2014, 36: 765–768
HOW WE. . .
How we developed a role-based portfolio for teachers’ professional development EEVA PYO¨RA¨LA¨ University of Helsinki, Finland
Med Teach Downloaded from informahealthcare.com by Universitat de Girona on 01/26/15 For personal use only.
Abstract Faculty development requires practical tools for supporting teachers’ professional development. In a modern medical education context, teachers need to adapt to various educational roles. This article describes how a role-based portfolio with a qualitative self-assessment scale was developed. It strives to encourage and support teachers’ growth in different educational roles. The portfolio was developed between 2009 and 2012 at the University of Helsinki in dialogue with teachers involved in faculty development. It is based on the role framework presented by Harden and Crosby. Today, it also involves the educational premises of constructive alignment, reflection and a scholarly approach to teaching. The role-based portfolio has led the teachers to discover new educational roles and set goals in their professional development.
Introduction
Practice points
In higher education, faculty development seeks to stimulate and support teachers’ professional development (Steinert et al. 2006; McLean et al. 2008; Schofield et al. 2010). Effective faculty development is based on higher education theories of teaching and learning, implements versatile learning methods and reflective practices, and provides participants with peer support and constructive feedback (Steinert et al. 2006). Activities offered to teachers range from workshops and seminars to longitudinal courses, programmes and degrees. Faculty development needs to support teachers’ adaptation to the major changes that have taken place in medical education. Teacher-centred and lecture-based teaching has evolved into learning in small groups, supporting learning processes and collaborative knowledge construction (Edmunds & Brown 2010). The teacher’s task is to design learning activities and assessment that are aligned with the learning outcomes of the course and the curriculum (Biggs & Tang 2011; Norcini et al. 2011). Teachers today use experiential learning methods, virtual learning environments, simulators and clinical skills centres to support learning. They solicit feedback from students, and external evaluators audit educational programmes. All this requires teachers develop their educational thinking and practice. This article describes how we developed a role-based portfolio with a qualitative self-assessment scale in order to stimulate and support teachers’ growth in different educational roles. The portfolio is based on the role framework presented by Harden & Crosby (2000) and is underpinned by three educational premises: (1) constructive alignment (Biggs & Tang 2011), (2) reflection (Sandars 2009) and (3) a scholarly
The role-based portfolio, with a qualitative scale and role profile, was designed to help teachers meet the challenges of medical education today, where they need to adapt to various educational roles. The portfolio combines a role framework with the educational premises of constructive alignment, reflection and a scholarly approach to teaching. Teachers choose the roles in which they wish to improve. Their role profiles change throughout their career.
approach to teaching and learning (Trigwell et al. 2000; Fincher & Work 2006; McLean 2010).
How we started Faculty development began at the University of Helsinki in 1993 as part of the curriculum reform. Today, about 400 teachers have completed the course, which extends over one academic year and provides 10 European Credit Transfer and Accumulation System (ECTS) study credits, corresponding to 270 h of study. The overarching learning goals are to enable teachers to apply student-centred and constructively aligned approaches and to enhance reflective learning. The course, which is not obligatory but recommended to faculty members, consists of nine face-to-face sessions, individual and small group learning activities and assessment. The idea of developing the portfolio originated when the course was revised in
Correspondence: Eeva Pyo¨ra¨la¨, PhD, MME, Senior Lecturer in University Pedagogy, Medical Education Research & Development Team, Hjelt Institute, Faculty of Medicine, 00014 University of Helsinki, P.O. Box 41, Finland. Tel: +358-9-19125133; Mobile: +358503491553; Fax: +358-9-191 27518; E-mail: [email protected] ISSN 0142-159X print/ISSN 1466-187X online/14/90765–768 ß 2014 Informa UK Ltd. DOI: 10.3109/0142159X.2014.886763
765
Med Teach Downloaded from informahealthcare.com by Universitat de Girona on 01/26/15 For personal use only.
