September 24, 2012

1. Advancing Educators and Education: The Role of AcademiesHaile T. Debas Academy of Medical Educators Celebration of New Members September 24, 2012 Blohm

2. WHYAre a Quarter of Faculty Considering Leaving Academic Medicine?

3. Why Are a Quarter of Faculty Considering Leaving Academic Medicine? • 26 U.S. Medical Schools 2007-2009 • 52% response rate • Surveyed about: • Engagement • Advancement • Relationships • Diversity • Equity • Leadership • Institutional values • Work-life integration • 14% seriously considered leaving institution, 21% academic medicine due to dissatisfaction Pololi LH et al. Why Are a Quarter of Faculty Considering Leaving Academic Medicine? A Study of Their Perceptions of Institutional Culture and Intentions to Leave at 26 Representative U.S. Medical Schools. Acad Med. 2012;87:859–869.

4. Why?Pololi et al. 2012 Factors associated with leaving academic medicine Factors associated with leaving institution only Shared Factors • Low relatedness/inclusion • Low engagement • Low self-efficacy • Low values alignment • High leadership aspirations • High URMM equity • Low school commitment to improve support for faculty • High ethical/moral distress • Younger faculty • Having MD degree • Primary role is research • Low institutional support

5. Academies… Recognize Support Mentor Promote • Low relatedness/inclusion • Low engagement • Low self-efficacy • Low values alignment • High leadership aspirations • High URMM equity • Low school commitment to improve support for faculty • High ethical/moral distress • Younger faculty • Having MD degree • Primary role is research • Low institutional support Develop Create Community Pololi et. al. 2012

6. “…teaching faculty members [in academies] have a new set of colleagues from across the school who share a common passion for teaching and who are being mentored in teaching and scholarship. Academies provide a second academic ‘home.’” The Academy Movement Irby DM, Cooke M, Lowenstein D, Richards B. The academy movement: A structural approach to reinvigorating the educational mission. Acad Med. 2004;79:729 –736.

7. Characteristics of AcademiesSearle et al. 2010 • 2008 national survey (122 schools, 96% rr) • 36 Academies • Nomination – 50% self nomination • Selection of members • 69% standards-referenced vs. normative • 22% used peer review • Criteria: Quality of teaching, educational leadership, development of ed. Materials, publications, ed. Research efforts Searle NS et. al. The prevalence and practice of Academies of Medical Educators: A survey of U.S. Medical Schools. Acad Med. Jan 2010

8. Academies Goals Data from Searle et al. 2010

9. Benefits to the Institution Data from Searle et al. 2010

10. Benefits for Members Data from Searle et al. 2010

11. How do academies differ?andWhat words do they use?

12. Declaration of Independence

13. Greenpeace

14. Haile T. Debas Academy of Medical Educators Mission: To support and advance the teaching mission of the UCSF School of Medicine and the people who carry it out. Goals: Enhance the status of teachers Promote and reward teaching excellence Foster curricular innovation Encourage scholarship in medical education

15. UCSF Academy of Medical Educators - MISSION

16. UCSF Academy of Medical EducatorsWEBSITE TEXT

17. Harvard Medical School Academy“About” Page (Goals)

18. Mount Sinai School of Medicine, Institute for Medical Education – Mission & Goals

19. Louisiana State University Academy for the Advancement of Education ScholarshipMission, Vision, Purpose

20. University of North Carolina School of Medicine Academy of Educators Mission

21. What are the greatest benefits/rewards the AME can provide to medical educators (members and non-members in all health professions)? • Opportunity to collaborate with others educators • Mentorship as an educator • Networking opportunities • Medical education research guidance (design, statistical analysis) • Opportunities for skill development (teaching, curriculum design, program assessment, leadership) • Guidance in the promotions process • Monetary (Grants, protected time, development programs) • Recognition for work as an educator • Belonging to a supportive group of peers • Other

22. Mentorship as an Academy Goal

23. National Mentorship SurveyPalepu et. al. 1998 • National survey, 1808 faculty responded (60%rr) • 54% junior faculty mentored and they: • Perceivedmore institutional support for teaching, research & administration • Allocated more time to research each week (28% vs. 15%) • Were more satisfied at work (62.6% vs. 59.5%) • Better research skills Palepu A, Friedman RH, Barnett RC, Carr PL, Ash AS, Szalacha L, Moskowitz M. Junior faculty members’ mentoring relationships and their professional development in US medical schools. Acad Med 1998; 73:318-23.

24. Junior Faculty’s PerspectiveChew et. al. 2003 • Survey - all 162 junior faculty (75% rr) at University of Washington School of Medicine • 36% considered themselves to be mentored • Adjusted for age, years on faculty, and fellowship training • Mentored faculty were more likely to be men (OR 2.9) and clinician-scientists (OR 10.3) • Mentored clinician-educators spent more time on scholarly activity (20.6% vs 11.5%, p<0.01) Chew LD et al. Junior Faculty’s Perspectives on Mentoring. Acad Med. 2003;78:652.

25. Does Mentoring Matter?Feldman et. al. 2010 • UCSF Study • Baseline survey prior to large mentoring program • Survey 852 junior faculty (all health professions) • 56% rr, N=464 • 2/3 had a mentor, 28% needed help • Having a mentor was associated with … • greater satisfaction with time allocation at work • Higher academic self-efficacy scores (reported in several studies) Feldman MD, Arean PA, Marshall SJ, Lovett M, O’Sullivan P. Does mentoring matter: results from a survey of faculty mentees at a large health sciences university. Medical Education Online 2010, 15: 5063

26. Faculty Retention and SuccessReis et. al. 2012 • UCSD School of Medicine • National Center of Leadership in Academic Medicine 1998-2005 • Faculty development workshops + lots of mentoring • Matched participants to non-participants • 67% vs. 56% retention new assistant professors after 8 years (AAMC: 43% 10 yr retention) • Greater academic success (awards, grants, teaching/mentoring, publications) Ries A, Wingard D, Gamst A, Larsen C, Farrell E, Reznik V. Measuring Faculty Retention and Success in Academic Medicine.Acad Med. 2012;87:1046–1051.

27. Peer MentoringLord et. al. 2012 • 6 assistant professor clinician educators in Psychiatry (4 yrs) • Qualitative analysis of interviews and survey showed increased/improved… • Workplace satisfaction • Social connection • Professional/scholarly productivity • Involvement in professional activities • Opportunity for peer discussions in a safe environment • Accountability and motivation • collaboration with other group members Lord JA, Mourtzanos E, McLaren K, Murray SB, Kimmel RJ, Cowley DS. A peer mentoring group for junior clinician educators: four years' experience. Acad Med. 2012 Mar;87(3):378-83.

28. In Business • Increased retention and job satisfaction • Mentor programs are more likely to succeed if mentors are rewarded/recognized

29. Mentorship • Low relatedness/inclusion • Low engagement • Low self-efficacy • Low values alignment • High leadership aspirations • High URMM equity • Low school commitment to improve support for faculty • High ethical/moral distress • Younger faculty • Having MD degree • Primary role is research • Low institutional support Factors associated with leaving institution only Factors associated with leaving academic medicine

30. "My chief want in life is someone who shall make me do what I can.” Ralf Waldo Emerson

31. Thank You Cynthia Ashe Karen Brent Dr. Molly Cooke Dr. Helen Loeser Dr. Patricia O’Sullivan Blohm, MD