Electronic curriculum, or E-curriculum, refers to computer-based learning including educational materials available on CD or DVD, online courses, electronic mechanisms to search the literature, email, and various applications of instructional technology including providing laptops to students, multimedia projection systems, and Internet-compatible classrooms. In spite of enthusiasm about the potential for E-curriculum to enhance dental education, there is minimal guidance in the literature to assist schools with implementation. The study objectives were: 1) identify U.S. and Canadian dental schools that have initiated mandatory laptop programs and assess cost, faculty development issues, extent of curricular use, problems, and qualitative perceptions; 2) determine the extent to which twenty-two other E-curriculum resources were available and used at North American dental schools; and 3) identify factors that influenced E-curriculum implementation. A twenty-six item questionnaire, known as the Electronic Curriculum Implementation Survey (ECIS), was mailed to all sixty-six North American dental schools (ten Canadian and fifty-six U.S. schools) during 2002-03 with a response rate of 100 percent. Twenty-five of the twenty-six ECIS questions employed a menu-driven, forced choice format, but respondents could provide amplifying comments. Fifty-three questionnaires were completed by associate deans for academic affairs, three by deans, and ten by instructional technology (IT) managers, IT committee chairs, or directors of dental informatics departments. The survey found that E-curriculum implementation among North American dental schools is following the classic innovation pattern in which a few early adopting institutions proceed rapidly while the majority of potential adopters make modifications slowly. Fourteen U.S. dental schools have established mandatory laptop programs for students. Ten of these laptop programs were created in the past two years; respondents reported numerous growing pains but were generally pleased with their progress. Other E-curriculum capabilities were incorporated into courses more frequently at laptop schools than the fifty-two non-laptop schools including websites, online course evaluations, and instructor use of email to communicate with students. Few dental schools use online courses, and at most schools, few faculty have received training in online instructional techniques. Virtually all North American dental schools have provided substantial instructional technology resources to their faculty, but use of twenty-two components and capabilities of E-curriculum was limited, especially at schools without laptop programs. Various faculty-related issues were reported as implementation barriers including lack of time, skill, and incentive to develop educational software. We conclude that many North American dental schools, especially those with laptop programs, are functioning at the "learn by doing" phase of initial implementation in a four-stage innovation adoption model. E-curriculum plann...

Health care, including oral health care and oral health education, is under great stress in the United States. The cost of and access to care, the cost of dental education, and a shortage of educators have led leaders in dental education, organized dentistry, and the public sector to underscore the problem. One of the proposed solutions is to find synergies and new health care and education models by building bridges among the health professions. One potential solution is being implemented at the NYU College of Dentistry (NYUCD). Dentistry and nursing are seemingly unrelated professions, and they are rarely if ever modeled together. That is about to change with the joining together of NYUCD and the Division of Nursing of the NYU Steinhardt School of Education in creating a College of Nursing within the College of Dentistry. This process has not been without controversy. Following the Division of Nursing's request to join NYUCD, and the subsequent announcement of the proposed combination by NYU in December 2004, some members of the dental profession responded by questioning the appropriateness of the merger and the similarity of the two programs. Nevertheless, substantial parallels exist in the education and practice of dentists and nurse practitioners (NP) including basic, social, and some clinical science education, practice models, research synergies, and community service. However, similarities in the core competencies of these professions have not been analyzed formally and in detail. Accordingly, the purpose of this study was to compare the core competencies of nurse practitioner and dental education programs. The results show a surprising overlap of the core competencies of the dental and nursing professions (38 percent partial or total overlap). A similar overlap with medicine also exists, albeit lower (25.4 percent). These results are notable because they demonstrate that the three health professions, independently of one another, developed very similar basic competencies and learning objectives. These data should encourage other health professions programs to seek new collaborative models for education, beyond the current silos of training, and new health care delivery systems as has been strongly recommended by the Institute of Medicine. Such collaborative education redirects health care toward providing truly interdisciplinary comprehensive primary care for patients.