E. Pyo¨ra¨la¨
2008. The portfolio was designed as a longitudinal practical self-assessment tool to support teachers’ development. The portfolio design was inspired by Harden & Crosby (2000), who identified the six main activities of a medical teacher and further subdivided each role into two roles, making a total of 12 roles (Figure 1). These roles were validated with a questionnaire in which they asked faculty members to rate the importance of each role to the teaching programme as well as their current and future personal commitment to the roles on a 5-point scale (Harden & Crosby 2000). The questionnaire was translated into Finnish and was used at the beginning and end of the course in the 2008–2009 academic year. The role framework and results of the survey were then discussed with the participants. The survey showed that teachers were most committed to the role of clinical/ practical teacher and being a teaching role model.
Figure 1. Twelve roles of a teacher adapted from Harden & Crosby (2000).
Figure 2. 766
They expressed relatively little commitment to assessment roles and planning and resource development. They pointed out that the 5-point scale was inaccurate, and completing the questionnaire twice did not provide sufficient insight into how to improve their roles. The discussions and feedback received at the 2009 AMEE (Pyo¨ra¨la¨ et al. 2009) provided us with the motivation to develop a portfolio with a detailed qualitative self-assessment scale. Our ambition was to construct a tool to support teachers’ progress in different roles during the course and combine the role framework with educational theory.
What we did The development of the qualitative self-assessment scale took place between 2009 and 2012, with the qualitative definitions of progress in the 12 roles requiring several experimental rounds and revisions. Criteria for all 12 roles were developed through continuous dialogue with course participants and use of the medical education literature and the author’s experience as an educational developer. We decided to develop a five-level scale for the portfolio. The first version of the portfolio focused on individual educators’ teaching experiences and use of feedback. The teachers were also asked to provide a written assessment of themselves in different roles, describe how they used feedback to improve their educational practices, and produce a role profile (Figure 2) at the beginning, middle and end of the course, which they compared with those of their peers at each stage. The feedback for the first version of the portfolio suggested that the teachers appreciated the visual role profiles. They, however, criticized the emphasis on the teacher’s experience in the role, claiming that extensive experience alone was
An example of a role profile of a clinical teacher at the beginning and end of the course.
Med Teach Downloaded from informahealthcare.com by Universitat de Girona on 01/26/15 For personal use only.
How we developed a role-based portfolio
insufficient to improve the quality of teaching. Some teachers also felt that some roles were reserved primarily for senior faculty members and clinicians; others remarked that their research activity did not contribute to the portfolio. The development of the portfolio has taken five years of testing, data collection and revision of the qualitative descriptions. The current version of the portfolio (version 4) combines the role framework with the educational theories of constructive alignment, which emphasizes the alignment of learning activities with learning outcomes (Biggs & Tang 2011), reflective learning, which requires active processing of experiences to create a new level of understanding and practice (Sandars 2009), and a scholarly approach to teaching, which involves consulting educational literature in order to make informed interventions to improve teaching (Trigwell et al. 2000; Fincher & Work 2006; McLean 2010). The qualitative descriptions pertaining to each role are different, but they are constructed with the same logic (Table 1). The first level requires knowledge of the educational role, the second practice of the role, and the third application of the principle of constructive alignment in the role. The fourth level requires reflection on the role, and the fifth level is reached when teachers provide evidence of a scholarly approach to the role, applying research-based educational knowledge to their teaching. We also modified the educational roles to better correspond with teaching and learning practices in the Faculty. The tutor role refers to facilitating small group learning and collaborative construction of new knowledge and understanding in PBL tutorials and small groups (Dolmans et al. 2005; Edmunds & Brown 2010). The role of the learning facilitator refers to facilitating students’ learning processes applying student-centred approaches and providing students with constructive feedback. We elaborated on the definitions of all 12 roles to trigger progress in teachers’ thinking and practice. For example, when teachers advance as on-the-job role models, they are expected not only to be consistent professional role models but also to discuss the professional role and its limits and ethical dimensions with students. Teachers are expected to be academic role models, actively engaging students in discussion on the responsibilities of teachers and students and integrating them into the academic community. Table 1. Qualitative self-assessment scale for each role.
