This qualitative research study identified criteria for clinical teacher quality preferences as perceived by dental students. Third and fourth year dental students at New York University College of Dentistry were given a two question, open-ended survey asking what qualities they liked most and least in a clinical teacher. Responses were collected until data saturation was achieved. A total of 157 respondents provided a total of 995 written comments. Descriptive words within the responses were coded and grouped into key words, according to similar relationships, and further refined into 17 defined categories. Three core themes, Character, Competence and Communication, emerged from these 17 categories, which were validated according to specific references found in the existing educational literature. 'Character' comprised nine of the 17 defined categories: (caring, motivation, empathy, patience, professionalism, available, fairness, happiness, patient-centred) and yielded 59.1% of total student responses; 'Competence' consisted of five categories: knowledgeable, expertise, efficient, skilful, effective (29.2%); and 'Communication' represented the remaining three categories: feedback, approachable and interpersonal communication (11.7%). Positive and negative responses related to the defined category of caring were cited by 59.2% of all students. Motivation was the next highest category, cited by 45.9% of students. Non-cognitive attributes, especially those in the Character theme, comprised the majority of student comments. Because students' perceptions are so critical to understanding clinical teaching effectiveness in dental education, these findings can be used to develop assessments to measure clinical teaching effectiveness, to create criteria for the hiring and promotion of clinical faculty and to plan faculty development programming.

This qualitative research study identified criteria for teacher quality preferences as perceived by current and past students. A two-question, open-ended survey asking what qualities learners liked most and least in a teacher/presenter was given to two groups: students (Group A) from medicine, dentistry, and related residency programs; and dentists and physicians (Group B) who had graduated at least three years previously and who attended a minimum of two days of continuing education courses in lecture format each year. A total of 300 subjects provided 2,295 written responses. Descriptive words within the responses were coded and grouped according to similar relationships, resulting in the emergence of twenty-one defined categories that were further refined into three core categories: personality, process, and performance. Results showed that the two groups appear to have different preferences in teacher/presenter characteristics. For Group A (students), the categories of content design, content organization, and content development were at the forefront of their preferences. Group B (professionals) overwhelmingly favored elements of speaker self-confidence and expertise. Both groups highly valued expertise and speaking style. These findings can be used to develop curriculum, enhance faculty members' teaching skills, and plan continuing education programs.

The routine evaluation of teaching effectiveness is important in improving faculty, departmental, and institutional efforts. There are three main categories of assessments: those performed by students, peers, and self. Although each category is independently valid, a collection of data from all three categories leads to a more comprehensive outcome and a creation of a triangulation model. The purpose of this study was to identify commonly used methods of assessing teaching effectiveness and to suggest the use of a triangulation model, which has been advocated in the literature on performance assessment as an optimal approach for evaluating teaching effectiveness. A twelve-question survey was sent to all U.S. dental schools to identify evaluation methods as well as to find evidence of triangulation. Thirty-nine out of fifty-seven schools responded. The majority of the schools used student evaluations (81 percent) and peer reviews (78 percent). A minority of schools reported using self-evaluations (31 percent). Less than one in five dental schools reported using all three strategies to achieve triangulation (19 percent). The three most commonly used evaluation methods ("performed routinely") were all in the student evaluation category. Less than half of the schools routinely evaluated clinical teaching effectiveness by any means (42 percent). In conclusion, dental schools should implement a triangulation process, in which evaluation data are obtained from students, peers, and self to provide a comprehensive and composite assessment of teaching effectiveness.

Treatment with ixed and removable partial dentures has been the traditional method of addressing the replacement of teeth competencies in dental education. However, by 2013 the Commission on Dental Accreditation (CODA) standards will mandate a competency in "replacement of teeth including ixed, removable, and dental implants." In 2005, New York University College of Dentistry implemented a comprehensive implant program for predoctoral dental students. One of the outcome assessments of this program was to determine the level of patient satisfaction. Therefore, a patient satisfaction survey (n=103) assessed the use of implant treatment for the restoration of partially edentulous patients, measuring such dimensions of satisfaction as function, comfort, and esthetics. The results revealed that 96 percent of the patients surveyed were satisied with their ability to chew, 91 percent were satisied with the comfort of their restoration, and 86 percent were satisied with the appearance of their restoration. Additionally, 90 percent of the surveyed patients who received implant-retained crowns as part of their routine care were satisied with the overall treatment experience, and 97 percent of them would recommend this treatment to a friend. The survey results validate implant-supported crown treatment in predoctoral education. Although implant-supported restorations are a valid treatment option that must be presented to patients during treatment planning, creating a clinical competency in implant therapy requires greater consideration. Therefore, the beneits and challenges of such a clinical competency are discussed.

The aim of this qualitative research study was to identify and categorize criteria for simulation teacher quality preferences as reported by dental students. Second-year dental students at New York University College of Dentistry in 2015 were given a two-question, open-ended survey asking what qualities they liked most and least in a simulation or preclinical teacher. Responses were collected until data saturation was reached. Key words in the responses were identified and coded based on similar relationships and then were grouped into defined categories. A total of 168 respondents out of the target group of 363 students (46.3%) provided 1,062 written comments. Three core themes-character, competence, and communication-emerged from 16 defined categories, which were validated using references from the educational literature. The theme of character encompassed eight of the defined categories (motivation, available, caring, patience, professionalism, empathy, fairness, and happiness) and accounted for 50% of the total student responses. The theme of competence comprised five categories (expertise, knowledgeable, efficient, skillful, and effective) and represented 34% of all responses. The communication theme covered the remaining three categories (feedback, approachable, and interpersonal communication) and contained 17% of the responses. Positive and negative comments in the category of motivation accounted for 11.2% of all student responses. Expertise was the next highest category with 9.3% of the responses, followed closely by 9.1% in the category of available. Among these students, the top five attributes of simulation teachers were motivation, expertise, available, caring, and feedback. While the study did not attempt to correlate these findings with improved student performance, the results can be used in the development of assessment tools for faculty and targeted faculty development programs. Dr. McAndrew is Clinical Professor and Senior