Portfolio Use to Develop Teaching Skills and Meet Program Goals

1. Portfolio Use to Develop Teaching Skills and Meet Program Goals Brian Mavis, PhD

2. What is a portfolio? How can it be used to document accomplishments related to teaching? What resources are available to guide faculty and RPT committees? Objectives

3. Living document Extension of your CV Personal annual report (annual review) Necessary part of many promotion and tenure packages What is a portfolio?

4. Originally conceptualized like those used with artists or architects Demonstrates quality of your work Records breadth of your work Illustrates professional development What is a portfolio?

5. “…a method of encouraging adult and reflective learning … based on developing a collection of evidence that learning has taken place” What is a portfolio? Snadden and Thomas 1998, p. 192

6. Personal reflection • Central to successful portfolio • Explains • What is included? • Why it is included? • How it is organized? • How it relates to program or institutional goals? What is a portfolio?

7. Tell your story • Where have you been? • What have you done? • What have you learned? • Where are you going?

8. How to build a portfolio? • Find a place to store your work • Keep everything • Ask for it in writing • Be organized • Paper vs electronic What is a portfolio?

9. What is a portfolio?

10. Documenting Competence Miller GE. The Assessment of Clinical Skills/Competence/Performance; Acad Med 1990 65(9):63-67. Adapted by Drs R. Mehay & R. Burns, UK (Jan 2009).

11. Why a portfolio?

12. Why a portfolio?

13. How can portfolios be used to document accomplishments related to teaching?

14. AAMC Taskforce on Educator Evaluation: 2010 – 2012 The Charge: To provide resources that will aid decision-makers in developing clear, consistent and efficient evaluation processes for faculty with a career focus in education Documenting Accomplishments

15. Task Force Members

16. Teaching Learner Assessment Curriculum Development Mentoring and Advising Educational Leadership and Administration What do educators do? Simpson et al, 2007

17. Four typical indicators of competence: Quantity Quality Scholarly approach Scholarship Evaluating the work of educators?

18. Quantity • Duration, number, scope of teaching activities • Quality • Teaching effective and well-received • Scholarly approach • Incorporates best practices • Scholarship • Workshops, peer-reviewed presentations • Adoption by others Contributions in Teaching

19. Scholarship involves: • Discovery of new knowledge • Application of knowledge • Integration of knowledge • Dissemination of knowledge Scholarship Reconsidered Boyer, 1990

20. Clear goals Adequate preparation Appropriate methods Significant results Effective presentation Reflective critique Glassick’s Criteria Glassick, 2000

21. Let’s Focus on Teaching

22. Learning objectives for teaching session/curriculum are: • Clearly stated • At level appropriate for learners • Specified to measure learner’s performance 1. Clear Goals

23. Learning objectives are: • Based on documented needs • SMART (specific, measurable, achievable, realistic and timely) • Address multiple domains (e.g., knowledge, skills and/or attitudes) 1. Clear Goals

24. Congruence/integration with other curricular components Use of best practices Necessary resource planning 2. Adequate Preparation

25. Best Practices • Content is up-to-date and evidence-based • Content is logically integrated with other curricular components • Content to be covered appropriate for time available • Content depth and breadth matched to learners’ needs 2. Adequate Preparation

26. Resource Planning • Specific needed resources are specified • Needed resources are available • Adequate preparation for use of technology 2. Adequate Preparation

27. Teaching methods aligned with learning objectives Methods are feasible, practicaland ethical Innovative teaching methods used to achieve learning objectives 3. Appropriate Methods

28. Chooses teaching strategies that incorporate a variety of approaches Variety of approaches is evidence-based Uses interactive approaches and promotes self-directed learning Includes strategies for monitoring learner progress Provides evidence of innovation 3. Appropriate Methods

29. Satisfaction/reaction of learners Learning: Measures knowledge, skills, attitudes and/or behaviors Application: desired performance demonstrated in other settings Impact: educational programs and processes here or elsewhere 4. Significant Results Kirkpatrick & Kirkpatrick, 2006

30. Satisfaction/Reaction • Teaching ratings by learners or peers/experts • Compare learner ratings across teachers • Learning • Measurable changes in knowledge, skills, etc. • Comparison to benchmarks or prior data 4. Significant Results

31. Application • Demonstration of knowledge, skills, etc. in subsequent settings or curricular components • Impact • Evaluation by knowledgeable peers, educational leaders, etc. • Internal or external awards or recognition 4. Significant Results

32. Recognized as valuable (internally or externally) through: • Peer review • Dissemination • Use by others 5. Effective Presentation

33. Invitations to conduct faculty development, workshops, presentations Peer review of other teachers Dissemination and adoption of teaching materials or methods 5. Effective Presentation

34. Ongoing improvement • Personal reflection • Learner performance data • Evaluation results • Peer review 6. Reflective Critique

35. Critical analysis of teaching activities using information from others and self-reflection Evidence of continuous quality improvement of teaching activities 6. Reflective Critique

36. Clear goals Adequate preparation Appropriate methods Significant results Effective presentation Reflective critique Glassick’s Criteria Glassick, 2000

37. Toolkit

38. AAMC Toolbox for Evaluating Educators Available through MedEdPortal: www.mededportal.org/publication/9313 Where to Find It

39. Boyer EL. Scholarship reconsidered: priorities of the professoriate. San Francisco, CA. Jossey-Bass Publishers; 1990. • GlassickCE.Boyer’s expanded definition of scholarship, the standards for assessing scholarship and the elusiveness of the scholarship of teaching. Acad Med. 2000; 75:877-880. • Kirkpatrick DL and Kirkpatrick JD. Evaluating Training Programs: The Four Levels (3rd Ed). San Francisco, CA: Berrett-Koehler Publishers, 2006. • Miller GE. The Assessment of Clinical Skills/Competence/Performance; Acad Med 1990 65(9):63-67. • Simpson D, Fincher RM, Hafler JP, Irby DM, Richards BF, Rosenfeld GC, Viggiano TR. Advancing educators and education by defining the components and evidence associated with educational scholarship. Med Educ. 2007;41:1002-1009. • Snadden D. & Thomas ML. The use of portfolio learning in medical education. Med Teach. 1998; 20: 192-199. References

40. Baldwin C, Chandran L, Gusic M. Guidelines for evaluating the educational performance of medical school faculty: priming a national conversation. Teach Learn Med. 2011; 23(3):285-97. • Hutchings, P. and Shulman, L.S. (1999). The scholarship of teaching: new elaborations and developments. Change, 31(5), 10-5. • Van Tartwijk, J. & Driessen, EW. Portfolios for assessment and learning: AMEE Guide No. 45. Med Teach. 2009; 31: 790-801. Additional Resources