trans-disciplinary fusion that transcends individual disciplines or subjects. This continuum opens up a range of options for integration. Analysis of curricula in this context allows educators to assess whether small or sweeping changes are appropriate based on the benefits and costs associated with the proposed change. This approach can help educators set reasonable, informed goals for their efforts to move towards a more integrated curriculum.

At UCSF, integration in the essential core curriculum that was introduced in 2001 has taken many forms, including close coordination of subjects that were traditionally taught separately, earlier introduction to topics that were in the past reserved for clinical rotations, and threading key themes (ethics, evidence-based medicine) throughout the four-year curriculum. More recently, there have been moves afoot to improve integration on the clerkship level. As medical schools nation-wide continue efforts toward higher levels of integration within their curricula, educators will benefit from 1) a discussion of challenges and best practices, and 2) development of skills to overcome barriers to success.

Specific Objectives: Participants in this workshop will be able to:

1. Explain the concept of an integration "ladder" and describe how it applies to their own curricular projects; 2. Identify key ingredients in, benefits gained from, and barriers to effective integration, based on the participants' collective experiences;
3. Formulate a structured plan to elevate the level of integration of a piece of the participants' current or planned curriculum.

Intended Audience: Medical educators who are interested in either developing new pieces of curriculum or revising existing curriculum with a focus on integration of multiple subjects. While the principles and exercises in the workshop are relevant to all areas of medical school, the expertise of the leaders is in the area of preclerkship curriculum.

Marriott Wardman Park
Wilson A

1:00 - 3:30p

GEA/GSA Mini-Workshop Sessions
Transitioning to a Competency-Based Curriculum in Undergraduate Medical Education

Organizer:
Janet Fischel, PhD
SUNY Stony Brook University School of Medicine

Faculty:
Latha Chandran MD, MPH
SUNY Stony Brook University School of Medicine

Elza Mylong, PhD
SUNY Stony Brook University School of Medicine

Purpose and Rationale: In parallel with the revised emphasis in graduate medical education on six core competencies, several medical schools are shifting their undergraduate medical curricula and evaluation methodologies to a competency-based format. Broad-based curricular change of this sort is among the most challenging to institutions. This workshop will provide educators who are either considering, or engaged in such changes, with information and resources important to that transition. The workshop explores the steps of planning, implementing, and evaluating such curricular change for UME, from the development of competencies that align with a school's missions, to resource and faculty development planning, to implications for student and administrative bodies, as well as strategies to earn "buy-in" from "stakeholders," and to evaluate the success of the new approach. Current views on "theory of change" such as identifying relevant preconditions to change, and delineating the interventions, paths or activities needed for the goal's success, will help to frame the workshop's information and activities. The workshop will engage participants in developing a plan for change and its evaluation, as well as identifying and troubleshooting important stumbling blocks.

Specific Objectives: The workshop's learning objectives are three-fold. At the conclusion of the workshop, participants will be able to:

1. delineate the components of quality planning for curricular change, from the incipiency of planning to methods of evaluating short- and long-term effectiveness;
2. describe a variety of strategies and resources to facilitate development and institution of specific changes relevant to a competency-based curriculum and evaluation methodology; and
3. map out programmatic options and alternative routes for achieving and evaluating such changes.

Participants from institutions already engaged in this curricular change, as well as those whose institutions may not have launched modifications as yet, but with ideas about achieving best educational practice, will help to "fill in" details within each of these learning objectives throughout the workshop.

Intended Audience: Medical educators from across the continuum will benefit from this workshop.

Marriott Wardman Park
Wilson B

1:00 - 3:30p

GEA/GSA Mini-Workshop Session
How to Develop an Innovative Longitudinal Clinical Skills Curriculum: Management, Methods and Materials

Organizer:
Carol S. Hasbrouck, MA
Ohio State University College of Medicine

Faculty:
Daniel Clinchot, MD
Ohio State University College of Medicine

Sorabh Khandelwal, MD
Ohio State University College of Medicine

Robert M. DePhilip, PhD
Ohio State University College of Medicine

Sarah Calvey, BA
Ohio State University College of Medicine

John R. Hill, BA
Ohio State University College of Medicine

Purpose and Rationale: The purpose of this session is to provide participants with the concepts and tools to design a clinical skills curriculum at their home institutions. This workshop will focus on curriculum management and development, hands-on development of clinical simulations and simulators, methods of instruction, checklist development, and evaluation.

Nationally and locally, there areconcerns that skills education has been more implicit than explicit. Medicine is constantly progressing and changing so the methods by which we teach medical students should follow suit. Medical education must ensure that each student has the resources needed to learn the skills necessary to provide high quality care, as highlighted in the AAMC's Report on Clinical Skills Education for Medical Students.

