Chapter 15. 국제교수개발 [Faculty Development in the Health Professions]

Chapter 15. 국제교수개발

Chapter 15 International Faculty Development Partnerships

Stacey Friedman , Francois Cilliers , Ara Tekian , and John Norcini

15.1 Introduction

 

iFDP은 상호 이익을 위해 형성되는 관계이며 개선 된 건강 관리와 같은 공동적이고 때로는 복잡한 목표를 달성하기 위해 노력합니다. 이들은 파트너가 독립적으로 할 수있는 것보다 효과적으로 특정 목표를 달성하고자하는 바람에 동기 부여됩니다 (Kolars 외. 2012; Leffers and Mitchell 2011). 또한 보건 전문 교육, 연구 및 실행의 세계화에 대한 대응이기도하다 (Marchal and Kegels 2003). 세계화에는 국경 간 통합과 아이디어와 자원의 교환이 포함 된 글로벌 용어로 보건 전문 교육을 개념화하는 것이 포함된다 (Hodges et al., 2009).

 International faculty development partnerships are relationships that form for mutual benefit and seek to achieve shared, and sometimes complex, goals such as improved health care. They are motivated by a desire to achieve specific goals more effectively than any partner could independently (Kolars et al.  2012 ; Leffers and Mitchell  2011 ). They are also a response to the globalization of health professions education, research, and practice (Marchal and Kegels  2003 ). Globalization includes conceptualizing health professions education in global terms, with cross-border integration and exchange of ideas and resources (Hodges et al.  2009 ).  

 

iFDP는 다음과 같은 이름들로 불린다.

International faculty development partnerships have variously been called collaborations, networks, coalitions, alliances, consortia, task forces, joint-working, and twinning (Dowling et al.  2004 ). 

 

참여기관의 경우, 파트너십은 기관에 대한 세계적인 인식을 구축하고, 학생 모집 및 교수진 유지를 향상 시키며, 학생, 교직원 및 졸업생을위한 자원을 제공 할 수 있습니다 (Kanter 2010).

For institutions that participate, partnerships may

• build global awareness of the institution,

• improve student recruitment and faculty retention, and

• provide a resource for students, faculty members, and alumni (Kanter 2010 ).

 

잘 작동하는 파트너쉽을 통해 교수진은 (Locally 경험하기 힘든) 다양한 교수 및 학습 방법, 연구 기회 확대, 임상 적 맥락, 자료 및 방법에 노출 될 수 있습니다 (McAuliffe and Cohen 2005). 또한 교수진은 공동 연구자 네트워크와 자신이 일하는 community of scholarship를 확장 할 수 있습니다.

Well-functioning partner- ships allow faculty to be exposed to different methods of teaching and learning, expanded opportunities for research, and clinical contexts, materials, and methods that they may not encounter locally (McAuliffe and Cohen 2005 ). Moreover, they allow faculty to expand their networks of collaborators and the communities of schol- arship in which they work.

 

iFDP(International faculty development partnerships)은 다양한 요구와 기회에 대응하여 발생하지만 목표를 달성하기위한 수단으로 교육의 질과 관련성을 향상시키기 위해 노력합니다. 일부 교수진 개발 파트너십이 해결하기 위해 노력하는 가장 큰 요구 중 하나는 고소득 국가와 저소득 국가의 보건 의료 종사자의 품질, 수량 ​​및 / 또는 분배가 부적절하다는 것입니다 (Norcini and Banda 2011, WHO 2008). 이 필요성의 한 차원은 지역 사회의 요구와 관련이있는 기초 및 고급 자격을 갖춘 충분한 보건 인력의 생산이다 (Scheffl et al., 2009). 또 다른 차원은 교수진에게 자신의 교육 기관에서의 전문적인 성장과 기능 할 수있는 만족스러운 지역 환경을위한 적절하고 적절한 기회를 제공 할 수있는 능력입니다 (Marchal 및 Kegels 2003).

International faculty development partnerships arise in response to a range of needs and opportunities, but they all seek to enhance the quality and relevance of education as a means of achieving their goals. One of the biggest needs some faculty development partnerships seek to contribute toward addressing is that of inadequate quality, quantity, and/or distribution of health care workers in both high and low income countries (Norcini and Banda 2011 ; WHO 2008 ).

