Chep presentation 2014 carter, sabo, rigby
Upcoming SlideShare
Loading in...5

Chep presentation 2014 carter, sabo, rigby






Total Views
Views on SlideShare
Embed Views



0 Embeds 0

No embeds



Upload Details

Uploaded via as Microsoft PowerPoint

Usage Rights

© All Rights Reserved

Report content

Flagged as inappropriate Flag as inappropriate
Flag as inappropriate

Select your reason for flagging this presentation as inappropriate.

  • Full Name Full Name Comment goes here.
    Are you sure you want to
    Your message goes here
Post Comment
Edit your comment
  • Introduce ourselves, the VCU SOM, what we do there, and our roles in Speed DesigningWe are here to share with you a new learning strategy for introducing faculty (or other learners, for that matter) to ideas for more effective teaching, and to do it in a way that exposes them to a wide variety of ideas in a short amount of time.The idea is not for this type of faculty development workshop to create skills per se, but to create enthusiasm and interest in learning more! It’s a little bit like meeting that special someone for the first time – the encounter may only last a few minutes, but your curiosity is peaked, and you want to see this person again!So it is with Speed Designing. We were introducing new ideas for teaching and we wanted to peak their interest to learn more, and to tell others about what they learned.
  • The driving force for creating a new way of teaching faculty instructional techniques and approaches emerged from a problem that has existed for a long time in medical education – for more than 100 years since Abraham Flexner first suggested that the first two years of medical school should be primarily lecture based, in which students learned the basic sciences involved in medicine, before encountering clinical experience in the last two years of medical school.Since that day, and the adoption of the Flexnerian model for teaching in medicine, most medical schools in the country followed the same tradition: 2 years of basic science, followed by 2 years of clinical experience. But the Flexnerian model was flawed when it comes to learner engagement and what we have come to appreciate as the benefits of active learning. Modern adult learning theory has taught us that adults want to be actively engaged and highly utilitarian in what they learn – learning for future use might satisfy some younger learners, but passivity among adults is an enculturated phenomenon that has been reinforced by the prevailing model of “sit and listen” that has dominated higher education for many, many years.In 2013, the VCU School of Medicine embarked upon the first curriculum innovation in 30 years. This radical redesign of the curriculum meant that faculty could no longer lecture has they had in the past. Our new space was designed for colloboration.
  • We have four floors in our new high-rise building, each of which has 22 collaborative learning tables designed to accommodate 6 learners at each table and their laptops. The tables are furnished with individual microphones and access to six wall screens for projection and two screens at each table upon which content can be displayed. This new, high tech environment which we began using in August 2013 was NOT designed for lecture.Our faculty were in a panic. Some were mad (furious, in fact), others said they would not teach in such a space. Others were intimidated by all the technology as well as the idea that they needed to completely redesign their courses for active, small group learning in a large group environment. To complicate matters, the incoming class of 215 students would be taught simultaneously on two floors. It was a big change. Not only did we have to teach faculty how to use the technology, but they needed to learn how to become facilitators of learning, not transmitters of lecture content.
  • In some ways, medical school is a unique environment, differing from the traditional semester course in undergraduate or graduate education in most universities. Our students attend class from 8 in the morning until around 4 or 5 in the afternoon, five days a week. They are taught in a block schedule format that differs significantly from a traditional, 15-week semester from the faculty perspective. Any given faculty member may teach for a single class level, such as first year med students, for two weeks during the year. During the “block” the faculty member might teach for 2 or 3 consecutive hours, every day during his or her 2 or 3 week block.This means that each year, for the faculty member, it is almost like beginning again –they have to prepare afresh. It’s hard to build expertise in a new teaching method when you teach so infrequently.In this block schedule, our learners really do drink from a firehose. The content that they are exposed in the first and second years of medical school is voluminous – and the pace is relentless. So these aspects of teaching are part of the issues we face when attempting to help faculty learn to teach in ways that are pedagogically sound.
