The Compass Model to plan faculty development programs

Mohamed Mostafa Al-Eraky, Michelle McLean

Research output: Contribution to journalArticleResearchpeer-review

Abstract

Faculty development is an imperative if institutions are to develop professional and competent teachers, educators, researchers and leaders. Planning of faculty development currently focuses on meeting the perceived needs of staff and their interests. We would like to propose the Compass Model as a conceptual framework to plan faculty development, which was inspired by the interplay between intrinsic and extrinsic forces for learning, as outlined in the Self-Determination Theory (SDT). In planning faculty development, the Compass Model acknowledges four agendas (directions) from various stakeholders: Strategies (N), Competencies (E), Resources (S) and Wish lists (W). The model then describes four avenues for faculty development offerings (quadrants): Foundation (NE), Innovation (SE), Response (SW) and Motivation (NW) (i.e. outputs, activities). The model was compared theoretically with another approach to faculty development planning. It was then piloted as a quality measure for a current program to check for omissions or missed opportunities. We plan to use it in a multi-center study to compare approaches in faculty development planning in different contexts. We hope our model assists faculty developers to consider all stakeholders' agendas when planning faculty development, beyond the current standard customer-based approach.
Original languageEnglish
Pages (from-to)13-16
Number of pages4
JournalMedical Education Development
Volume2
Issue number1
DOIs
Publication statusPublished - 1 Jan 2012

Fingerprint

Planning
Innovation

Cite this

Al-Eraky, Mohamed Mostafa ; McLean, Michelle. / The Compass Model to plan faculty development programs. In: Medical Education Development. 2012 ; Vol. 2, No. 1. pp. 13-16.
@article{e8b6d889a6114dd38e34f24424d1688e,
title = "The Compass Model to plan faculty development programs",
abstract = "Faculty development is an imperative if institutions are to develop professional and competent teachers, educators, researchers and leaders. Planning of faculty development currently focuses on meeting the perceived needs of staff and their interests. We would like to propose the Compass Model as a conceptual framework to plan faculty development, which was inspired by the interplay between intrinsic and extrinsic forces for learning, as outlined in the Self-Determination Theory (SDT). In planning faculty development, the Compass Model acknowledges four agendas (directions) from various stakeholders: Strategies (N), Competencies (E), Resources (S) and Wish lists (W). The model then describes four avenues for faculty development offerings (quadrants): Foundation (NE), Innovation (SE), Response (SW) and Motivation (NW) (i.e. outputs, activities). The model was compared theoretically with another approach to faculty development planning. It was then piloted as a quality measure for a current program to check for omissions or missed opportunities. We plan to use it in a multi-center study to compare approaches in faculty development planning in different contexts. We hope our model assists faculty developers to consider all stakeholders' agendas when planning faculty development, beyond the current standard customer-based approach.",
author = "Al-Eraky, {Mohamed Mostafa} and Michelle McLean",
year = "2012",
month = "1",
day = "1",
doi = "10.4081/med.2012.e4",
language = "English",
volume = "2",
pages = "13--16",
journal = "Medical Education Development",
issn = "2038-954X",
publisher = "PAGEpress",
number = "1",

}

The Compass Model to plan faculty development programs. / Al-Eraky, Mohamed Mostafa; McLean, Michelle.

In: Medical Education Development, Vol. 2, No. 1, 01.01.2012, p. 13-16.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticleResearchpeer-review

TY - JOUR

T1 - The Compass Model to plan faculty development programs

AU - Al-Eraky, Mohamed Mostafa

AU - McLean, Michelle

PY - 2012/1/1

Y1 - 2012/1/1

N2 - Faculty development is an imperative if institutions are to develop professional and competent teachers, educators, researchers and leaders. Planning of faculty development currently focuses on meeting the perceived needs of staff and their interests. We would like to propose the Compass Model as a conceptual framework to plan faculty development, which was inspired by the interplay between intrinsic and extrinsic forces for learning, as outlined in the Self-Determination Theory (SDT). In planning faculty development, the Compass Model acknowledges four agendas (directions) from various stakeholders: Strategies (N), Competencies (E), Resources (S) and Wish lists (W). The model then describes four avenues for faculty development offerings (quadrants): Foundation (NE), Innovation (SE), Response (SW) and Motivation (NW) (i.e. outputs, activities). The model was compared theoretically with another approach to faculty development planning. It was then piloted as a quality measure for a current program to check for omissions or missed opportunities. We plan to use it in a multi-center study to compare approaches in faculty development planning in different contexts. We hope our model assists faculty developers to consider all stakeholders' agendas when planning faculty development, beyond the current standard customer-based approach.

AB - Faculty development is an imperative if institutions are to develop professional and competent teachers, educators, researchers and leaders. Planning of faculty development currently focuses on meeting the perceived needs of staff and their interests. We would like to propose the Compass Model as a conceptual framework to plan faculty development, which was inspired by the interplay between intrinsic and extrinsic forces for learning, as outlined in the Self-Determination Theory (SDT). In planning faculty development, the Compass Model acknowledges four agendas (directions) from various stakeholders: Strategies (N), Competencies (E), Resources (S) and Wish lists (W). The model then describes four avenues for faculty development offerings (quadrants): Foundation (NE), Innovation (SE), Response (SW) and Motivation (NW) (i.e. outputs, activities). The model was compared theoretically with another approach to faculty development planning. It was then piloted as a quality measure for a current program to check for omissions or missed opportunities. We plan to use it in a multi-center study to compare approaches in faculty development planning in different contexts. We hope our model assists faculty developers to consider all stakeholders' agendas when planning faculty development, beyond the current standard customer-based approach.

U2 - 10.4081/med.2012.e4

DO - 10.4081/med.2012.e4

M3 - Article

VL - 2

SP - 13

EP - 16

JO - Medical Education Development

JF - Medical Education Development

SN - 2038-954X

IS - 1

ER -