• One dimension of this need is the production of enough health workers with basic and advanced qualifi cations that are relevant to the needs of the community (Scheffl er et al. 2009 ).

• Another dimension is the ability to offer faculty members adequate and appropriate opportunities for professional growth in their own institutions and a satisfactory local environment in which to function (Marchal and Kegels 2003 ).

교원의 결정에 영향을 주어 다른 교육 기관, 국가 또는 지역으로 이전 할 수있는 전문적 요인 및 개인적 요소에는 보상, 장비 및 첨단 기술에 대한 접근, 직업 및 훈련 기회, 기술 개발, 전문 네트워크 창출, 경력 향상 기회, 근무 환경이 포함됩니다 , 다른 환경에서의 경험 기회, 건강 관리의 지역 정치, 지역에서의 의약품 개선 욕구, 사회적 조건, 개인의 안전, 개인의 자유 정도, 가족 문제 (Burch et al., 2011; Burdick et al., 2006) ).

Professional and personal factors that may influence faculty decisions to relocate to a different institution, country, or region include

• remuneration,

• access to equipment and advanced technology,

• career and training opportunities,

• skills development,

• professional network creation,

• opportunities for career advancement,

• work environment,

• opportu- nity for experience in a different environment,

• regional politics of health care,

• desire to improve medicine in region,

• social conditions,

• personal safety,

• degree of personal freedom, and

• family issues (Burch et al. 2011 ; Burdick et al. 2006 ).

 

이 장의 사례에 설명 된 바와 같이, iFDP는 구조와 목적, 조직적 독립성 (Gajda 2004)의 상응하는 정도에서 서로 다르며 시간이 지남에 따라 발전합니다. 조직 독립성은 

• Cooperation (독립적 인 조직이 정보를 공유하는 곳)에서부터

• Coordination (독립적 인 조직이 활동을 지원하거나 이벤트를 공동 후원하는 경우)

• Collaboration (조직이 상호 목표를 달성하기 위해 독립성을 포기하는 경우)

...에 이르기까지 연속적으로 개념화 될 수 있습니다.

As illustrated by the examples in this chapter, international faculty development partnerships differ (and evolve over time) in structures and purposes, and in the corresponding degree of organizational independence (Gajda 2004 ). Organizational independence can be conceptualized along a continuum from cooperation (where fully independent organizations share information) to coordination (where indepen- dent organizations align activities or co-sponsor events) to collaboration (where organizations give up some independence to achieve mutual goals).

 

파트너십은 파트너 리소스 및 요구 사항 측면에서 다양합니다. 파트너 기부 및 혜택의 성격은 파트너 리소스 및 필요에 따라 부분적으로 다릅니다. 상대적으로 자원이 풍부하고 자원이 제한적인 기관들간의 파트너십에서 자원이 풍부한 기관은 이타주의와 향상된 명성, 영향력, 관점과 지식을 넓히고자 하는 잠재성에 의해 동기 부여가 될 수 있습니다.

 

이상적인 파트너십은 각 파트너와 동등하거나 별개의 이익을 얻는 것입니다. Einterz et al. (2007)은 '선진국과 개발 도상국의 의료 시스템은 본질적으로 불평등하다'는 점에서 Equality보다는 Equity이 생산적인 관계의 특징이되어야한다고 주장했다 (Einterz 외, 2007 p 813). 파트너쉽은 상호 공헌과 혜택으로 지원됩니다. 이는 모든 파트너의 역량 강화와 제도적 힘 강화에 중점을 둡니다.

Partnerships also vary in terms of partner resources and needs. The nature of partner contributions and benefi ts differ in part depending on partner resources and needs. For partnerships between relatively well-resourced and resource-limited institutions, the well-resourced may in part be motivated by altruism, as well as the potential for enhanced reputation, infl uence, and broadened perspectives and knowledge. The ideal partnership would be one in which there were equal, if distinct, benefi ts to each partner involved. Einterz et al. ( 2007 ) argue that equity, rather than equality, should be a characteristic of productive relationships, given that ‘medical systems in the developed and developing world are inherently unequal’ (Einterz et al. 2007 p. 813). Partnerships are supported by mutual contributions and benefi ts. This entails empowerment of all partners and a focus on fostering institutional strength.

 

15.2 iFDP의 장점은 무엇인가?