  • This slide is a graphic representation of Kurt Lewin’s Force Field Analysis. Lewin was a German social psychologis who left Nazi Germany when we was no longer allowed to teach. He emigrated to the US and became a preeminent scholar of human behavior in the 1940s before an early death in ….Lewin thought that any problem could be viewed in terms of the forces that impinged upon it. The bar in the center represents the present state or a desired state. For us, it is the successful implementation of a new curriculum for the SOM. Driving forces are positive forces that enable change to occur. In our case, it is the administration’s (and some faculty’s) desire for more active, engaged learning in the curriculum, realizing that this is a much better learning situation for our students.Also moving us forward toward change is the new building we have, designed for collaborative learning, and the Liaison Committee on Medical Education’s new accreditation standards which define active learning and recognize it as meeting LCME standards. Restraining Forces are those that serve as obstacles to change. In our situation, these are lack of pedagogical skills and knowledge for engaging in active learning, a strong tradition of didactic, lecture-based learning environments, and resistance of the faculty to what they don’t know and don’t understand. Lewin insisted that the way to “move a problem to resolution” was to work to remove restraining forces, since increasing driving forces only creates additional resistance from the obstacles to change. Speed Designing, and our FacDevel. Initiatives are designed to reduce these restraining forces.
  • The road ahead, we know, is steep.
  • So, how did we plan to address the problem?We have taken a multi-prong approach, and one of our strategies has been to implement what we are calling “speed designing.”
  • Speed Designing is about Instructional designing. But our name comes from the popular concept of speed dating.
  • So how does Speed Designing resemble speed dating?Well, our participants engage in a rapid, round robin sharing of information as they rotate among tables, where they are introduced to potential instructional strategies as “partners” for pedagogy. They talk to a person experienced in using the learning strategy and have a chance to “try it on” for size – Is this learning strategy a good fit for what I’m trying to accomplish in the classroom?”Speed designing gives our faculty participants an opportunity to talk to someone who has used the strategy and to ask questions. Most importantly, faculty peers are talking to faculty peers.
  • Our next source of inspiration comes from Roger’s seminal ideas about the diffusion of innovation. Rogers defined an innovation as an idea, a practice, or an object perceived as new by an individual or some other unit of adoption. Many of these new ideas are technological, but not all are. Rogers categorized five adopter categories: The Innovators (Venturesome) – Innovators are constantly interested in new ideas. They are able to cope with a high degree of uncertainty about the innovation at the time her or she adopts. The Early Adopters (Respect) – Early adopters are an integrated part of the local social system, these are opinion leaders in their social systems. Potential adopters look to early adopters for advice and info about an innovation.The Early Majority (Deliberate) – adopt new ideas just before the average member of a system. They interact frequently with their peers but seldom hold positions of opinion leadership. They are, however, important links in the diffusion process because they are connected to the social system’s interpersonal networks.Late Majority (Skeptical) – adoption for the late majority is often as the result of increasing peer pressure. They are cautious about innovations and slightly skeptical. They do not adopt until most others in the system have adopted. Laggards (Traditional) – are the last in the social system to adopt. The point of reference for the laggard is what has worked in the past. These individuals interact with others who have traditional views.