The portfolio instructions emphasize that course participants set their own goals and assess their development as educators during the course. The idea is not for them to advance in all roles but rather to choose the roles in which they wish to improve. As Harden & Crosby (2000) suggest, the role profiles of teachers change as their careers develop. Consequently, although all the roles are explored in the teaching unit, it is unlikely that they are present in one person (Harden & Crosby 2000). We believe that the role-based portfolio has helped teachers increase their interest in new educational roles and motivated them to set professional goals. Furthermore, they have learned to write reflective self-assessments and have developed a better understanding of the challenges of teaching (Pyo¨ra¨la¨ 2012).
What to do next Evaluation The next step in this educational development project is a systematic action research evaluation of the effectiveness of the portfolio as a tool for teachers’ professional development (McNiff & Whitehead 2011). The subjects are course participants who have given their consent for the study, and the research data consist of all material relating to the portfolios during their development process, including reflective writing, portfolios, feedback and observational notes.
Further use of the portfolio The development of the portfolio has been an important project for improving faculty development at the University of Helsinki and has received positive feedback from teachers and AMEE conference participants (Pyo¨ra¨la¨ et al. 2009; Pyo¨ra¨la¨ 2012). Moreover, it has been translated into English and Swedish for wider use in medical education, particularly through web-based environment. In an institution, a group profile of the individual staff members’ educational roles provides valuable information on the strengths and weaknesses of staff when implementing an educational programme. A group profile is useful for recognising the staff shortcomings and deciding how to better meet the range of educational roles required. Effective faculty development needs to be responsive to these demands and support teachers who are eager to advance, meet new challenges and take on new responsibilities and educational roles. The portfolio could also benefit from a sixth level, that of the scholarship of teaching and learning. This refers to peerreviewed publicly disseminated research on teaching and learning with a focus on the general, comprehensive improvement of student learning (Trigwell et al. 2000; Fincher & Work 2006; McLean 2010).This would encourage those faculty members who wish to take an active role in educational research, as they often need support in research methods and data analysis, mentoring, peer support and a community of practice where they feel safe to exchange ideas and present preliminary results.
767
E. Pyo¨ra¨la¨
Med Teach Downloaded from informahealthcare.com by Universitat de Girona on 01/26/15 For personal use only.
Conclusion This educational development project was initiated to encourage and support teachers’ professional development in a medical education context, and our decision to develop the portfolio and collaboration with them proved efficacious. We began the process with a quantitative questionnaire of the 12 roles of a medical teacher (Harden & Crosby 2000). Thereafter, by means of a thorough and scholarly approach, we developed a portfolio with a qualitative self-assessment scale for the 12 roles and validated it with a considerable number of medical teachers. Today, the portfolio integrates the role framework with educational theories of constructive alignment, reflective learning and a scholarly approach to teaching. The forthcoming study is expected provide further evidence of the effectiveness of the portfolio as a tool for teachers’ professional development. Questions of the credibility and reflexivity of the research process will then be thoroughly examined. Transferability, i.e. the potential to transfer the portfolio to other national and cultural contexts has been enhanced by detailed description of the context of the portfolio, the development process of the qualitative scale and the theoretical framework. The portfolio has been translated into English to provide opportunities for institutions in different countries to use it in faculty development and to provide practice-based knowledge of its applicability in different contexts.
Notes on contributors ¨ RA ¨ LA ¨ , PhD, MME, is a Senior Lecturer in University Pedagogy in EEVA PYO the Faculty of Medicine at the University of Helsinki in Finland and is responsible for faculty development. Her research interests include faculty development and communication skills.
Acknowledgements I wish to express my gratitude to the members of our faculty development team, Juha Nieminen, Matti Aarnio, Asta Toivonen and Anne Vierros. I would also like to thank Riitta
768
Mo¨ller and Charlotte Sile´n from the Karolinska Institute for their continuous support and constructive feedback during this project. Declaration of interest: The author reports no conflicts of interest. The author alone is responsible for the content and writing of this article.
