Exploring the Effectiveness of Faculty Development Program on Medical and Health Related Sciences Education

Abstract

The professional development of faculty is progressively noticeable in both higher and health profession education. The monitoring of faculty development activities could enhance their effectiveness and contribute to the education quality. This study aimed to address a faculty development program regarding four active learning-based approaches and their impact on three undergraduate medical and health-related programs. <strong>Methods:</strong> Following the implementation of the faculty development program, it was evaluated based on the first three levels of Kirkpatrick’s Model. The program development was underpinned by the training needs assessment of the faculty. <strong>Results:</strong> The results of the evaluation using the Kirkpatrick model (reaction, learning, behaviour, and actions) were informative. The response rate by faculty was 100%. Overall, faculty satisfaction with their development activities (Kirkpatrick 1st level) was 91%. The results of the T-tests of the Faculty Development Programs (FDPs) were statistically significant (p<0.05). The gain and transfer of knowledge in the workplace were ensured. <strong>Discussion and Conclusion:</strong> This research provided valuable information regarding the impact of faculty development activities on the faculty from various perspectives. The current study endorses the faculty development program’s positive impact on the performance of the faculty, teaching effectiveness, and increased the increased student satisfaction about active learning-based teaching.

Success stories: exploring the long-term impact of a global faculty development program for health professions educators

“…Despite their ubiquitous adoption, the long-term impact of FDPs and their effectiveness in sustaining global needs has not been thoroughly studied. Though there has been increasing reports of studies on effectiveness of FDPs for health professions educators in the past ve years (9)(10)(11)(12)(13)(14)(15), most measure shorter term program effectiveness through a pre-post program comparison. Only few studies have examined the long-term in uence of FDPs (16)(17)(18)(19)(20), and most of these FDPs are local programs within an institution.…”