  • Diffusion is the process by which an innovation is communicated through certain channels over time among the members of a social system. Mass media channels are more effective in creating knowledge of innovations, but interpersonal channels are more effective in forming and changing attitudes toward a new idea, and in getting others to adopt it. Diffusion is a special kind of communication concerned with the spread of messages that are perceived as new ideas. Communication is the process in which participants create and share information with one another in order to reach a mutual understanding.Diffusion has a special character because of the newness of the idea in the message content. Thus some degree of uncertainty and perceived risk is involved in the diffusion process. An individual can reduce this degree of uncertainty by obtaining more information about the new idea.Rogers discovered that people differ in their readiness to accept and embrace new ideas that that these differences make up a bell curve of readiness to adopt the new idea..
  • Rogers was a rural sociologist, so many of his early studies of the adoption of innovations were related to farm and rural product or idea innovations. But his theory of diffusion of innovation draws from many different disciplines, including anthropology, education, and medical sociology.
  • The time that is involved in diffusion is conceptualized by Rogers as having five steps: knowledge, persuasion, decision, implementation, and confirmation. Individuals seek information at various stages in the innovation decision processThe characteristics of an innovation, as perceived by the members of a social system, determine its rate of adoption. There are five attributes of an innovation: (1) relative advantage; (2) compatibility, (3) complexity; (4) trialability, or the ability to “try it out,” and (5) observability, or the ability for someone to observe us using the innovation.
  • Peer coaching is a concept that was developed by Beverly Showers and Bruce Joyce more than 30 years ago. In the 1970s and 1980s, they were conducing staff development for faculty that focused on teaching strategies when they discovered that as few as 10% of the participants implemented what they had learned. Rates of transfer of learning were low, even for people who had volunteered for training. For some reason, well-researched curriculum and teaching models did not find their way into general practice so that they could influence students’ learning environments. In a series of studies that began in 1980, they tested hypotheses related to the proposition that regular (weekly) seminars would enable teachers to practice and implement the content they were learning. These seminars were coaching sessions, focused on classroom implementation and the analysis of teaching, and included student responses. It was during these studies that they noticed a serendipitous result from these coaching studies: during these weekly sessions, peers developed into coaching teams, working collaboratively to improve teaching practice.Showers and Joyce began to formalize the peer coaching process. They discovered that members of peer coaching groups far exceeded their counterparts in retention of what they had learned, as well as greater implementation of new teaching strategies. The peer to peer connection appeared to be important to teacher development.
  • We wanted to take advantage of what has been learned about having peers coach and share advice and strategies with their faculty colleagues when we created Speed Designing. Our desire was to foster a group of faculty who could also serve as coaches and cheerleaders to their peers, sharing what they had learned about strategies for teaching and learning, and encouraging their peers to try it out.Since the time of Showers and Joyce’s early studies that led to the development of peer coaching as a concept, peer coaching has evolved to be more of a one-on-one meeting between a faculty member and a peer coach, with a very targeted focus for development.Our use, however, was to involve faculty in teaching other faculty, sharing best practices, and their own experiences with a particular teaching and learning strategy.
  • The source for our peer coaches came from another new innovation that we adopted to encourage faculty to acquire the skills and knowledge needed to be successful in our new curriculum. In the Fall of 2012, we developed graduate level coursework for a new certificate program in medical education, one that would enable early adopting faculty to serve as the disseminators and innovators for new ideas in the School of Medicine.A small core group of faculty were quite interested in our newly developed Teaching in Medical Education faculty fellows program, in which they would be some of the first to learn innovative approaches for teaching in both classroom and clinical settings.This small core group, which numbers about 50 now, has become a community of practice in that they are dedicated individuals who share a common knowledge base and language to speak about teaching and learning practices.