15.2 What Are the Benefits of International Faculty Development Partnerships?

필연적으로 국제적인 교수진 개발 파트너십에는 다양한 이해관계자가 있습니다. 각각의 파트너는 서로 다른 맥락에서 운영되며 각각 독특한 요구와 강점을 가지고 있습니다. (도 15.1 참조).

There are inevitably multiple stakeholders in international faculty development partnerships, each operating within a different context and each with unique needs and strengths. (see Fig.  15.1 ). 

 

 

교수진 개발 평가는 종종 개인 수준의 결과에 초점을 맞 춥니 다. 그러나 교수진 개발의 '관계'측면을 검토 할 필요성이 점차 커지고있다 (Asthana 외 2002, El Ansari 외 2001, Halliday 외 2004, O'Sullivan and Irby 2011).

Faculty development evaluation has often focused on individual- level outcomes; however, there is increasing recognition of the need to examine ‘relationship’ aspects of faculty development (Asthana et al. 2002 ; El Ansari et al. 2001 ; Halliday et al. 2004 ; O’Sullivan and Irby 2011 ).

15.2.1. 개인의 이득

15.2.1 Individual Benefits

그러나 일부 혜택은 국제 프로그램에 참여하는 개별 교수진에게 특히 중요합니다. 새로운 맥락에서의 건강과 문화뿐만 아니라 궁극적으로 다른 나라의 아이디어와 노출은 교수진에게 동기 부여가 될 수있다 (Kanter 2010). 파트너십에 참여하는 것은 다른 문화에서 질병과 건강에 대한 지식을 향상시킴으로써 교수진과 학생의 성장에 기여할 수 있으며, 따라서 보건 전문가 교육과 건강 관리를 강화할 수 있습니다 (Brook et al. 2010; Kanter 2010). 또한 혜택에는 저 자원 환경에서 보건 전문가 교육 혁신에 참여함으로써 얻은 향상된 업무 만족도가 포함될 수 있습니다 (Kolars 외. 2012). 이러한 파트너십에 참여한 사람은 전문성을 인정 받거나 승진 할 수도 있습니다 (Tekian and Dwyer 1998).

However, some benefi ts are particular to indi- vidual faculty members participating in an international program.

• Exposure to fac- ulty and ideas from other countries, as well as to health care and culture in new contexts, can be motivating to faculty (Kanter 2010 ).

• Participation in partnerships can contribute to faculty and student growth by enhancing their knowledge about illness and wellness in different cultures and can thereby enrich their practice of both health professions education and health care (Brook et al. 2010 ; Kanter 2010 ).

• Benefits might also include enhanced work satisfaction accrued from participating in innovations in health professions education in low resource settings (Kolars et al. 2012 ).

• Greater professional recognition and advancement may also accrue to individuals for involvement in such partnerships (Tekian and Dwyer 1998 ).

15.2.2 기관의 이득

15.2.2 Institutional Benefits

대부분의 교수진 개발 이니셔티브는 참여 기관의 역량을 높이고 교육의 질을 향상시키기위한 것입니다. 이러한 혜택은 학생들의 학습과 건강 관리로 확대되어야합니다. 이상적으로, 이러한 이점은 교수진 개발 파트너십의 기간을 넘어 서서 유지되는 것이어야합니다. 이니셔티브의 디자인은 참여한 개인 너머에 어떤 유익이 발생 하는지를 결정하는 몇 가지 중요한 요소 중 하나이다 (Grossman and Salas 2011; Holton et al., 2003).
Most faculty development initiatives are intended to increase capacity and improve the quality of education at the participating institutions. These benefi ts should in turn extend to student learning and health care. Ideally, these benefi ts should be such that they are sustained beyond the duration of the faculty development partnership. The design of the initiative would be one crucial factor among several in determining whether any benefi t accrues beyond participating individuals (Grossman and Salas 2011 ; Holton et al. 2003 ).

파트너십에 참여하면 파트너가 자원을 공유하거나 개발할 수 있습니다.
Involvement in partnerships can result in resource sharing or development by partners.

파트너쉽 참여는 자원이 제한적인 환경에서 가능하지 않은 역량 개발을 가능하게하는 funding에 대한 접근을 생성 할 수있다 (Kanter 2010; Kolars 외. 2012). 관련 기관은 기관을 통해 전달되는 외부 기관의 자금 지원 (예 : 보조금 지원)을받을 수 있습니다. 이 기금은 파트너십에 참여한 교수진 시간을 buy함으로써 부서 및 / 또는 기관 리소스를 늘릴 수 있습니다.