In spite of efforts by many dental schools to provide information technology resources for students, only a handful of studies have been conducted to determine what dental students think about these initiatives. There are no reports in the literature describing students' perceptions of mandatory laptop programs, which are now being implemented by at least 25 percent of North American dental schools. In schools that have implemented laptop programs, students are required either to enroll with their own laptops that meet specifications or to purchase a laptop from the school at matriculation. In some schools, students are also required to purchase curriculum support software that is bundled with the laptop. This study was conducted to determine students' opinions at U.S. dental schools with mandatory laptop programs about these aspects of this information technology initiative: frequency of use, perceived necessity of use, note-typing during lectures, effectiveness of training, influence on study habits, benefits, implementation problems, added value in relation to added tuition costs, impact on quality of dental education, overall rating of the laptop experience, and impact of the laptop on use of other electronic curriculum resources. Responses of students at schools that purchased packaged curriculum support software from a commercial vendor were compared with students' responses at schools where faculty provided their own educational software. Responses were also compared among freshmen, sophomores, and upperclassmen in a cross-sectional sample. In 2004, approximately 800 dental students at fourteen dental schools responded to eleven questions that requested their impressions and evaluation of mandatory laptop programs and associated educational software. These questions comprised one section of the IREC Students' Questionnaire (IREC=Institutional Readiness for Electronic Curriculum) that assessed students' perceptions of various aspects of information technology at their schools. The majority of students (63 percent) reported that the laptop and associated software were not essential for successful performance in their courses primarily because few instructors had modified their courses to take advantage of laptop capacities. Slightly more than half of the students reported their training was good or excellent, but felt that classroom-based "one size fits all" training was not effective. Less than 15 percent of the students reported that they had made substantial changes in their study habits as a consequence of the laptop program. The benefits perceived by students were primarily related to enhanced email communication with classmates and instructors and convenient access to the Internet and teachers' PowerPoint presentations. Implementation barriers included the inconvenience of carrying laptops to classes, lack of incentive to use the laptop and software because instructors did not require it, and poor quality software. Only 32 percent of students agreed that the value of the laptop and associated software ...

Many dental schools are currently struggling with the adoption of emerging technologies and the incorporation of these technologies into the educational process. Dental students exhibit an increasing degree of digital comfort when using social networking, mobile devices, search engines, or e-textbooks. Although the majority of students might consider themselves to be very skilled at using information technology, many faculty members would claim the opposite when evaluating their own knowledge and skills in the use of technology. As the use of technology, both formally and informally, continues to increase, dental educators are faced with many questions, such as: Does students' digital comfort disguise a lack of information literacy? What is the appropriate path of implementing technology into teaching and learning, and how can institutions support such an implementation? This article surveys a series of myths that exist about the use of technology in education and raises questions about their validity and how dental educators can avoid being misled by them. Mr. Stein is a Graduate Fellow

Introduction The goal of this project was to use the Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research (CFIR) as the theoretical foundation for developing a web-based clinical decision support system (CDSS) for primary care screening and care coordination by dental hygienists at chairside. Methods First, we appraised New York State education and scope of practice requirements for dental hygienists with input from health experts who constituted a Senior Advisory Board for the project, and reviewed current professional guidelines and best practices for tobacco use, hypertension and diabetes screening, and nutrition counseling at chairside. Second, we created algorithms for these four health issues (tobacco, hypertension, diabetes, and nutrition) using evidence-based guidelines endorsed by authoritative professional bodies. Third, an information technology specialist incorporated the algorithms into a tool using an iterative process to refine the CDSS, with input from dental hygienists, dentists, Senior Advisory Board members and research staff. Results An evidence-based CDSS for use by dental hygienists at chairside for tobacco use, hypertension and diabetes screening, and nutrition counseling was developed with the active participation of the individuals involved in the implementation process. Conclusions CDSS technology may potentially be leveraged to enhance primary care screening and coordination by dental hygienists at chairside, leading to improved patient care. Using the CFIR as a pragmatic structure for implementing this intervention across multiple settings, the developed CDSS is available for downloading and adaptation to diverse dental settings and other primary care sensitive conditions.

Digital textbooks are being used to reduce production and storage costs of printed copies, enhance usage, and include search capabilities, but the use of digital texts is not universally accepted. In 2001, the New York University College of Dentistry introduced a digital reference library, the VitalBook. Beginning in 2005, the college annually surveyed senior students and, from 2012, also surveyed alumni on their opinions and extent of use of the VitalBook. The aim of this study was to evaluate 12 years of students' perspectives and three years of alumni perspectives on the value of the VitalBook to their dental educational experience. Students were asked how frequently they used the VitalBook, if it was a good investment, if they would use it after graduation, and if they would recommend it to others. Alumni were asked the last three questions. This study reports the results from 4,105 students over 12 years (average response rate 95.3%) and 184 alumni over three years (average response rate 17.4%). The results indicated that students used the VitalBook on average 24% of their study time, but they were split regarding the other questions. The majority opinion in 2005 was negative on all questions. These opinions shifted to become more favorable to a peak in 2010, but declined since then to a more negative overall view of the VitalBook. A split opinion among students continued through 2016, with fewer recommending it although more considered it a good investment with plans to use it after graduation. Alumni mirrored their responses as students. These results suggest that, as more flexible and dynamic digitized reference systems emerge, the use of student-paid traditional digitized textbooks may become an even less favored choice.

No abstract