  • When we created the TiME program, as we refer to our Teaching in Medical Education faculty fellows program, we wanted it to serve the purpose of graduate education for faculty who were interested, and also to be a source for developing a cadre of academic leaders in medical education who could model best practices in undergraduate, clinical and graduate programs in the School of Medicine.Roy and Fidelma are part of this core group who have been taking courses in this graduate certificate program since January of 2013. It is these faculty who served as our peer coaches for the Speed Designing sessions.
  • I can describe the curriculum.
  • Talk about how this core group has become our innovators and early adopters for learning new teaching and assessment strategies. They were ideal for sharing best practices with peers less far along the “adoption” continuum. We do want to say here that for anyone who wants to adopt Speed Designing to their own work with faculty or with others, they do not necessarily need to create a graduate certificate program for advanced education to do it.The key principles are a common learning experience of sufficient duration to develop knowledge and skills and a uniform language for communicating best practices and ideas.
  • How the Speed Designing workshop was organized.
  • We chose to have two Speed Designing sessions, one week apart. The first was on using various instructional strategies with these topics introduced by faculty who were serving as peer coaches.
  • The second session, one week later, was on various strategies for assessments. Again, our peer coaches came from faculty who had participated in the graduate certificate program coursework.
  • Some of the comments that were made on end-of-session evaluations in both Speed Designing sessions. These photos were from the sessions themselves which were held in our new learning studios. These also served to introduce many faculty to this new learning environment, since we were only a month away from the launch of our new curriculum with the incoming class of first year medical students.
  • Six months after our Speed Designing sessions, we sent out a very brief survey to all who had participated in Speed Designing, both the faculty attendees and the faculty who were serving as peer coaches. We were particularly interested in whether or not the attendees had implemented any of the new strategies they learned, or if any thing in the social system had functioned as barriers or constraints. Since many of our faculty teach in the block schedule, we figured some may not have yet had an opportunity to implement what they had learned, and we wanted to know when they planned to do so.Finally, we wanted to explore the notion of diffusion and whether or not they shared what they learned with others. We were interested in this for both the faculty attendees and the faculty participants. Roy gives data results in conjunction with the next few slides and summarizes what worked, and where we still have “miles to go.”
  • Had anybody actually tried out the new ideas they learned about?
  • If not, what were the barriers or constraints that may have prevented them from doing so?
  • Did they have a timeline in mind for implementation, if it had not occurred yet?
  • Most importantly, had they shared what they learned with other peers? Are these ideas diffusing within our culture?
  • Summary of what the results tell us about learning and where we still have to go to continue to spread new innovative teaching practices throughout the SOM
  • We do realize that our faculty need ongoing practice and reinforcement to learn to implement new ideas.
  • For that reason, Speed Designing is part of a continuum of workshops, graduate coursework, special interest groups that meet frequently to support and coach those interested in trying new strategies. We have a new Web Portal under development, called iTeach which will host multimedia resources and content, and we plan to continue to implement more sessions of Speed Designing. All of this happens with opportunities for individual faculty consultation, as well.
  • Here’s what we have in mind. As our core faculty who are participating in our graduate certificate program implement the new ideas they are learning, we are going to host Speed Designing sessions so that they can continue to serve as peer coaches and spread news of these new ideas even further.
  • Now, we want to take our remaining time to ask that you turn to two or three people near you, and talk among yourselves to consider how the concepts of Speed Designing might work in your own environment. If not in faculty development opportunities, perhaps as some other innovative off-shoot of Speed Designing with other groups of learners. So, go ahead, turn to your neighbors, and explore how you might use or adapt this idea. After 5-10 minutes, we will ask that some of you share these ideas with the group as a whole.After report out, then close with Q & A. Thank you to our audience~