Involvement in partner- ships can also generate access to funding that allows the development of capacity that would not otherwise be possible in resource-constrained environments (Kanter 2010 ; Kolars et al. 2012 ). Institutions involved may benefi t from funding of external agencies (such as grant funding) that is channeled through their institutions. This funding may augment departmental and/or institutional resources by buying out faculty time for their involvement in the partnership.

교원 개발 파트너십이 고소득 국가와 저소득 국가의 기관들 사이에있을 때, 고소득 국가의 파트너에 대한 가치 제안은 부분적으로 이타 적이 될 수 있습니다 (Kolars 외. 2012). 자원 제약이있는 환경에서 보건 전문가의 교육이나 건강의 질을 향상시키는 것을 돕는 것은 고소득 국가의 기관의 명성을 향상시킬 수 있습니다 (Kanter 2010).

When the faculty development partnership is between institutions from high and low income countries, the value proposition for partners from high income nations may be in part altruistic (Kolars et al. 2012 ). Helping to improve the quality of health professions education or health in resource constrained settings can enhance the reputation of institutions from high income countries (Kanter 2010 ).

 

또한 모든 파트너의 명성은 혁신의 공동 작업과 개발을 통해 향상 될 수 있습니다 (Kanter 2010). 국 제, 지역 및 국제 자금 지원 기관 (Conaboy et al., 2005; Tekian and Dwyer 1998)과 같은 중요한 역할을 담당하는 파트너가있는 경우 국제 협력에 대한 참여가 신뢰를 얻을 수 있습니다. 장기적인 관점에서 볼 때 이러한 혜택은 더 나은 교수진과 학생들을 끌어들이도록하여 교육 기관을 강화시킬 수 있습니다 (Kanter 2010).

Moreover, the reputation of all partners can be enhanced through collaboration and development of innovations (Kanter 2010 ). Involvement in international collaborations can gain credibility for partners with infl uential role players like legislators and national, regional, and international funding agencies (Conaboy et al. 2005 ; Tekian and Dwyer 1998 ). Over the longer term, benefi ts such as these could strengthen institutions by allowing them to attract better faculty and students (Kanter 2010 ).

 

 

15.2.3 시스템과 사회의 이득

15.2.3 System and Societal Benefits

많은 국제 교수진 개발 파트너십의 궁극적 인 목표는 일반적으로 교육 시스템을 강화하는 방법으로 자국 내에서 의료 서비스를 강화하는 것입니다 (Kanter 2010). 국제 파트너십의 중점은 주요 질병, 전문 교육 분야 또는보다 일반적인 교육 분야에있을 수 있습니다. 파트너 국가에서 교육을 강화하는 교수진 개발은 특히 보건 의료 노동자 migration가 문제가되는 곳에서 의료 종사자의 retention에 기여할 수있다 (Burch et al. 2011; Clinton et al. 2010). 국가 간 및 빈곤 지역 (종종 농촌 지역) 간의 이 migration를 막을 경우 국가의 건강 필요를 충족시키는 데 드는 비용을 잠재적으로 줄일 수 있습니다 (Kanter 2010).

The ultimate goal of many international faculty development partnerships is strengthening health care in their countries, typically by way of strengthening educa- tional systems (Kanter 2010 ). The focus of international partnerships may be on a major illness, an area of specialty training, or more general areas of education. Faculty development that enhances education in partners’ countries may contribute to the retention of health workers, especially where health care worker migration is an issue (Burch et al. 2011 ; Clinton et al. 2010 ). Stemming this migration, both between countries and from underserved (often rural) areas within countries, poten- tially reduces the costs of meeting the health needs of a nation (Kanter 2010 ).

그러나 교수진의 교육 준비, 커리큘럼 개발 기술, 다른 보건 전문가 교육자와의 네트워크 구축 능력, 의료 시스템에서 리더십과 관리 역할을 맡을 수있는 능력 (Kolars 외, 2012)과 같은 문제는 그러한 이니셔티브에 의해 해결 될 수 있습니다.

However, issues like

• faculty preparedness to teach,

• curriculum development skills,

• the ability to network with other health professions educators, and

• preparation to assume leadership and management roles in the health care system (Kolars et al. 2012 )

can be addressed by such initiatives.