Within the OSU longitudinal curriculum, a unique course entitled the Clinical Skills Immersion Experience (CSIE) was implemented in July 2006. The CSIE is a third-year course dedicated to the teaching of procedures through simulated experiences and lays the foundation for procedural proficiency/competency. It is a required part of the curriculum and allows students to have seven days dedicated to focusing on the understanding and performance of over sixteen procedures and a few ATLS hands-on related skills. Every eight weeks, 36 of the third year students are assigned to the Clinical Skills Immersion Experience for seven days. Exposing students, rather than lecturing to them, gives an excellent working knowledge of the procedures. The students are provided with readings, videos and hands-on experiences. Indications and contraindications for procedures are also taught so that students not only learn how to do a procedure, but also when it would be appropriate. Students receive formative feedback during the experience and are tested at the end. Although students do not become experts on procedures in seven days, they gain confidence and build a foundation for future skills development and understanding.

As indicated, medical education must ensure that each student is provided the opportunity to learn the requisite clinical skills needed to provide high quality care. This innovative curriculum and the CSIE address the needs for enhancing clinical skills education using simulation and hands-on interactions.

Specific Objectives: The content covered will include information on curriculum management and development (both curricular and administrative), hands-on development of clinical simulations and simulators, materials used, methods of instruction, checklist development, and methods of evaluation. By the end of the workshop, participants will be able to:

1. Describe processes for developing and managing a clinical/procedural skills curriculum;
2. Create selected inexpensive simulations;
3. Discuss and identify cost effective techniques for making other simulation models;
4. Describe multiple ways to use cadavers to teach procedures cost effectively; =
5. Delineate the role of ultrasound in a clinical skills/procedures curriculum; " Learn how to create/structure a web-based curriculum to make it user-friendly;
6. Identify how and what should be assessed /documented regarding skills and procedures;
7. Identify opportunities for implementing simulation sessions into the curriculum;
8. Describe barriers or challenges to implementing a clinical skills curriculum.

Intended Audience: This session is intended for medical faculty and medical educators (MD and non-MD) who are interested in enhancing the clinical skills education of medical students by implementing or enhancing a clinical skills curriculum. The skills being taught can be applied to the development of a longitudinal curriculum or a focused skills course.

Marriott Wardman Park
Wilson C

1:00 - 3:30p

GEA/GSA Mini-Workshop Session
Successful Models for Medical Student Mentoring Programs

Organizer:
Kertia Black, MEd, MD
Wayne State University School of Medicine

Faculty:
Anita D. Taylor, MAEd
Oregon Health and Science University School of Medicine

Phyllis Carr, MD
Boston University School of Medicine

Sharon D. Gates, MA
Rush University Community Services

Purpose and Rationale: Medical schools all over the country are beginning to increase their class sizes in an effort to meet the projected need for more physicians in the decades to come. Some of our schools are already huge institutions training a thousand or more students. In such environments, students can easily become lost and disoriented. Mentoring programs are one way of allowing students to bond into smaller groups in which they can receive close attention from faculty. Faculty, too, often feel the lack of contact with individual students with so much of the learning occurring in large lectures or on-line. Mentoring groups are a way to bring the faculty and students closer together in the kind of partnership that truly facilitates learning. These groups also serve as a powerful networking tool for students once they graduate. Although many schools have tried mentoring programs, there are many obstacles to creating truly successful ones. Questions arise, such as: how do we recruit faculty? What about funding? How many students comprise the optimal mentoring group size? What do we actually want the mentors to do? In this mini-workshop, you will hear from the leaders of four successful mentoring programs. These leaders will describe their programs and will discuss how they overcame challenges. As medical school class size continues to increase, mentoring programs will become more and more important. Our panel will help provide guidance to others who are planning to institute such programs.

Specific Objectives: During this workshop, participants will be work to:

1. Describe four successful mentoring programs;
2. Address specific issues of: faculty recruitment, stimulating student involvement, and institutional support;
3. Expose the audience to four different mentoring program models.

At the end of our session, participants will be able to:

1. Describe some of the elements that lead to a successful mentoring program;
2. Bring back to their institutions at least two methods for recruiting faculty mentors;
3. Begin to see which mentoring model would best suit their program and;
4. Bring back to their institutions ideas for getting students involved in a mentoring program.

Intended Audience: Medical School Administrators and Faculty program.

Marriott Wardman Park
Kennedy

1:00 - 4:00p

GEA/GSA Mini-Workshop Session
Produce or Perish: A Roadmap to Scholarly Success

Organizer:
Miriam Bar-on, MD
University of Nevada School of Medicine

Faculty:
Maryellen Gusic, MD
Penn State University College of Medicine

Lyuba Konapasek, MD
Cornell University Weill School of Medicine

Purpose and Rationale: This workshop will address the call by the AAMC's Group on Educational Affairs steering committee to consider both the scholarly approach to education and the scholarship of education. Faculty, especially junior faculty, participate in numerous activities in multiple mission areas. They participate in clinical activities, are active in service activities in the institution and in their communities, and they teach various types of learners in their daily work. Many of these activities can be pursued in a scholarly manner, and if the work is disseminated and subject to peer review, it can and should lead to promotion. This workshop will help faculty operationalize Glassick's six criteria for scholarship by participating in a practical, hands-on exercise. Participants will leave the session with the ability to directly apply these criteria in their own professional lives.

Specific Objectives: Describe Boyer's definition of scholarship; List Glassick's six criteria of scholarship; Apply these criteria in the analysis of a case describing the activities of a "typical" faculty member in order to identify opportunities for scholarship; Identify the culture of scholarship at one's home insititution; Develop a personal plan for scholarship that can be implemented as part of one's own career development.