Chep presentation 2014 carter, sabo, rigby Chep presentation 2014 carter, sabo, rigby Presentation Transcript

  • Spreading the Gospel with Speed Designing: Faculty Development through Peer Coaching Terry Carter, Roy Sabo, and Fidelma Rigby Virginia Commonwealth University School of Medicine
  • The Problem
  • The Challenge
  • Unique Aspects of Teaching in a Medical School Block schedules 215 students in a class Learners that drink from a firehose!
  • Kurt Lewin’s Force Field Restraining Forces New Building Accreditation Standards Didactic Tradition New Curriculum Desire for Active Learning Resistant Faculty Lack of Knowledge about Pedagogy Lack of Facilitation Skills
  • The Road Ahead
  • The Solution: Speed Designing
  • Our Sources of Inspiration: Speed Dating
  • Ideas in Speed Dating Adapted to Speed Designing! Rapid, round robin sharing of information Introduction to potential “partners” Matchmaking to find a good fit with an instructional or assessment strategy
  • Diffusion of Innovations: Rogers (1962/2003)
  • Origins of Rogers’ Theory Anthropology Early Sociology Rural Sociology Education Industrial Sociology Medical Sociology
  • Five Stages of Accepting an Innovation Knowledge Persuasion Decision Implementation Confirmation During communication, an idea is rarely evaluated from a scientific standpoint; rather, subjective perceptions of the innovation influence diffusion
  • : Peer Coaching (Showers and Joyce, 1996)
  • Faculty as Cheerleaders and Coaches
  • Why It Worked: A Core Group of Faculty Trained in Educational Methods
  • Goals for the Program Enhance depth and breadth of faculty expertise to support teaching and learning in medicine. Foster the development of a cadre of academic leaders who can model best practices in teaching within undergraduate, clinical, and graduate programs. Promote leadership in the scholarship of teaching and learning (SoTL) through contributions in the medical education literature.
  • Courses in the Graduate Certificate Required to earn the Certificate Electives (Choose two) Instructional Strategies Performance Feedback and Simulation Curriculum Design Group and Team Facilitation Adult Learning Theory and Practice Digital Media Technologies for Teaching in Medicine Teaching as Scholarship in Medical Education Reflective Practice
  • Faculty in the TiME Program Became Influence and Credibility of Peers the Innovators and Early Adopters Sharing with Peers
  • How Speed Designing Sessions Worked Three hour commitment, Noon – 3 pm Lunch and Listen to 45 minutes of lecture • Writing goals and objectives • Alignment between goals & objectives, instructional and assessment strategies Move to the Learning Studios, one or two coaches per table Eight tables offering 15 minute overview of a teaching topic Used a Web-based timer to signal time to rotate among tables
  • Speed Designing with Instructional Strategies Case-based Learning Team-based Learning Learning Climate Just-in-Time Teaching POGIL Using Bloom’s Taxonomy Human Simulation Standardized Patients
  • Speed Designing with Assessment Strategies Oral Presentations Peer Assessments Using Bloom’s Taxonomy Using Rubrics Reflective Writing Self-Assessments Writing MCQs ePortfolios and Concept Maps
  • The most important thing I walked away with was a clearer understanding of how important course goals and objectives are… Really demystified the details of using some of these small group strategies … loved the different approaches, when prep is involved for students, and when it is not…
  • The most important thing I learned was how to develop a rubric … and how to encourage reflective writing in my course I never realized that peer evaluation was one of the best ways to evaluate at the highest levels of Bloom’s Taxonomy.
  • Six Months Later Which Workshop / What Role? Implementation of New Ideas? • How well did it work? • Barriers or constraints? • Intentions to use, if not yet? Did you share any of the ideas learned with peers?
  • Have They Tried it? How Did It Work?
  • If Not, What Barriers or Constraints Prevented Implementation?
  • Do they Intend to Use The Ideas They Learned? When?
  • Influence and Credibility of Peers Sharing with Peers What Have They Shared?
  • What We Have Learned about The Diffusion of New Ideas
  • Opportunities for Practice and Reinforcement
  • Support for Speed Designing Teaching in Medical Education (TiME) Faculty Fellows program of graduate courses Special Interest Groups iTeach Web Portal - Online Resources and Tutorials (under development) Lunchtime Learning Workshops
  • Additional Plans for Future Speed Designing Sessions Digital Media Technologies in Teaching Simulation in Medical Education Strategies for Reflective Practice
  • How Might You Use Speed Designing in Your Teaching and Learning Setting?
  • Credits George Ben Johnston Auditorium VCU MCV Campus Photo taken May 14, 2008 by taberandrew Collaborative Tables Jeanne Schlesinger, VCU School of Medicine, 2012 Doctor, Doctor! Used with permission from photographer, Littman, March 18, 2006 – All rights reserved otherwise
  • Credits Desert Leader Hamed Saber December 15, 2006 Diffusions of Innovations and!DiffusionOf Innovation.png Speed Dating Speed Dating Business Finance Style Singles Speed Dating, Washington, DC
  • Credits Peer Coaching ent_projects/peercoaching/ Peers – Kidspot, Peer Pressure at School Taken by Justin Coulson Student Activities Office presents: Speed Dating Taken by Ann Phan February 15, 2013 Speed Dating Taken by Linh Do November 25, 2011
  • Credits Virginia Commonwealth University Rams – NCAA Tournament Cheerleaders Shaka Smart Time Management vs. Drinking from a Firehose Getting kids to practice Why climb a ladder when you can climb a jungle gym
  • Credits SunGraph Calendar Grab and Go Learning- ASTD banner