Developing a Standardized Mechanism to Identify Sites of Excellence in Clinical Education
Purpose: In a national study related to innovation and excellence in physical therapist (PT) education, Jensen et al recommend that academic programs have a means to identify sites which provide excellent clinical education. The impetus for this project came out of communication between clinical and academic partners, recommendations from the clinical education summit, and a review of the literature. Stakeholders from 2 regional consortiums collaborated to develop an innovative assessment process to support the growth and sustainment of sites of excellence in clinical education. The purpose of this educational session will be for participants to review a pilot assessment that may be used to identify these sites and provide valuable input and feedback on this developing process.Methods and/or Description of Project: A review of the interprofessional literature, describing characteristics of clinical education excellence, informed the development of a clinical site self-study document. The assessment process was modeled after the Commision on the Accreditation of Rehabilitation Facilities (CARF) which encourages clinical sites to voluntarily participate in a peer-reviewed, self-assessment process. Several sites were considered, and 3 were intentionally selected. Two Site Coordinators of Clinical Education (SCCEs) accepted the invitation to participate in the assessment process. After agreeing to participate, an initial discussion took place between the researchers and the SCCEs to answer questions regarding the clarity or intent of the items included in the self study. Narrative responses to the open-ended questions were accompanied by supportive documents utilized by the sites. The research team jointly reviewed submitted materials to ascertain the need for additional information and identify areas of relative strengths and areas for further development. SCCEs were also asked to provide input on the value of this self-assessment, it’s feasibility, challenges, strengths, and opportunities that this process provided.Results/Outcomes: The SCCEs were motivated to participate in the self-assessment in order to promote recognition of their clinical education sites. Time and support allocated to the SCCE by higher levels of administration influenced the quality and level of engagement across this process. Based on the feedback received, modifications were made to the original self-study document and informed the research team about the challenges and benefits associated with this process.Conclusions/Relevance to the conference theme: Our Leadership Landscape: Perspectives from the Ground Level to 30,000 Feet: Academic programs need to graduate PT students that are well prepared to meet the changing demands of the healthcare environment. This outcome is dependent on students having experiences at sites that model excellence in clinical education.This research team proposes an innovative, peer-reviewed process to recognize clinical sites that lead the way towards excellence in clinical education.References: Chan DSK. Combining qualitative and quantitative methods in assessing hospital learning environments. Int J Nurs Stud. 2001;38:447-459. Jensen GM, Nordstrom T, Mostrom E, Hack LM, Gwyer J. National study of excellence and innovation in physical therapist education: Part 1—Design, method, and results. Phys Ther. 2017;97:857-874. Jensen GM, Hack LM, Nordstrom T, Gwyer J, Mostrom E. National study of excellence and innovation in physical therapist education: Part 2—A call to reform. Phys Ther. 2017;97:875-888. McSherry R, Cottis K, Rapson T, Stringer M. Embracing external scrutiny to build bridges and genuine partnerships between education and clinical practice. Nurs Edu Pract. 2015;15:149-154. Recker-Hughes C, Wetherbee E, Buccieri KM, Timmerberg JF, Stolfi A. Essential characteristics of quality clinical education experiences: Standards to facilitate learning. J Phys Ther Edu. 2014;28(S1):48-55. Schaffer VJ, Rothschild EP. Evaluating clinical sites: Meeting the ARC-PA Accreditation standards. J Phys Assist Edu. 2007;18(1):56-59. Weiss KB, Wagner R, Nasca TJ. Development, testing, and implementation of the ACGME Clinical Learning Environment Review (CLER) Program. J Grad Med Edu. 2012;Sept:396-398.Course Objectives: Participants will be able to: 1 Discuss the benefits of an innovative, standardized process to recognize clinical sites of excellence. 2. Describe site characteristics of excellence in clinical education from the inter-professional literature. 3. Assess and critique the content of the pilot self-study document. 4. Discuss feasibility of implementing a peer-reviewed regional or national system to recognize sites of clinical excellence.Instructional Methods: lecture, question and answer session with audience participation (poll everywhere), small and large group discussionTentative Outline/Schedule: Tentative outline / Schedule: 1. Potential benefits of a standardized process to formally recognize sites of excellence to clinical sites and academic programs. (10 mins) 2. Desired characteristics of clinical sites (5 minutes) 3. An introduction to the pilot study process and results (15 minutes) 4. Small group break-outs: Review and provide feedback on the self-study document and proposed process (30 minutes) 5. Small/large group discussion: Discuss feasibility of voluntary, self-assessment process and potential next steps towards implementation (30 minutes)