Intended Audience: Junior and Mid-level Faculty and Educators

Marriott Wardman Park
Roosevelt

1:00 - 4:00p

GEA/GSA Mini-Workshop Session
High-Quality Multiple Choice Tests to Assess Application of Basic Science Knowledge using Patient Vignettes

Organizers and Faculty:
Kathleen Z. Holtzman, PhD
National Board of Medical Examiners

David B. Swanson, PhD
National Board of Medical Examiners

Paul M. Wallach, MD
University of South Florida

Purpose and Rationale: Writing good tests is a challenging task. Multiple-choice questions (MCQs) often contain technical flaws providing advantages to "test-wise" examinees, and they sometimes focus on content that is relatively unimportant from clinical and life-long learning perspectives. Reflecting world-wide shifts toward integrative curricula, this workshop focuses on writing MCQ exams for basic science courses that assess application of knowledge to clinical situations, rather than recall of isolated basic science facts.

Specific Objectives: At the conclusion of the workshop, participants will be able to:

1. Recognize, correct and avoid commonly occurring technical flaws in MCQ phrasing;
2. Write (and rewrite) MCQs assessing application of basic science knowledge to clinical situations rather than recall of isolated basic science facts;
3. Organize item-writing efforts for basic science courses;
4. Participate effectively in group review of MCQs.

Intended Audience: Medical school faculty involved in writing exams, including course directors, members of medical education departments, curriculum deans and others interested in achievement testing.

Marriott Wardman Park
Eisenhower

1:00 - 4:00p

GEA/GSA Mini-Workshop Session
Prevention and Remediation of Medical Student Learning and Emotional Problems

Organizers and Faculty:
Laurie Raymond, MD
Harvard Medical School

Elizabeth A. Higgins, MD
Albany Medical College

Karen Wulfsberg
Harvard Medical School

Loring Brinckerhoff, PhD
Harvard Medical School

Purpose and Rationale: Since the Americans with Disabilities Act of 1990, an increasing number of students who received educational assistance in elementary, secondary, and post-secondary school are now entering graduate school. Medical school faculty and administrators are just beginning to grapple with the complexities of serving these advanced students with documented or newly identified learning and attentional difficulties/disabilities. At the same time, emotional issues including depression, bipolar disorder, anxiety, post-traumatic stress, and other disorders, are being increasingly diagnosed in high school and college students, accompanied by treatment with psycho-pharmacological medications. In medical school, students faced with a new set of educational challenges may experience emotional difficulties newly or recurrently, as primary disorders, or secondary to additional learning and/or attentional problems.

Given the enormous personal and institutional investment involved in the successful training of every medical student, medical students who under-perform need early, accurate diagnosis for effective, strategic interventions to take place. Learning and emotional issues affecting a medical student's performance can be difficult to sort out without a collaborative, multi-disciplinary approach of administrators, faculty, education specialists, and mental health consultants. Finding a way to identify, prevent, and/or remediate in a practical, timely way the learning and emotional issues of medical students at different phases of their training can significantly diminish the personal academic and emotional cost for individual students and their institutions. The purpose of this workshop is to model exchanges between a new Student Affairs administrator (Associate Dean, Albany Medical College) with her own questions about how to address learning and emotional issues for her students and members of the Office of Advising Resources (Harvard Medical School.)

The workshop will explore practical ways of approaching and anticipating emotional and learning challenges at different developmental phases of medical student training. The Office of Advising Resources has given three previous workshops on emotional and learning difficulties in medical students at the AAMC (2002, 2004, and 2006.) The feedback reveals that student affairs administrators are the most frequent participants. They have strongly valued the discussion periods in which they can share best practices amongst each other and have asked us to address more specifically the practical implementation of screening, prevention, and remediation efforts to optimally support their students. It is in response to this feedback that this workshop invites student affairs administrator from another medical school as one of the workshop facilitators. This workshop will incorporate and encourage discussion from the participants in each segment of the workshop.

Specific Objectives:

1. To identify questions facing a new student affairs administrator re: how to address the emotional and learning needs of her students;
2. To discuss the spectrum of learning issues for medical students at different phases of their training and timely supports to help minimize academic crises;
3. To discuss learning, attentional and nonverbal learning disorders and disabilities, neuropsychological testing review, and decisions re: reasonable accommodations under the ADA;
4. To discuss the spectrum of emotional issues for medical students at different phases of their training and timely supports to help minimize emotional crises;
5. To discuss the spectrum of psychiatric disorders and disabilities, psychiatric documentation review, and decisions re: reasonable accommodations;
6. To discuss practical implementation of resources for screening, prevention, and remediation of learning and emotional issues for students.

Intended Audience: Heath Professional, Medical Education, and Student Affairs Administrators and Faculty

Marriott Wardman Park
Taft

1:00 - 4:00p

GEA/GSA Mini-Workshop Session
Unburying our Heads from the Sand: Addressing the Issues of Resident Impairment

Organizer:
Kathryn Andolske, MD, MPH
Duke University Hospital

Faculty:
Alisa Nagler, JD, MA, EdD
Duke University Hospital

Gwen Murhpy, MS, PhD
Duke University Hospital

Purpose and Rationale: The LIFE Curriculum is a collaborative effort of Duke University Hospital, the UNC Hospitals, the NC AHEC, and the NC Physician's Health Program whose goal is to assist graduate medical education programs, their residents and faculty to prevent, identify, and manage resident fatigue and impairment. These challenging situations are frequently a major "crisis" point in the individual resident's career with spillover affects impacting the entire program.