References Biggs J, Tang C. 2011. Teaching for quality learning at university. 4th ed. Maidenhead: SRHE & Open University Press. Dolmans DHJM, De Grave W, Wolfhagen IHAP, van der Vleuten CPM. 2005. Problem-based learning: Future challenges for educational practice and research. Med Educ 39:732–741. Edmunds S, Brown G. 2010. Effective small group learning: AMEE Guide No. 48. Med Teach 32:715–726. Fincher RME, Work JA. 2006. Perspectives on the scholarship of teaching. Med Educ 40:293–295. Harden RM, Crosby J. 2000. The good teacher is more than a lecturer – The twelve roles of the teacher. Med Teach 22:334–347. McLean M. 2010. Scholarship, publication and career advancement in the health professions education: Guide Supplement 43.1 – Viewpoint. Med Teach 32:526–529. McLean M, Cilliers F, Van Wyk JM. 2008. Faculty development: Yesterday, today and tomorrow. AMEE Guide No 36. Med Teach 30:555–584. McNiff J, Whitehead J. 2011. All you need to know about action research. 2nd ed. London: Sage. Norcini J, Anderson B, Bollela, V, Burch V, Costa MJ, Duvivier, R, Galbraith R, Hays R, Kent A, Perrot V, Roberts T. 2011. Criteria for good assessment: Consensus statement and recommendations from the Ottawa 2010 Conference. Med Teach 33:206–214. Pyo¨ra¨la¨ E. 2012. Teachers’ reflection on roles of medical teachers. AMEE 2012, Lyon, France. Pyo¨ra¨la¨ E, Aarnio M, Nieminen J. 2009. The twelve roles of a teacher – A valuable framework for teachers’ pedagogical training. AMEE 2009, Ma´laga, Spain. Sandars J. 2009. The use of reflection in medical education: AMEE Guide No. 44. Med Teach 31:685–695. Schofield SJ, Bradley S, Macrae C, Nathwani D, Dent J. 2010. How we encourage faculty development. Med Teach 32:883–886. Steinert Y, Mann K, Centeno A, Dolmans D, Spencer J, Gelula M, Prideux D. 2006. A systematic review of faculty development initiatives designed to improve teaching effectiveness in medical education: BEME Guide No. 8. Med Teach 28:497–526. Trigwell K, Martin E, Benjamin J, Prossner M. 2000. Scholarship of Teaching: A model. High Educ Res Dev 19:155–168.
HOW WE. . .
How we developed a role-based portfolio for teachers’ professional development EEVA PYO¨RA¨LA¨ University of Helsinki, Finland
Med Teach Downloaded from informahealthcare.com by Universitat de Girona on 01/26/15 For personal use only.
Abstract Faculty development requires practical tools for supporting teachers’ professional development. In a modern medical education context, teachers need to adapt to various educational roles. This article describes how a role-based portfolio with a qualitative self-assessment scale was developed. It strives to encourage and support teachers’ growth in different educational roles. The portfolio was developed between 2009 and 2012 at the University of Helsinki in dialogue with teachers involved in faculty development. It is based on the role framework presented by Harden and Crosby. Today, it also involves the educational premises of constructive alignment, reflection and a scholarly approach to teaching. The role-based portfolio has led the teachers to discover new educational roles and set goals in their professional development.
Introduction
Practice points
In higher education, faculty development seeks to stimulate and support teachers’ professional development (Steinert et al. 2006; McLean et al. 2008; Schofield et al. 2010). Effective faculty development is based on higher education theories of teaching and learning, implements versatile learning methods and reflective practices, and provides participants with peer support and constructive feedback (Steinert et al. 2006). Activities offered to teachers range from workshops and seminars to longitudinal courses, programmes and degrees. Faculty development needs to support teachers’ adaptation to the major changes that have taken place in medical education. Teacher-centred and lecture-based teaching has evolved into learning in small groups, supporting learning processes and collaborative knowledge construction (Edmunds & Brown 2010). The teacher’s task is to design learning activities and assessment that are aligned with the learning outcomes of the course and the curriculum (Biggs & Tang 2011; Norcini et al. 2011). Teachers today use experiential learning methods, virtual learning environments, simulators and clinical skills centres to support learning. They solicit feedback from students, and external evaluators audit educational programmes. All this requires teachers develop their educational thinking and practice. This article describes how we developed a role-based portfolio with a qualitative self-assessment scale in order to stimulate and support teachers’ growth in different educational roles. The portfolio is based on the role framework presented by Harden & Crosby (2000) and is underpinned by three educational premises: (1) constructive alignment (Biggs & Tang 2011), (2) reflection (Sandars 2009) and (3) a scholarly
The role-based portfolio, with a qualitative scale and role profile, was designed to help teachers meet the challenges of medical education today, where they need to adapt to various educational roles. The portfolio combines a role framework with the educational premises of constructive alignment, reflection and a scholarly approach to teaching. Teachers choose the roles in which they wish to improve. Their role profiles change throughout their career.
approach to teaching and learning (Trigwell et al. 2000; Fincher & Work 2006; McLean 2010).
