The aim of this study was to compare the learning preferences of millennial dental hygiene students (born between 1982 and 2002) in the U.S. with the teaching methods used by their non-millennial instructors. Cross-sectional surveys were developed with 21-item, five-point Likert scales to examine students' preferences for and faculty use of lecture, collaborative activities, technology, independent work, and group discussion. Surveys were emailed to U.S. dental hygiene program directors in September 2015. The respondents totaled 800 students and 343 faculty members-approximately 5% of all dental hygiene students and 6.8% of all dental hygiene faculty members in the U.S. The results showed that the responding faculty members (88.7%) used case studies more than the students (61.2%) preferred and that the students (71.4%) preferred games when learning more than the faculty members (57.2%) used them (p<0.0001). Student respondents (82.1%) preferred handouts for lecture more than did the faculty respondents (58.8%; p<0.0001). Faculty respondents expected students to read before class 39.3% more than student respondents read (p<0.0001). Student respondents preferred study guides for exams 39.2% more than the faculty respondents provided them (p<0.0001). Participating faculty members (84.0%) had students work in groups more than these students preferred (57.8%), and 92% of these faculty members used group activities in class (p<0.0001). The responses of the millennial dental hygiene students in this study were consistent with previous research on millennial traits. This study found areas of disagreement between students and faculty members on the use of case studies, study guides, and group work. Although these students stated they preferred lecture over group work, trends in education stress using active learning over lecture.Ms.

Dental and dental hygiene faculty members often do not provide consistent instruction in the clinical environment, especially in tasks requiring clinical judgment. From previous efforts to calibrate faculty members in calculus detection using typodonts, researchers have suggested using human subjects and emerging technology to improve consistency in clinical instruction. The purpose of this pilot study was to determine if a dental endoscopy-assisted training program would improve intra-and interrater reliability of dental hygiene faculty members in calculus detection. Training included an ODU 11/12 explorer, typodonts, and dental endoscopy. A convenience sample of six participants was recruited from the dental hygiene faculty at a California community college, and a two-group randomized experimental design was utilized. Intra-and interrater reliability was measured before and after calibration training. Pretest and posttest Kappa averages of all participants were compared using repeated measures (split-plot) ANOVA to determine the effectiveness of the calibration training on intra-and interrater reliability. The results showed that both kinds of reliability signiicantly improved for all participants and the training group improved signiicantly in interrater reliability from pretest to posttest. Calibration training was beneicial to these dental hygiene faculty members, especially those beginning with less than full agreement. This study suggests that calculus detection calibration training utilizing dental endoscopy can effectively improve interrater reliability of dental and dental hygiene clinical educators. Future studies should include human subjects, involve more participants at multiple locations, and determine whether improved rater reliability can be sustained over time.

Calibration among faculty is challenging to achieve and maintain. In this study, calibration refers to the training process by which standardization of chart documentation in a SOAP note format was achieved. In the SOAP format, chart entries by health care providers are written in the following categories: Subjective data, Objective data, Assessment, and Plans. The primary training "effect" or outcome that was measured in this study was the capacity of faculty members to write a SOAP note that adhered to prescribed standards for chart documentation. This study was conducted to assess the short-term effects of training and determine whether faculty members' capacity to write appropriately constructed SOAP notes could be sustained for one year. Eight dental hygiene faculty members at the University of Minnesota participated in a pre-training assessment in which they prepared a SOAP note based on a patient case, completed a training session on writing SOAP notes, and completed a post-training test shortly after training that also consisted of writing a SOAP note based on a patient's case. One year later, a follow-up test, similar to the pre-and post-tests, was conducted. Each component of the SOAP note was compared and scored against a gold standard benchmark score of 29 that represented the number of items that should have been included in an ideal SOAP note in the estimation of the investigators, based on chart documentation guidelines of the University of Minnesota Dental Hygiene Division. The mean score for the pre-test was 18.25 (SD=2.82), which represented 63 percent of the benchmark gold standard score of 29. The post-test mean score immediately after training was 24.63 (SD=2.13; 84.9 percent of the benchmark score), and the one-year follow-up mean score was 22.75 (SD=1.83; 78.4 percent of the gold standard benchmark). From the pre-test to the post-test administered in close approximation to the SOAP note training, faculty members' approximation of the gold standard benchmark increased by 35 percent, or 6.28 points, and from the post-test to the follow-up test one year subsequently, approximation of the benchmark score decreased by approximately 1 percent or 1.88 points. Friedman's test indicated that the differences in mean scores for the pre-test, post-test, and follow-up test were significant. The Sign test was used for post hoc tests; alpha was adjusted using Bonferroni's procedure. Conclusions support a hypothesis that faculty capacity to write a SOAP note that adheres to standards can be increased through training and that the effects can be maintained over a period of approximately one year.

Educators in all academic disciplines have been encouraged to utilize assessment strategies to evaluate students' critical thinking. The purpose of this study was to assess the viability of the modiied objective structured clinical examination (m-OSCE) to evaluate critical thinking in dental hygiene education. This evaluation utilized a convenience sample of senior dental hygiene students. Students participated in the m-OSCE in which portions of a patient case were revealed at four stations. The exam consisted of multiple-choice questions intended to measure students' ability to utilize critical thinking skills. Additionally, there was one ill-in-the-blank question and a treatment plan that was completed at the ifth station. The results of this study revealed that the m-OSCE did not reliably measure dental hygiene students' critical thinking. Statistical analysis found no satisfactory reliability within the multiple-choice questions and moderately reliable results within the treatment planning portion of the examination. In addition, the item analysis found gaps in students' abilities to transfer clinical evidence/data to basic biomedical knowledge as demonstrated through the multiple-choice questioning results. This outcome warrants further investigation of the utility of the m-OSCE, with a focus on modiications to the evaluation questions, grading rubric, and patient case.