While only three years old, the LIFE curriculum has proven popular and useful. Over 2500 participants have participated in regional and national workshops and over 5500 CD ROMs and teachers guides which contain the curricular materials have been mailed to faculty in all states and 10 countries who requested them. The first two CD ROMS were accepted "with acclamation" by the AAMC peer- reviewed MedEDPORTAL. The first analysis of pre and post tests of the first 100 participants reported gains in self perceived competence in preventing, identifying and addressing representative situations. They are able to articulate action plans many of which have been implemented at six months follow up. Over 100 programs have requested customization of the program in at least some way. Some enhancement, such as providing scripts for the "cases", or adding more post tests, have been incorporated into the web site for other users. Users reported using as conferences, seminars, self study. Some requested permission to burn hundreds of CD ROMS (one for each faculty member or resident at their institution); others to incorporate into a local intranet.

This presentation will model how the available instructional items can be used to teach this content within a residency program. Representative case studies will be analyzed. Participants will be asked to develop specific action plans for their own program and provided with extensive "take home" materials for use in implementation.

Specific Objectives: At the completion of the session, participants will:

1. Acknowledge the stress inherent in physician training and how that can lead to "Impairment;"
2. Diagnose representative situations of "Impaired performance" due to fatigue and other conditions;
3. Select appropriate strategies to prevent, identify and manage stress and fatigue;
4. Contrast the strengths and weaknesses of commonly available resources;
5. Plan the implementation of a curriculum to address fatigue and impairment including the development of new policies/procedures (when needed), faculty development, curricular strategies and evaluation for their own institutions.

Intended Audience: This session is designed for faculty and or staff involved in the training of residents and fellows, however it is also felt pertinent to all those involved in training of health professionals. Knowledge of their institution, current duty hour and other GME policies and ACGME competencies is helpful but not necessary.

Marriott Wardman Park
Truman

1:00 - 4:00p

GEA/GSA Mini-Workshop Session
How to Design and Implement a Curriculum to Improve Physician Documentation in the Inpatient Medical Record

Organizer:
Joseph J. Arcuri, Jr, MD
University of Minnesota Medical Center

Faculty:
Pat F. Bass, III, MD, MS
Louisiana State University Health Sciences Center

JoAnn Wood, MD, MS Ed
University of Minnesota Medical Center

Purpose and Rationale: The mini-workshop is designed to introduce participants to the basic tools necessary to teach effective documentation to medical students, residents and practicing physicians and facilitate the design and implementation of similar curricula at their respective institutions.

Specific Objectives: Participants will be able to:

1. Describe at least two different methods to teach students, residents, and colleagues about terms related to documentation in the inpatient setting;
2. Design and implement a curriculum to teach participants how the use of effective and uniform language in the inpatient medical record increases effective communication to primary care providers and third-party payers;
3. Design and implement a curriculum at their home institutions in order to improve effective documentation in the inpatient setting, communication of the severity and acuity of illness, and assignment of appropriate DRGs and hospital reimbursement for resources consumed;
4. develop a method of tracking results of curricula delivered.

Intended Audience: The mini-workshop is intended for anyone involved in medical education including faculty teaching patho-physiology courses to medical students, faculty teaching medical students interviewing/documentation skills, medical student clerkship directors, residents in any subspecialty or at any level of training, faculty directly supervising medical students and residents during inpatient rotations, residency program directors/assistant program directors, and physicians interested in improving their own documentation skills/practices in the inpatient setting.

Marriott Wardman Park
Balcony A

1:00 - 4:00p

GEA/GSA Mini-Workshop Session
MERC - Qualitative Research Methods

Organizer and Faculty:
Ilene B. Harris, PhD
University of Illinois College of Medicine

This workshop provides participants with an overview of the purposes, uses, and standards for rigor of qualitative research methods; and provides an opportunity for skill development in design of a small qualitative study and analysis of qualitative data.

At the end of the workshop, participants will be able to:

1. Describe the purposes and uses of qualitative methods in medical education;
2. Characterize the paradigms, research designs, data collection methods and types of data associated with qualitative research methods;
3. Analyze qualitative data, by identifying themes in data sets;
4. Apply standards for rigor to evaluate qualitative evaluation or research studies;
5. Design a small qualitative study.

Marriott Wardman Park
Balcony B

1:00 - 4:00p

GEA/GSA Mini-Workshop Session
MERC - Formulating Research Questions and Designing Studies

Organizers and Faculty:
Ernie Yoder, MD, PhD, FACP
Providence Hospital and Medical Centers

Description: In this workshop, participants will brainstorm research ideas, write, and refine a measurable research question. They will discuss when IRB approval is required for their study. The basics of research design will be discussed and applied to their selected research question.