How we started Faculty development began at the University of Helsinki in 1993 as part of the curriculum reform. Today, about 400 teachers have completed the course, which extends over one academic year and provides 10 European Credit Transfer and Accumulation System (ECTS) study credits, corresponding to 270 h of study. The overarching learning goals are to enable teachers to apply student-centred and constructively aligned approaches and to enhance reflective learning. The course, which is not obligatory but recommended to faculty members, consists of nine face-to-face sessions, individual and small group learning activities and assessment. The idea of developing the portfolio originated when the course was revised in
Correspondence: Eeva Pyo¨ra¨la¨, PhD, MME, Senior Lecturer in University Pedagogy, Medical Education Research & Development Team, Hjelt Institute, Faculty of Medicine, 00014 University of Helsinki, P.O. Box 41, Finland. Tel: +358-9-19125133; Mobile: +358503491553; Fax: +358-9-191 27518; E-mail: [email protected] ISSN 0142-159X print/ISSN 1466-187X online/14/90765–768 ß 2014 Informa UK Ltd. DOI: 10.3109/0142159X.2014.886763
765
Med Teach Downloaded from informahealthcare.com by Universitat de Girona on 01/26/15 For personal use only.
E. Pyo¨ra¨la¨
2008. The portfolio was designed as a longitudinal practical self-assessment tool to support teachers’ development. The portfolio design was inspired by Harden & Crosby (2000), who identified the six main activities of a medical teacher and further subdivided each role into two roles, making a total of 12 roles (Figure 1). These roles were validated with a questionnaire in which they asked faculty members to rate the importance of each role to the teaching programme as well as their current and future personal commitment to the roles on a 5-point scale (Harden & Crosby 2000). The questionnaire was translated into Finnish and was used at the beginning and end of the course in the 2008–2009 academic year. The role framework and results of the survey were then discussed with the participants. The survey showed that teachers were most committed to the role of clinical/ practical teacher and being a teaching role model.
Figure 1. Twelve roles of a teacher adapted from Harden & Crosby (2000).
Figure 2. 766
They expressed relatively little commitment to assessment roles and planning and resource development. They pointed out that the 5-point scale was inaccurate, and completing the questionnaire twice did not provide sufficient insight into how to improve their roles. The discussions and feedback received at the 2009 AMEE (Pyo¨ra¨la¨ et al. 2009) provided us with the motivation to develop a portfolio with a detailed qualitative self-assessment scale. Our ambition was to construct a tool to support teachers’ progress in different roles during the course and combine the role framework with educational theory.
What we did The development of the qualitative self-assessment scale took place between 2009 and 2012, with the qualitative definitions of progress in the 12 roles requiring several experimental rounds and revisions. Criteria for all 12 roles were developed through continuous dialogue with course participants and use of the medical education literature and the author’s experience as an educational developer. We decided to develop a five-level scale for the portfolio. The first version of the portfolio focused on individual educators’ teaching experiences and use of feedback. The teachers were also asked to provide a written assessment of themselves in different roles, describe how they used feedback to improve their educational practices, and produce a role profile (Figure 2) at the beginning, middle and end of the course, which they compared with those of their peers at each stage. The feedback for the first version of the portfolio suggested that the teachers appreciated the visual role profiles. They, however, criticized the emphasis on the teacher’s experience in the role, claiming that extensive experience alone was
An example of a role profile of a clinical teacher at the beginning and end of the course.
Med Teach Downloaded from informahealthcare.com by Universitat de Girona on 01/26/15 For personal use only.
