Glick Ira D, Zisook Sidney
Department of Psychiatry and Behavioral Sciences at Stanford University School of Medicine, Stanford, California, USA.
Acad Psychiatry. 2005 May-Jun;29(2):134-40. doi: 10.1176/appi.ap.29.2.134.
For a variety of pedagogical, political and financial reasons, there are major problems in achieving effective teaching of cutting-edge psychopharmacology for psychiatric residents. This article focuses on ways to improve the teaching/learning process, in part through the use of structured curricula. The authors review 1) attempted solutions to the educational problems, including use of the 1980s American College of Neuropsychopharmacology (ACNP) and 1990s American Society of Clinical Psychopharmacology (ASCP) model curriculums; 2) evaluation of and obstacles to change; and 3) suggestions of what to do now.
A psychopharmacology curriculum was prepared in the early 1980s under the auspices of the ACNP and in the 1990s and early 2000s by the ASCP in three editions. Three separate surveys of training directors and Chairs of departments using the curriculum, informal feedback from a variety of psychopharmacology experts, interactive presentations at national meetings (e.g., ACNP and AADPRT) served to guide development and revisions of the curriculum.
Three formal follow up evaluations over two decades of users of the curriculum have suggested that it is not enough to have a strong content of what needs to be taught. In addition, a successful psychopharmacology curriculum must have 1) the pedagogy, (i.e., features like pre-post questions, teaching points, etc.) to facilitate use of the many facets and considerable amounts of information; 2) advanced technology to make the content current, adaptable, and both teacher- and student-friendly; 3) accompanying strategies to allow buy-in from training directors and teachers who have had no role in development; 4) reasonable cost to allow wide-spread dissemination while covering preparation expense (preferably without industry support); and, finally 5) evaluation of competence both at the end of training and post-residency in actual practice.
The long-term objective of improving the teaching/learning process is to improve the clinical practice of psychopharmacology.
由于多种教学、政治和经济原因,在为精神科住院医师有效教授前沿精神药理学方面存在重大问题。本文重点关注改进教学/学习过程的方法,部分通过使用结构化课程。作者回顾了:1)对教育问题的尝试性解决方案,包括使用20世纪80年代美国神经精神药理学会(ACNP)和90年代美国临床精神药理学会(ASCP)的模式课程;2)对变革的评估及障碍;3)对当前应做之事的建议。
20世纪80年代初在ACNP的主持下编写了一份精神药理学课程,20世纪90年代和21世纪初由ASCP编写了三个版本。对使用该课程的培训主任和系主任进行了三项独立调查,来自各类精神药理学专家的非正式反馈,在全国性会议(如ACNP和AADPRT)上的互动展示,均用于指导课程的开发和修订。
对该课程使用者进行的长达二十年的三项正式跟踪评估表明,仅有丰富的教学内容是不够的。此外,一个成功的精神药理学课程必须具备:1)教学方法(即像课前课后问题、教学要点等特征),以促进对众多方面和大量信息的利用;2)先进技术,使内容与时俱进、具有适应性且对教师和学生都友好;3)配套策略,以使未参与开发的培训主任和教师能够接受;4)合理成本,以便在涵盖编写费用的同时广泛传播(最好无需行业支持);最后,5)在培训结束时以及住院医师培训结束后的实际实践中对能力进行评估。
改进教学/学习过程的长期目标是改善精神药理学的临床实践。