Participants will be able to:

1. Write a FINER (feasible, interesting, novel, ethical, relevant) educational research question;
2. Specify an educational research area of interest;
3. Evaluate whether they need IRB approval for their study; " Select the correct design for their research question.

Marriott Wardman Park
Balcony C

3:15 - 5:15p

GEA/GSA Mini-Workshop Session
Achieving Mastery in Physical Examination Skill Teaching

Organizer:
Eugene C. Corbett, Jr. MD, FACP
University of Virginia

Faculty:
Lynn Bickley, MD
Texas Tech University

Vern C. Juel, MD
Duke University

Meg M. Keeley, MD
University of Virginia

Purpose and Rationale: Mastery in clinical skills education requires that the physical examination teacher achieve expertise in three domains:

1. Skill performance and self-assessment;
2. Skill teaching and teaching self assessment;
3. Skills teaching mentoring (faculty development).

The purpose of this workshop is to engage participants in a process of clinical skill performance and teaching, and to utilize this experience to create a peer to peer process that identifies principles pertinent to achieving mastery in physical examination skills teaching. This workshop has already been successfully undertaken in a number of specialty organizations.

Specific Objectives: Participants will:

1. Compare best practice techniques for performing four physical examination skills: otoscopic examination, jugular venous pressure measurement, S2 auscultation, muscle strength testing; "
2. Demonstrate and compare skill teaching methods for the four skills; "
3. Develop evaluation checklists for each of the four physical examination skills for use in teaching and evaluating student performance;
4. Develop a group consensus regarding principles and optimal methods for enhancing the teaching of clinical skills.

Intended Audience: Medical educator and deals involved with medical education.

Marriott Wardman Park
Coolidge

3:15 - 5:15p

GEA/GSA Mini-Workshop Session
Team Based Learning 101

Organizer:
Nagaswami Vasan, DVM, PhD
New Jersey Medical School

Faculty:
Paul Haidet, MD, MPH
Baylor College of Medicine

Dan Mayer, MD
Albany Medical College

Dean Parmelle, MD
Wright State University Boonshoft School of Medicine

Purpose and Rationale: The overall goal of the workshop is to provide perspective about and practical approach to TBL in developing effective curricula that ensures student active participation and self-directed learning.

Specific Objectives: At the end of this workshop, the participants will be able to:

1. Identify core principles and practices associated with TBL;
2. Compare and contrast various teaching methods such as lecture based, PBL and TBL;
3. "Actively" demonstrate how TBL is done by having participants to experience the full process (including peer evaluation) of TBL as learners;
4. Describe medical school courses in which TBL will increase the level of student engagement and learning. (eg., evidence based medicine, basic scineces);
5. Evaluate the effect of this strategy in a TBL oriented curriculum.

Intended Audience: This mini-workshop is organized for all medical educators, deans involved in medical education and curriculum development/management and faculty who are in the process of developing an active learning model.

Marriott Wardman Park
McKinley

Wednesday, November 7

8:00 - 11:00a

GEA/GSA Mini-Workshop Session
Narrative Matters: Competence for Improving Care of the Patient and the Practitioner

Organizer:
John D. Engel, PhD
Northeastern Ohio Universities College of Medicine

Faculty:
Joseph Zarconi, MD
Northeastern Ohio Universities College of Medicine

Lura Pethtel, MEd
Institute for Professionalism Inquiry Summa Health System

Sally Missimi, RN, MEd
Summa Health System

Purpose and Rationale: Recent publications from the Institute of Medicine, the Accreditation Council for Graduate Medical Education, and the AAMC, as well as pressure from public and legislative bodies, reinforce the fact that communication, relationship, and meaningful dialogue are at the center of medical practice. Gaps in these areas account for multiple challenges in patient safety, adherence with medical recommendations, and biomedical and functional outcomes. Medical educators agree that trainees learn as much from observing their teachers at work as they do in the classroom. The major mode of transmission in the "hidden" or informal curriculum is narrative. The stories that students and residents tell one another about their everyday experiences make up a large part of the informal curriculum. The same power of stories is true for practicing health professionals in their care for patients and interactions with each other. Ethicists have recognized that story telling is an important part of medical care and have proposed a field of inquiry called narrative ethics. In a parallel development some scholars have proposed a field of inquiry called narrative medicine. The proposed mini-workshop focuses on recent approaches and techniques for teaching narrative medicine skills across various levels of health professions education and capitalizes on current theoretical and practical advances in narrative medicine and research.

Specific Objectives: In this workshop, participants will:

1. Understand the theoretical and empirical work relevant to narrative approaches in four situations - patient and physician, physician and self, physician and colleagues, physician and community;
2. Practice and receive reflective feedback on a variety of clinical reading, writing, and listening skills to increase moral imagination, empathy, and clinical insight;
3. Construct illness stories from the patient's perspective;
4. Understand the impact of empathic practice on patient outcomes and physician health;
5. Construct empowering stories of professional relationships with colleagues and institutions;
6. Discuss and develop strategies for using narrative-based models in the curriculum.