How we developed a role-based portfolio
insufficient to improve the quality of teaching. Some teachers also felt that some roles were reserved primarily for senior faculty members and clinicians; others remarked that their research activity did not contribute to the portfolio. The development of the portfolio has taken five years of testing, data collection and revision of the qualitative descriptions. The current version of the portfolio (version 4) combines the role framework with the educational theories of constructive alignment, which emphasizes the alignment of learning activities with learning outcomes (Biggs & Tang 2011), reflective learning, which requires active processing of experiences to create a new level of understanding and practice (Sandars 2009), and a scholarly approach to teaching, which involves consulting educational literature in order to make informed interventions to improve teaching (Trigwell et al. 2000; Fincher & Work 2006; McLean 2010). The qualitative descriptions pertaining to each role are different, but they are constructed with the same logic (Table 1). The first level requires knowledge of the educational role, the second practice of the role, and the third application of the principle of constructive alignment in the role. The fourth level requires reflection on the role, and the fifth level is reached when teachers provide evidence of a scholarly approach to the role, applying research-based educational knowledge to their teaching. We also modified the educational roles to better correspond with teaching and learning practices in the Faculty. The tutor role refers to facilitating small group learning and collaborative construction of new knowledge and understanding in PBL tutorials and small groups (Dolmans et al. 2005; Edmunds & Brown 2010). The role of the learning facilitator refers to facilitating students’ learning processes applying student-centred approaches and providing students with constructive feedback. We elaborated on the definitions of all 12 roles to trigger progress in teachers’ thinking and practice. For example, when teachers advance as on-the-job role models, they are expected not only to be consistent professional role models but also to discuss the professional role and its limits and ethical dimensions with students. Teachers are expected to be academic role models, actively engaging students in discussion on the responsibilities of teachers and students and integrating them into the academic community. Table 1. Qualitative self-assessment scale for each role.
The portfolio instructions emphasize that course participants set their own goals and assess their development as educators during the course. The idea is not for them to advance in all roles but rather to choose the roles in which they wish to improve. As Harden & Crosby (2000) suggest, the role profiles of teachers change as their careers develop. Consequently, although all the roles are explored in the teaching unit, it is unlikely that they are present in one person (Harden & Crosby 2000). We believe that the role-based portfolio has helped teachers increase their interest in new educational roles and motivated them to set professional goals. Furthermore, they have learned to write reflective self-assessments and have developed a better understanding of the challenges of teaching (Pyo¨ra¨la¨ 2012).
What to do next Evaluation The next step in this educational development project is a systematic action research evaluation of the effectiveness of the portfolio as a tool for teachers’ professional development (McNiff & Whitehead 2011). The subjects are course participants who have given their consent for the study, and the research data consist of all material relating to the portfolios during their development process, including reflective writing, portfolios, feedback and observational notes.
Further use of the portfolio The development of the portfolio has been an important project for improving faculty development at the University of Helsinki and has received positive feedback from teachers and AMEE conference participants (Pyo¨ra¨la¨ et al. 2009; Pyo¨ra¨la¨ 2012). Moreover, it has been translated into English and Swedish for wider use in medical education, particularly through web-based environment. In an institution, a group profile of the individual staff members’ educational roles provides valuable information on the strengths and weaknesses of staff when implementing an educational programme. A group profile is useful for recognising the staff shortcomings and deciding how to better meet the range of educational roles required. Effective faculty development needs to be responsive to these demands and support teachers who are eager to advance, meet new challenges and take on new responsibilities and educational roles. The portfolio could also benefit from a sixth level, that of the scholarship of teaching and learning. This refers to peerreviewed publicly disseminated research on teaching and learning with a focus on the general, comprehensive improvement of student learning (Trigwell et al. 2000; Fincher & Work 2006; McLean 2010).This would encourage those faculty members who wish to take an active role in educational research, as they often need support in research methods and data analysis, mentoring, peer support and a community of practice where they feel safe to exchange ideas and present preliminary results.
767
E. Pyo¨ra¨la¨
Med Teach Downloaded from informahealthcare.com by Universitat de Girona on 01/26/15 For personal use only.
