Faculty Development Initiatives in Academic Dentistry: A Systematic Review

Abstract

The aims of this systematic review were to collect a list of published articles on dental faculty development and to determine the types and location of programs evaluated and years of publication. A subset of selected articles were then assessed using Kirkpatrick assessment model four levels: learner reaction, participant learning, participant behavioral change, and changes in organizational practice. The search, conducted in 2016, comprised all potentially relevant articles in the following databases: PubMed, EMBASE via Ovid, and ERIC. The study screening was done by three reviewers in multiple stages: by title, abstract, and full text review. Following deduplication, 257 titles were obtained; of those, 102 articles were selected for abstract review. As a result of that review, 32 articles were excluded, leaving 70 for data extraction. The majority of the 70 articles were about programs in the U.S., and two‐thirds were studies conducted at individual academic institutions. Most focused on faculty development initiatives (n=49), followed by retention (n=22), recruitment (n=16), and/or promotion/tenure (n=11). The year with the highest number of published articles was 1991 (n=10, 14%), followed by 2007 and 2011 (n=6, 8.6% each). Among the 12 articles evaluated with the Kirkpatrick model, most assessed Levels 1, 2, and 3, but very few addressed Level 4. Research in those 12 articles was conducted primarily at two dental schools: New York University College of Dentistry (n=5) and University of Florida College of Dentistry (n=4). This study generated a varied list of published articles on faculty development, but the results point to the need for research at more institutions and using additional methodologies.

Mentoring dental faculty: A survey of faculty with early development funding and supports

“…Defining evaluation and assessment criteria and piloting new theories or validated techniques for mentoring will further development of educational opportunities for mentors to expand their mentoring skills as departments and institutions advance recruitment and retention of faculty. 3,12…”

“…The number of junior faculty in academic and research centers remains low and underrepresented minority faculty, in particular, are concentrated in junior ranks. 2,3 Meaningful faculty development programs are specifically designed in part to overcome systemic and historical disadvantages junior faculty face and to increase academic success rates of all faculty. 4 Supportive mentoring relationships by more senior faculty members create a positive work environment and encourages collegiality, which spurs productivity and improves overall workplace satisfaction.…”

Outcomes from the Health Resources and Services Administration's Dental Faculty Development Program

“…10 Due to the varied nature of faculty development content and implementation, outcome evaluations tend to focus on faculty satisfaction, attitudes, knowledge, skills, academic activities, and professional networking, but not practice change or patient outcomes. 2,10,11 In 2012, HRSA utilized the Public Health Service Act Title VII, Section 748 (42 U.S.C. 293k) legislation to create the first funding opportunity focused solely on the development of faculty at dental training institutions.…”

Outcomes of a 2‐year, 5 cohort faculty development program

“…A systematic review on manuscripts related to faculty development at dental schools found most articles focused on self‐reported perceptions and attitudes about teaching and learning and/or assessment of knowledge, skills, and behaviors of faculty. This review suggests mixed methods research and longer term follow‐ups to research on faculty development programs 5 …”

“…This review suggests mixed methods research and longer term follow-ups to research on faculty development programs. 5 Faculty development, like most topics in academia, is handled in a variety of ways across institutions. In a 2016 survey, 40% of dental schools reported an Office of Faculty Affairs or similar focused on faculty development; the Office of Academic Affairs most often reported responsibility for faculty development activities outside of an Office of Faculty Affairs.…”