Intended Audience: Faculty responsible for teaching behavioral and social sciences, medical ethics, human values, introduction to clinical medicine, clinical clerkships, and CME related to topics in relationship-centered care will benefit from this skill development workshop. The intended audience will practice the following complex narrative skills: exercising moral imagination and expressing clinical empathy; writing reflectively and telling complex clinical stories; and practicing compassionate presence and mindful listening (witnessing). Participants will actively engage with various reflective writing and reading exercises and receive feedback on their performance.

Marriott Wardman Park
Virginia B

8:00 - 11:00a

GEA/GSA Mini-Workshop Session
Creating Effective Application Exercises in the Basic Sciences through Interdepartmental Collaboration with Clinical Sciences

Organizer:
Dan Mayer, MD
Albany Medical College

Faculty:
Nagaswami Vasan, DVM, PhD
New Jersey Medical School

Paul Haidet, MD, MPH
Baylor College of Medicine

Dean Parmelee, MD
Wright State University Boonshoft School of Medicine

Ruth Levine, MD
University of Texas Medical Branch

Purpose and Rationale: One trend in medical education is to teach the basic sciences using clinical examples to help the students acquire the concepts in more practical ways and improve their critical thinking skills. An active teaching strategy, Team Based Learning (TBL), incorporates innovations to foster active learning, critical thinking, self-study, advance preparation, and team communication among students in large groups. The education strategy of TBL uses higher order skills (from Bloom's taxonomy), rather than simple regurgitation of knowledge and comprehension.

In this workshop, participants will use the principles of TBL to explore how to teach basic science concepts and enhance student use of higher order thought processes, while incorporating clinical sciences into the process. This will help the students to learn the underlying sciences and critically appreciate the implications of the material learned in the basic sciences. Promoting small group (team) engagement in large group settings, by using TBL gives students the opportunity to acquire and practice critical thinking competencies and integrate clinical sciences into the learning process of basic sciences content knowledge, problem solving and communications.

The workshop will help the attendees better understand how TBL can facilitate the integration of clinical sciences into the basic sciences. While this can help to increase competencies of learners at all levels (UME, GME, and CME), we will focus on the undergraduate medical education level for the workshop. We will demonstrate how basic sciences can be structured into the application exercise in TBL lessons in the basic sciences including a wide range of examples, drawing upon the experiences at several institutions that incorporate TBL into multiple courses.

Specific Objectives:

1. Describe ways to integrate clinical and basic sciences in TBL and how these are perceived from the learners' perspective (having had the opportunity to experience a simulated team based learning exercise);
2. List the elements for creating an effective application exercise;
3. Indicate how to create Application Exercises that integrate clinical and basic science principles and that will stimulate higher order thinking in the basic sciences;
4. Use the TBL process to decide on the value of different types of application exercises;
5. Describe specific formats in which TBL has been integrated into medical education courses at University of Texas Medical Branch, Baylor University, Albany Medical College, New Jersey Medical School and Wright State University.

Intended Audience: Directors of curriculum development and faculty teaching clinical or basic science courses across the curriculum (UME, GME, and CME) who are interested in getting a hands-on and in-depth understanding of how to use TBL as a method of teaching that can integrate clinical and basic sciences in the medical curriculum.

Marriott Wardman Park
Virginia C

8:00 - 11:00a

GEA/GSA Mini-Workshop Session
MERC- Program Evaluation and Evaluation Research

Organizers and Faculty:
Linda C Perkowski, PhD
University of Minnesota Medical School

Britta Thompson, PhD

Description: This workshop will provide some basic principles in questionnaire/survey design and give workshop participants an opportunity for hands-on experience designing a questionnaire. Following participation in this workshop, learners will be able to:

1. Design a blueprint for a survey/questionnaire appropriate to their own application;
2. Construct and edit questions to avoid common problems in question wording and framing;
3. Select an appropriate response format from a menu of alternatives;
4. Design the overall format of the survey/questionnaire to facilitate data management and analysis.

Marriott Wardman Park
Wilson B

8:00 - 11:00a

GEA/GSA Mini-Workshop Session
How to Design, Teach and Track Outcomes of Grant Writing Workshops: Beyond the Dog and Pony Show

Organizer:
Nancy Ryan Lowitt, MD, EdM, FACP
University of Maryland School of Medicine

Faculty:
Wendy Sanders, MA
University of Maryland School of Medicine

Bruce Jarrell, MD
University of Maryland School of Medicine

Purpose and Rationale: Many AAMC medical schools have identified the need for grant writing workshops to help junior faculty compete successfully for peer-reviewed funding. Interest in grant writing training has increased significantly in recent years due to a combination of factors. First, junior faculty with great promise as clinical investigators may lack skills, experience and mentoring in grant writing. The problem of lack of experience in grant writing is compounded by the current funding climate, which is the most competitive in NIH history. Increasing competition for grants has an impact on senior mentors, some of whom may have less time to mentor junior investigators as they spend more time competing for their own funding. These obstacles notwithstanding, junior faculty must develop skills in proposal development and understand the process of grant review in order to become independent fully-funded investigators.

Many institutions now offer grant writing workshops. The majority of these workshops are didactic half-day or full-day training sessions. At the University of Maryland School of Medicine we have developed several innovative approaches to teaching grant writing and to tracking the outcomes of these workshops, and propose to introduce these to workshop participants.