Conclusion This educational development project was initiated to encourage and support teachers’ professional development in a medical education context, and our decision to develop the portfolio and collaboration with them proved efficacious. We began the process with a quantitative questionnaire of the 12 roles of a medical teacher (Harden & Crosby 2000). Thereafter, by means of a thorough and scholarly approach, we developed a portfolio with a qualitative self-assessment scale for the 12 roles and validated it with a considerable number of medical teachers. Today, the portfolio integrates the role framework with educational theories of constructive alignment, reflective learning and a scholarly approach to teaching. The forthcoming study is expected provide further evidence of the effectiveness of the portfolio as a tool for teachers’ professional development. Questions of the credibility and reflexivity of the research process will then be thoroughly examined. Transferability, i.e. the potential to transfer the portfolio to other national and cultural contexts has been enhanced by detailed description of the context of the portfolio, the development process of the qualitative scale and the theoretical framework. The portfolio has been translated into English to provide opportunities for institutions in different countries to use it in faculty development and to provide practice-based knowledge of its applicability in different contexts.
Notes on contributors ¨ RA ¨ LA ¨ , PhD, MME, is a Senior Lecturer in University Pedagogy in EEVA PYO the Faculty of Medicine at the University of Helsinki in Finland and is responsible for faculty development. Her research interests include faculty development and communication skills.
Acknowledgements I wish to express my gratitude to the members of our faculty development team, Juha Nieminen, Matti Aarnio, Asta Toivonen and Anne Vierros. I would also like to thank Riitta
768
Mo¨ller and Charlotte Sile´n from the Karolinska Institute for their continuous support and constructive feedback during this project. Declaration of interest: The author reports no conflicts of interest. The author alone is responsible for the content and writing of this article.
References Biggs J, Tang C. 2011. Teaching for quality learning at university. 4th ed. Maidenhead: SRHE & Open University Press. Dolmans DHJM, De Grave W, Wolfhagen IHAP, van der Vleuten CPM. 2005. Problem-based learning: Future challenges for educational practice and research. Med Educ 39:732–741. Edmunds S, Brown G. 2010. Effective small group learning: AMEE Guide No. 48. Med Teach 32:715–726. Fincher RME, Work JA. 2006. Perspectives on the scholarship of teaching. Med Educ 40:293–295. Harden RM, Crosby J. 2000. The good teacher is more than a lecturer – The twelve roles of the teacher. Med Teach 22:334–347. McLean M. 2010. Scholarship, publication and career advancement in the health professions education: Guide Supplement 43.1 – Viewpoint. Med Teach 32:526–529. McLean M, Cilliers F, Van Wyk JM. 2008. Faculty development: Yesterday, today and tomorrow. AMEE Guide No 36. Med Teach 30:555–584. McNiff J, Whitehead J. 2011. All you need to know about action research. 2nd ed. London: Sage. Norcini J, Anderson B, Bollela, V, Burch V, Costa MJ, Duvivier, R, Galbraith R, Hays R, Kent A, Perrot V, Roberts T. 2011. Criteria for good assessment: Consensus statement and recommendations from the Ottawa 2010 Conference. Med Teach 33:206–214. Pyo¨ra¨la¨ E. 2012. Teachers’ reflection on roles of medical teachers. AMEE 2012, Lyon, France. Pyo¨ra¨la¨ E, Aarnio M, Nieminen J. 2009. The twelve roles of a teacher – A valuable framework for teachers’ pedagogical training. AMEE 2009, Ma´laga, Spain. Sandars J. 2009. The use of reflection in medical education: AMEE Guide No. 44. Med Teach 31:685–695. Schofield SJ, Bradley S, Macrae C, Nathwani D, Dent J. 2010. How we encourage faculty development. Med Teach 32:883–886. Steinert Y, Mann K, Centeno A, Dolmans D, Spencer J, Gelula M, Prideux D. 2006. A systematic review of faculty development initiatives designed to improve teaching effectiveness in medical education: BEME Guide No. 8. Med Teach 28:497–526. Trigwell K, Martin E, Benjamin J, Prossner M. 2000. Scholarship of Teaching: A model. High Educ Res Dev 19:155–168.
