JDE
HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS
QUICK SEARCH:   [advanced]


     

J Dent Educ. 65(8): 768-776 2001
© 2001 American Dental Education Association
This Article
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Services
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Similar articles in PubMed
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrow reprints & permissions
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via HighWire
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by O'Neill, P.
Right arrow Articles by Taylor, C.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by O'Neill, P.
Right arrow Articles by Taylor, C.
Journal of Dental Education, Vol 65, Issue 8, 768-776
Copyright © 2001 by American Dental Education Association

Articles

Responding to the need for faculty development: a survey of U.S. and Canadian dental schools

PN O'Neill and CD Taylor

The Office of Professional Development at The University of Texas-Houston Health Science Center Dental Branch was established in November 1996 in order to meet the professional development needs of the faculty, staff, and administration. Although other dental schools share similar needs, our research revealed no study to determine how dental schools managed their faculty development needs. Therefore, a preliminary survey to collect data about offices similar to ours was developed and sent to the deans of fifty-four U.S. schools including Puerto Rico and ten Canadian schools. Thirty-seven schools (58 percent) responded, and it was determined that five schools (14 percent) had Offices of Professional Development and seven (19 percent) had Offices of Faculty Affairs. Based on these results, an expanded follow-up survey was conducted. The respondents were asked to indicate 1) which entity within the school was primarily responsible for handling faculty development, and 2) which entity actually sponsored each of eighteen faculty development activities. With a response from thirty-three U.S. schools (61 percent) and six Canadian schools (60 percent), six administrative structures (models) for faculty development were identified: 1) Office of Academic Affairs, 2) Departmental Chair, 3) a Faculty Development Committee, 4) an Office of the Dean, 5) an Office of Faculty/Professional Development, and 6) Other Resources.


This article has been cited by other articles:


Home page
 J Dent EducHome page
L. S. Behar-Horenstein, G. Schneider-Mitchell, and R. Graff
Faculty Perceptions of a Professional Development Seminar
J Dent Educ., April 1, 2008; 72(4): 472 - 483.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

Home page
 J Dent EducHome page
W. D. Hendricson, E. Anderson, S. C. Andrieu, D. G. Chadwick, J. R. Cole, M. C. George, G. N. Glickman, J. F. Glover, J. S. Goldberg, N. K. Haden, et al.
Does Faculty Development Enhance Teaching Effectiveness?
J Dent Educ., December 1, 2007; 71(12): 1513 - 1533.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

Home page
 J Dent EducHome page
K. R. Dalrymple, C. Wuenschell, and C. F. Shuler
Development and Implementation of a Comprehensive Faculty Development Program in PBL Core Skills.
J Dent Educ., September 1, 2006; 70(9): 948 - 955.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]


HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS
Copyright © 2001 by the American Dental Education Association.