No abstract

Academic dentists and members of the practice community have been hearing, for more than a decade, that our educational system is in trouble and that the profession has lost its vision and may be wavering in the achievement of its goals. A core of consistently recommended reforms has framed the discussion of future directions for dental education, but as yet, most schools report little movement toward implementation of these reforms in spite of persistent advocacy. Provision of faculty development related to teaching and assessment strategies is widely perceived to be the essential ingredient in efforts to introduce new curricular approaches and modify the educational environment in academic dentistry. Analyses of the outcomes of efforts to revise health professions curricula have identiied the availability and effectiveness of faculty development as a predictor of the success or failure of reform initiatives. This article will address faculty development for purposes of enhancing teaching effectiveness and preparing instructors for potential new roles associated with curriculum changes. Its overall purpose is to provide information and insights about faculty development that may be useful to dental schools in designing professional growth opportunities for their faculty. Seven questions are addressed: 1) What is faculty development? 2) How is faculty development accomplished? 3) Why is faculty development particularly important in dental education? 4) What happens when faculty development does not accompany educational reform? 5) Why are teaching attitudes and behaviors so dificult to change? 6) What outcomes can be expected from faculty development? and 7) What does the available evidence tell us about the design of faculty development programs? Evidence from systematic reviews pertaining to the teaching of evidence-based dentistry, strategies for continuing professional education, and the Best Evidence in Medical Education review of faculty development outcomes are presented to answer this question: does faculty development enhance teaching effectiveness? Characteristics consistently associated with effective faculty development are described.

T rends in health professions education are often inluenced by reports that analyze national health care workforce needs, practice patterns of the various professions, and data on the quality of care provided, the cost-effectiveness of care, and the access to care. Over the past decade, the health professions have been urged to improve collaboration among their practitioners with the objective of improving the quality of care they provide, especially the complex care needed for an aging population and patients with chronic diseases.A body of knowledge has developed in the literature concerning what is now referred to as interprofessional education (IPE) and practice-a Association ReportAbstract: The state of interprofessional education (IPE) in U.S. and Canadian dental schools was studied by the American Dental Education Association (ADEA) Team Study Group on Interprofessional Education. The study group reviewed the pertinent IPE literature, examined IPE competencies for dental students, surveyed U.S. and Canadian dental schools to determine the current and planned status of IPE activities, and identiied best practices. Members of the study group prepared case studies of the exemplary IPE programs of six dental schools, based on information provided by those schools; representatives from each school then reviewed and approved its case study. Six reviewers critiqued a draft of the study group's report, and study group members and reviewers met together to prepare recommendations for schools. This report identiies four domains of competence for student achievement in IPE and summarizes responses to the survey (which had an 86 percent response rate). It also includes the case descriptions of six schools' IPE programs and the study group's recommendations for dental schools. The report concludes that there is general recognition of the goals of IPE across U.S. and Canadian dental schools, but a wide range of progress in IPE on the various campuses. Challenges to the further development of IPE are discussed.

The collective body of work over the last seventy-ive years in the Journal of Dental Education has chronicled the ongoing critical issues and trends in dental education. The evolution of the curriculum has run in its and starts across the twentieth century and into the twenty-irst. Today, there has been a resurgence in the introspective work of the profession to examine what is taught, how it is taught, in what sequence it is taught, and the context relating dental education to other health professions and the global reach of the educational and professional environment. In the context of contemporary times, individual as well as organizational leadership has refocused the educational environment from teaching to learning.

Oral health in long-term care (LTC) facilities has been repeatedly documented as less than ideal. The complex nature of this environment has made it difficult to understand and improve the oral health status of residents through education and training. The purpose of the study was to investigate how the executive directors (EDs) of LTC facilities value oral health and to determine facility variables, which may influence how oral care is delivered. A mail survey of the EDs of all LTC facilities in Ohio (n = 1018) was conducted with 338 responses received after secondary follow-up (33.2% response rate). The 30-item survey included information concerning the nursing facility, the EDs, the EDs' perception of the level of oral health care, and value statements rated on a Likert-like scale. The results of the survey showed that more than two-thirds of the EDs were female and that most facilities were proprietary (70.3%). ED gender was not statistically associated with any of the oral health variables. Fifty-three percent of the EDs rated their residents' oral health as fair or poor but were still satisfied with the oral care provided at their facilities. The apparent discontinuity between perceived levels of oral health and satisfaction with oral care suggests that EDs are distanced from the oral care of their residents or they do not acknowledge oral health care needs. While the survey results revealed important facility characteristics and administrators' perceptions about oral health, the most important aspect of this project was the low response rate despite secondary follow-up. That, coupled with the negativity expressed upon follow-up, suggests a larger issue that may affect oral health in nursing facilities: oral health continues to have a low priority in this setting. Continuing efforts to improve oral health and educate LTC professionals about oral health's influence on general health is critical for managing the oral health of future generations of aging adults.