In this workshop we propose:

1. To offer faculty leaders and individual faculty members a critical overview of the structure and content of three models of grant writing workshops (large multi-session workshops, small intensive grant writing workshops, and focused multi-method workshops designed for specific departments). Each model described in the overview includes a form of "mock review session" in which participants receive feedback on their own applications;
2. To offer a practical introduction to an intensive grant-writing workshop itself, with examples of project grant applications in various stages for hands-on review. Participants will participate in a "mock review" designed for the workshop and will provide feedback to the "applicant;"
3. To review how institutional leaders may track the intermediate and longer-term outcomes of grant writing workshops at the Department or School level.

We will offer email support for participants following the course, providing consultation, resources, and sharing examples of "best practices" offered by participants.

Specific Objectives: At the conclusion of the workshop participants will be able to:

1. Describe three models of grant writing workshops for junior faculty professional development;
2. Describe the process of selecting the educational methods for the grant writing workshop which will best address the needs of your institution and faculty;
3. Discuss the feasibility of implementing and tracking the use of the Grant Writing Workshop at the Department or Institutional (Medical School or campus) levels;
4. Demonstrate familiarity with an updated bibliography of resources for grant writing, mentoring, and professional development for junior faculty.

Intended Audience: Medical School Faculty, Academic Deans, Research Committee Members, Department Chairs, Mentors, Program Directors, Course Masters, and Medical Educators.

Marriott Wardman Park
Delaware A

8:00 - 11:00a

GEA/GSA Mini-Workshop Session
Peer Evaluation: Assessing Scholarship of Teaching

Organizer:
Patricia McNally, EdD
Loyola University Chicago Stritch School of Medicine

Faculty:
Nancy Kheck, PhD Mount Sinai School of Medicine

Maryellen Gusic, MD
Penn State College of Medicine

Purpose and Rationale: The best teaching is critically reflective. Peer evaluation is one way to foster critical reflection. This methodology assesses the effectiveness and quality of teaching. The authors will use models from three different institutions to promote discussion of the challenges involved in planning, implementing, and evaluating programs of peer assessment. This workshop emphasizes the importance of defining multi-level outcome measures in the design of the assessment tools and in the design of the program and will adapt the framework developed by Kirkpatrick to determine these outcomes.

Specific Objectives: By the end of this workshop, participants will be able to:

1. Explore the current status of the system of peer review at their own institution and the institutions represented by the audience members;
2. Apply a multi-level framework for the evaluation of outcomes of educational interventions;
3. Initiate a plan to introduce or enhance a peer review program at their institution.

Intended Audience: Participants will be faculty who are involved in medical education at all levels. It may be of particular interest to those people involved in faculty development.

Marriott Wardman Park
Wilson A

8:00 - 11:00a

GEA/GSA Mini-Workshop Session
Teaching to Promote Learning in Cultural Competence

Organizers:
Janet P. Hafler, EdD
Tufts University School of Medilcine

Carmi Z. Margolis, MD, MA
Ben Gurion University

Faculty:
Margret Chang, MD
Brown University Medical School

Agneta Golan, MD
Ben Gurion University

Yaakov Henkin, MD
Ben Gurion University

Roxana Llerena-Quinn, PhD
Harvard Medical School

Alicia D. Monroe, MD
Brown University Medical School

Emily Rickards, MD
Brown University Medical School

Helen Sheilds, MD
Harvard Medical School

Jean Wu, EdD
Tufts University

Purpose and Rationale: Few academic clinicians receive any formal training in providing culturally competent care (CCC), yet they are expected to be educators and caregivers in classroom settings, in teaching hospitals, and in clinics. The goal of this workshop is to explore how to effectively teach cultural competence and to share different teaching strategies, curriculum designs and assessment techniques used at four institutions: Tufts University School of Medicine; Medical School for International Health at Ben Gurion University in cooperation with Columbia University Medical Center, Beer-Sheva, Israel; the Warren Alpert Medical School of Brown University; and Harvard Medical School. While the search for the most effective teaching strategies in this area is on-going, some methods have been tried with good success. Participants will have the opportunity to rotate through three of the four stations where different strategies are used to teach and promote cultural competence. Participants will be able to identify and discuss best practices currently in use at the four institutions.

Specific Objectives: The participants will:

1. Begin to develop skills to teach cultural competence;
2. Explore a variety of teaching strategies that teach culturally competent care;
3. Explore suggestions for institutional support and organization to teach culturally competent care education.

Intended Audience: Educators and faculty who are involved in teaching or who have expressed an interest in culturally competent care will benefit from participation because each station will focus on best practices that promote cultural competence.

Marriott Wardman Park
Delaware B

1:00 - 4:00p

GEA/GSA Mini-Workshop Session
Designing, Implementing, and Evaluating a Patient Safety Full Disclosure with Apology Curriculum

Organizer:
Anne Gunderson, EdDc, GNP
University of Illinois at Chicago College of Medicine

Faculty:
David Mayer, MD
University of Illinois at Chicago College of Medicine

Ara Tekian, PhD, MHPE
University of Illinois at Chicago

Rosemary Gibson, MSc
Robert Wood Johnson Foundation

Purpose and Rationale: Physicians vow to do no harm, but they never promise to disclose a medical error to their patient when it occurs. Reports in the literature and actuarial data, however, suggest that aggressive Full Disclosure with apology programs can produce greater patient trust and satisfaction and result in fewer numbers of malpractice lawsuits. Many physicians, however, continue to remain silent secondary to the fear of litigation, fear of stating explicitly to a patient that an error occurred, and the desire to put a positive spin on a situation.

