Soleas Eleftherios, Dagnone Damon, Stockley Denise, Garton Kendall, van Wylick Richard
Queens University, Ontario, Canada.
Can Med Educ J. 2020 Mar 16;11(1):e46-e56. doi: 10.36834/cmej.68181. eCollection 2020 Mar.
Implementing competency-based medical education (CBME) at the institutional level poses many challenges including having to rapidly enable faculty to be facilitators and champions of a new curriculum which utilizes feedback, coaching, and models of programmatic assessment. This study presents the necessary competencies required for Academic Advisors (AA) and Competence Committee (CC) members, as identified in the literature and as perceived by faculty members at Queen's University.
This study integrated a review of available literature (n=26) yielding competencies that were reviewed by the authors followed by an external review consisting of CBME experts (n=5). These approved competencies were used in a cross-sectional community consultation survey distributed one year before (n=83) and one year after transitioning to CBME (n=144).
Our newly identified competencies are a useful template for other institutions. Academic Advisor competencies focused on mentoring and coaching, whereas Competence Committee member's competencies focused on integrating assessments and institutional policies. Competency discrepancies between stakeholder groups existing before the transition had disappeared in the post-implementation sample.
We found value in taking an active community-based approach to developing and validating faculty leader competencies sooner rather than later when transitioning to CBME. The evolution of Competence Committees members and Academic Advisors requires the investment of specialized professional development and the sustained engagement of a collaborative community with shared concerns.
在机构层面实施基于胜任力的医学教育(CBME)面临诸多挑战,包括必须迅速使教师成为新课程的促进者和倡导者,该新课程采用反馈、指导和程序化评估模式。本研究介绍了学术顾问(AA)和胜任力委员会(CC)成员所需的必要胜任力,这些胜任力是在文献中确定的,也是女王大学教师所感知到的。
本研究综合了对现有文献(n = 26)的综述,得出了作者随后进行审查的胜任力,随后由CBME专家(n = 5)进行外部审查。这些经批准的胜任力用于在过渡到CBME之前一年(n = 83)和之后一年(n = 144)进行的横断面社区咨询调查。
我们新确定的胜任力对其他机构来说是一个有用的模板。学术顾问的胜任力侧重于指导和辅导,而胜任力委员会成员的胜任力侧重于整合评估和机构政策。过渡前存在的利益相关者群体之间的胜任力差异在实施后的样本中已消失。
我们发现在向CBME过渡时,尽早采取积极的基于社区的方法来开发和验证教师领导者的胜任力是有价值的。胜任力委员会成员和学术顾问的发展需要投入专门的专业发展,并需要一个有共同关注点的协作社区持续参与。