Virtual microscopy (VM) using scanned slides and imaging software is increasingly used in medical curricula alongside instruction in conventional microscopy (CM). Limited reports suggest that VM is useful in the veterinary education setting, and generally well-received by students. Whether students can apply knowledge gained through VM to practical use is unknown. Our objective was to determine whether instruction using VM, compared to CM, is a successful method of training veterinary students for the application of cytology in practice (i.e., using light microscopes). Seventy-one veterinary students from Colorado State University who attended a voluntary 3-hour cytology workshop were randomized to receive the same instruction with either VM ( n = 35) or CM ( n = 36). We compared these students to a control group ( n = 22) of students who did not attend a workshop. All students took a post-workshop assessment involving the interpretation of four cases on glass slides with CM, designed to simulate the use of cytology in general practice. Students also took an 18-question survey related to the effectiveness of the workshop, providing their opinions on cytology instruction in the curriculum and their learning preference (VM or CM). The mean assessment score of the VM group (14.18 points) was significantly higher than the control group (11.33 points, p = .003), whereas the mean of the CM group (12.77 points) was not statistically significantly different from controls ( p = .170). Not only is VM an effective method of teaching cytology to veterinary students that can be translated to a real-world case scenario, but it outperformed CM instruction in this study.

Competencies can guide outcomes assessment in veterinary medical education by providing a core set of specific abilities expected of new veterinary graduates. A competency-guided evaluation of Colorado State University’s (CSU) equine veterinary curriculum was undertaken via an alumni survey. Published competencies for equine veterinary graduates were used to develop the survey, which was distributed to large animal alumni from CSU’s Doctor of Veterinary Medicine program. The results of the survey indicated areas for improvement, specifically in equine business, surgery, dentistry, and radiology. The desire for more hands-on experiences in their training was repeatedly mentioned by alumni, with the largest discrepancies between didactic knowledge and hands-on skills in the areas of business and equine surgery. Alumni surveys allow graduates to voice their perceived levels of preparation by the veterinary program and should be used to inform curriculum revisions. It is proposed that the definition and utilization of competencies in each phase of a curricular review process (outcomes assessment, curriculum mapping, and curricular modifications), in addition to faculty experience and internal review, is warranted.

No abstract

Content expertise in basic science and clinical disciplines does not assure proficiency in teaching. Faculty development to improve teaching and learning is essential for the advancement of veterinary education. The Consortium of West Region Colleges of Veterinary Medicine established the Regional Teaching Academy (RTA) with the focus of “Making Teaching Matter.” The objective of the RTA’s first effort, the Faculty Development Initiative (FDI), was to develop a multi-institutional faculty development program for veterinary educators to learn about and integrate effective teaching methods. In 2016, the Veterinary Educator Teaching and Scholarship (VETS) program was piloted at Oregon State University’s College of Veterinary Medicine. This article uses a case study approach to program evaluation of the VETS program. We describe the VETS program, participants’ perceptions, participants’ teaching method integration, and lessons learned. A modified Kirkpatrick Model (MKM) was used to categorize program outcomes and impact. Quantitative data are presented as descriptive statistics, and qualitative data are presented as the themes that emerged from participant survey comments and post-program focus groups. Results indicated outcomes and impacts that included participants’ perceptions of the program, changes in participant attitude toward teaching and learning, an increase in the knowledge level of participants, self-reported changes in participant behaviors, and changes in practices and structure at the college level. Lessons learned indicate that the following are essential for program success: (1) providing institutional and financial support; (2) creating a community of practice (COP) of faculty development facilitators, and (3) developing a program that addresses the needs of faculty and member institutions.

Competency-based veterinary education focuses on the knowledge and clinical skills required to generate a productive and confident practitioner. Accurate identification of clinically relevant core competencies enables academic institutions to prioritize which new and foundational information to cover in the limited time available. The goal of this study was to aggregate the opinions of veterinary practitioners about small animal core competencies in veterinary orthopedics. An online 20-question survey was distributed with questions regarding respondent demographics, education, practice type, caseload, involvement in orthopedic procedures, access to referral hospitals, frequency of orthopedic condition presentation and procedure performance, and proposed percent allocation of various orthopedic curriculum topics. Responses were included from 721 respondents, largely first-opinion veterinarians (81%, n = 580/721). The majority (58%; n = 418/721) of respondents performed less than 10% of the orthopedic surgeries themselves and, 37% ( n = 266/721) reported never performing orthopedic surgery; of those performing surgeries, 78% ( n = 354/455) performed less than six orthopedic procedures monthly. The five most common orthopedic conditions seen included: generalized osteoarthritis, patellar luxation, cranial cruciate ligament disease, hip dysplasia/arthritis, and muscle/tendon injuries. Median respondent scores for the percentage which a topic should comprise in an ideal orthopedic curriculum were 20% each for ‘orthopedic exam’ and for ‘non-surgical orthopedic knowledge’, 15% each for ‘non-surgical orthopedic skills,’ ‘orthopedic imaging (radiographs),’ and ‘surgical orthopedic knowledge,’ 10% for ‘surgical orthopedic skills,’ and 2% for ‘advanced orthopedic imaging.’ Based on these results, a curriculum focusing on the most clinically relevant orthopedic conditions with an emphasis on diagnosis establishment and non-surgical treatments is proposed.