The Institute of Medicine's (IOM) report To Err is Human; Building a Safer Health System estimated that as many as 98,000 patients die every year in hospitals from preventable medical errors. Medical errors are defined as the failure of a planned action or the use of the wrong plan to achieve an aim. (It has been reported that medical errors cost the nation approximately $37.6 billion annually, with up to $29 billion of those costs associated with preventable errors. Disclosing adverse events is a complex process, but is increasingly recognized as an important aspect of providing care for patients, and is a central part of fostering a safety culture. Disclosure has the potential to help solve a key problem in which harmed patients and their families lose trust and faith in their care-givers. Issues related to a lack of professionalism in health care continue to generate active discussions. The American Association of Medical Colleges and the National Board of Medical Examiners recently established eight qualities of professionalism. Lack of full disclosure when an error occurs arguably violates at least seven of those eight professionalism qualities.

Since the release of the staggering IOM data, considerable discussion has occurred in the United States regarding ways to align the current medical education system to meet the growing concerns related to patient safety and disclosure of error. Unfortunately, although patient safety has been increasingly recognized as a key dimension of quality care, systematic safety education for medical students is lacking. Adding to this is the pervasive historical culture of "shame and blame" among health care providers when a medical error occurs.

During this highly interactive workshop, we will present the current literature pertaining to patient safety and full disclosure; discuss the curricular development, implementation and assessment tools used for the patient safety full disclosure module, and share the module evaluation and outcome data from the past two years.

Specific Objectives: By the end of the mini-workshop, participants will improve their ability to:

1. Critically review the research that shows the positive impact of the Full Disclosure with apology;
2. Comprehend the conceptual framework, curricular design, student assessment, and curricular evaluation tools necessary for the development and implementation of a full disclosure with apology training module;
3. Identify effective evaluation methods of the full disclosure curriculum, especially in regard to professionalism, interdisciplinary teamwork, and communication;
4. Select innovative instructional methods for the delivery of a Full Disclosure curriculum;
5. Recognize the expectations of patients and families when medical error and/or adverse events occur.

Intended Audience: Medical educators and deans a like - from across the medical education continuum - will find this beneficial.

Marriott Wardman Park
Wilson A

1:00 - 4:00p

GEA/GSA Mini-Workshop Session
Problem Solving Barriers to Scholarship Using Action Learning

Organizer:
Larrie Greenberg, MD
The George Washington University School of Medicine

Faculty:
Benjamin Blatt, MD
The George Washington University School of Medicine

Margaret Plack, PT, EdD
The George Washington University School of Medicine

Purpose and Rationale: Involving clinician/educators in educational scholarship is a difficult task within the context of a very busy clinical environment. Despite the fact that there are many opportunities in the clinical setting for faculty to engage in scholarly activities, such as studying and evaluating the ACGME competencies, these opportunities are often not translated into action. This lack of productivity can stand in the way of academic promotion and overall job satisfaction. Faculty identify many barriers to why they are not engaged in scholarly work; namely, time, effort, no funding, lack of mentoring, etc. To address these issues, the overall goal of this mini-workshop is to use an innovative problem solving strategy [i.e., action learning (AL)] to explore current barriers to scholarly activity. AL is a process that seeks solutions to problems using cycles of reflective questioning and action to facilitate ongoing learning and problem solving by a small and invested group. A principle of the technique is to promote questioning as a way to get all the issues on the table before looking for solutions. This precludes premature closure on the problem and often destroys shibboleths that have been handed down from one generation to the next. This technique has been used in many Fortune 500 companies as they worked to solve complex problems in innovative ways. What we hope will evolve from using this technique is a better understanding on how to approach these barriers and to activate participants to implement ideas generated in the workshop that fit the culture in their home institution.

The workshop facilitators represent different disciplines, namely, physical therapy, pediatrics and internal medicine. They have extensive educational experience and have presented multiple workshops regionally, nationally, and internationally. They are all invested in scholarship and have used the action learning technique in their teaching and educational research.

Specific Objectives:

1. Identify potential barriers that inhibit scholarship activities;
2. Describe the action learning process of questioning as a way to approach problem-solving;
3. Recognize supports that may overcome barriers and enable scholarly activity through action learning;
4. Apply action learning as a strategy to develop innovative solutions to overcome barriers to scholarship;
5. Share innovative solutions developed by the participants;
6. Explore an example of how scholarship was integrated into the daily work responsibilities of OB-GYN faculty and residents.

Intended Audience: This workshop will be of particular interest to 1) leaders in academic health centers who are seeking ways to promote their educational scholarship activities, 2) faculty interested in the technique of action learning, and 3) faculty seeking concrete examples of how educational scholarship can be a reality.

Marriott Wardman Park
Wilson B