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


     


J Dent Educ. 66(6): 730-738 2002
© 2002 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 Atchison, K.
Right arrow Articles by Cheffetz, S.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by Atchison, K.
Right arrow Articles by Cheffetz, S.
Journal of Dental Education, Vol 66, Issue 6, 730-738
Copyright © 2002 by American Dental Education Association


Articles

Critical issues for dentistry: PGD program directors respond

KA Atchison and SE Cheffetz

Discussion of critical issues facing postgraduate education in general dentistry (PGD) and dental education in general has been intense in the past decade. This study reports on critical issues raised by directors of PGD programs that may help direct future research and action within dental education and the larger profession. The analysis reports responses to an open-ended question sent to all U.S. PGD program directors regarding critical issues facing their training programs. Of 212 surveys, 169 program directors submitted written responses regarding critical issues. Twelve unique themes were identified: lack of postdoctoral applicants (two subthemes were high student debt and students' preference for private practice); student quality; professionalism and attitudes; number of postdoctoral positions; lack of funding; quality of facilities; special patient care; program curriculum; educator issues; mandatory or encouraged PGD year; value of dental program; and dentist shortage. Significant differences between AEGD and GPR directors were observed for two of the twelve areas: high student debt and value of dental program. The study provided insight into the thoughts of a large proportion of the U.S. PGD program directors "in the trenches." Some consideration of allowable expenses may be needed to align federal training support to best address program director needs.


This article has been cited by other articles:


Home page
J Dent EducHome page
C. S. Massey, T. P. Raybould, J. Skelton, A. S. Wrightson, and T. A. Smith
Advanced General Dentistry Program Directors' Attitudes and Behaviors Regarding Pediatric Dental Training for Residents
J Dent Educ., March 1, 2008; 72(3): 344 - 351.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]


Home page
J Dent EducHome page
R. S. Masella
Renewing Professionalism in Dental Education: Overcoming the Market Environment
J Dent Educ., February 1, 2007; 71(2): 205 - 216.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]




HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS
Copyright © 2002 by the American Dental Education Association.