Resident Evaluation of Orthodontic Programs in the United States

Abstract

The objective of this study was to investigate the satisfaction of orthodontic residents in the United States with their programs and determine the scope of their training. Program chairs/directors of all sixty-five U.S. orthodontic graduate programs were contacted for permission to email their residents. A total of 335 residents from thirty-seven programs were invited to complete an anonymous, online, fifty-seven-item survey in May 2007. Data were categorized, and basic statistics were performed. A total of 136 (40.60 percent) residents completed the survey. Overall, 75.74 percent were satisfied with their program. Residents said they feel they receive appropriate didactic teaching sessions and dedicated academic time (60.29 percent). Most residents (92.70 percent) indicated their program offers training in numerous philosophies, while 80.29 percent said they have sufficient clinically based training and 59.85 percent said they have sufficient research-based training. A total of 57.66 percent said they will not complete more than thirty cases from start to finish and on average treat two orthognathic surgery, thirteen extraction, twentyfour nonextraction, and nine adult patients. Most (92.70 percent) said their program contains care for disabled or underserved patients; most (92.70 percent) said they feel they will be adequately prepared to provide unsupervised orthodontic care after graduation; and 54.41 percent said they think other specialties have a positive view of orthodontics. Only 58.09 percent indicated they have a formal interdisciplinary program for treating patients. We conclude that U.S. orthodontic residents are satisfied with their programs. They receive training in a variety of approaches; however, inadequacies in exposure to interdisciplinary teaching and a limitation of the number of cases started and completed were identified. These observations may be a result of program length due to the preponderance of twenty-four-to thirty-month programs.Dr. Noble is a part-time

Development and implementation of the Clinical Tooth Shade Differentiation Course – an evaluation over 3 years

“…This student feedback allows instructors to refine their own approaches [ 21 ], [ 22 ], [ 23 ] and to make adjustments if necessary to create a better learning environment. The overwhelming majority of published articles in the area of dental education use student evaluations to assess innovations in teaching [ 24 ], [ 25 ], [ 26 ], [ 27 ], [ 28 ], [ 29 ], [ 30 ], [ 31 ]. The investigation of Subramanian et al [ 32 ] considers students as collaborative partners in the educational process.…”

Graduate orthodontic education in Turkey: the residents' perspective

“…As identifying the residents or programme would violate the ethics of the study, individual programmes might consider performing regular feedback sessions, year‐end reviews and exit surveys . Satisfaction rate were detected as 75.74% in United States and 86.36% ratio was established in Canada . The duration of orthodontic training programme in Turkey is longer than in the US and Canada.…”

“…Orthodontics is the oldest specialty in dentistry and graduates the most number of specialists each year . According to the American Dental Association, orthodontics was found to be the most popular of all the dental specialties . There are currently a total of 23 orthodontic residency programmes in Turkey and the number is increasing with new dental schools being opened.…”

The importance of ‘student voice’ in dental education

“…Although this perspective is touched upon in the school education literature, it is particularly evident in the higher education and dental education literature. Many dental educational papers assert that projects that elicit student feedback help academic staff to better understand students' perspectives of existing institutional teaching and learning practices, and this may then inform academic professional development . Advocates of student voice projects assert that considering student perspectives in curriculum development introduces the missing and unique perspectives of those who directly experience current teaching philosophies (and their consequences) .…”

“…Moreover, there are notable differences between the justifications provided in dental education and school‐based research literature for listening to student voice. The vast majority of the dental education papers justify their student feedback studies from a student evaluation of teaching and formative feedback on pedagogical practices perspective . Only a few studies refer to the student engagement or reflection on their learning process or stakeholder perspective as a rationale for their study .…”