 

 

고소득 국가의 강사 개발 파트너는 전 세계 보건 전문가 교육의 질 향상 (Guo 외 2009)과 같은 인도주의적 목표 달성에 기여함으로써 어느 정도 이익을 얻을 수 있으며 자원이있는 지역 또는 국가의 건강 증진 건강 전문가의 교육의 질과 관련성을 개선함으로써 긴급한 건강 문제를 해결할 수 있도록 돕는다 (Kanter 2010, Kolars 외). 저소득 국가의 건강 관리 강화 및 건강 증진은 모든 파트너에게 혜택을 줄 수 있습니다. 예를 들어, 이것은 한 국가에서 다른 국가로 병의 확산을 감소시키는 데 기여할 수 있습니다 (Kanter 2010).

Faculty development partners from high income countries may benefit to some degree by

• contributing to the realization of humanitarian goals like improving the quality of health professions education around the world (Guo et al. 2009 ),

• enhancing health in a district or nation where resources are limited, and

• helping solve pressing health problems by improving the quality and relevance of the educa- tion of health professionals (Kanter 2010 ; Kolars et al. 2012 ).

Strengthening health care and enhancing health in lower income countries may have benefi ts that extend to all partners. For instance, this could contribute to decreasing the spread of illness from one country to another (Kanter 2010 ).

15.2.4. 관계적 이득

15.2.4 Relationship Benefits

파트너십을 통해 팀을 구성하고 네트워크를 강화할 수 있습니다 (Kolars 외. 2012).

Partnerships can build teams and strengthen networks (Kolars et al. 2012 ).

15.3 사례

15.3 Examples of International Faculty Development Partnership Programs

 

 

 

15.3.1 다기관 참여와 코디네이팅 기관

15.3.1 Coordinating Organization with Multi-institution Participation

International partnership programs that involve a central coordinating organization with multi-institution participation are capable of global reach. The following two examples illustrate this geographic breadth.

첫 번째 사례: The Harvard Macy Institute: Program for Educators in Health Professions

One example of a program run by a coordinating organization is The Harvard Macy Institute: Program for Educators in Health Professions ( http://www. harvardmacy.org ; Armstrong et al. 2003 ; Armstrong and Barsion 2006 ; Armstrong 2007 ). Program faculty come from a range of institutions and countries. Some program alumni are involved as faculty. International participants are healthcare professionals with a role as educators. The program was established with a grant from the Josiah Macy Jr. Foundation, and additional funding comes from tuition fees paid by participants. Additional support comes from faculty and staff time from Harvard and other institutions.

• The program consists of two residential sessions about 4 months apart.

• There are five curricular themes: learning and teaching, curriculum, evaluation, leadership, and information technology.

• Participants undertake an educational project (e.g. revision of curriculum or implementation of a faculty development program in the participant’s home institution).

• The informal curriculum is noted to be as important as the formal curriculum (i.e. largely ad hoc interpersonal interactions between and among students and faculty are as important to the achievement of program goals as the formally stated and intended curriculum).

효과성

Desired benefits of the program include

• enhancing the professional development of health professionals as educators,

• supporting institutional changes via changes in participant teaching behaviors and professional activities, and

• developing communities of practice across disciplines and institutions.

 

목표 달성의 근거

Evidence of goal achievement includes participants’ (learners’) report of:

• • Increased awareness and use of a greater array of teaching methods; increased knowledge about and comfort with active learning.

•  • Increased enthusiasm for and commitment to medical education as a primary career direction and stronger identity and confidence as a medical educator.

•  • New understanding of, and appreciation for, ways in which medical education is implemented in institutions nationally and globally (i.e. broadened perspectives).

•  • Evidence of organizational change via participant behaviors (e.g. additional projects, joining educational committees, educational grant applications).

•  • Creation/expansion of a global network of resources and connections, including support from like-minded colleagues.

두 번째 사례: FAIMER Institute and FAIMER Regional Institutes

The Foundation for Advancement of International Medical Education and Research (FAIMER): FAIMER Institute and FAIMER Regional Institutes are also examples of programs with a coordinating organization ( http://www.faimer. org ; Burdick et al. 2006 2007 2010 2011 2012 ; Norcini et al. 2005 ).

• The FAIMER Institute program has on-site sessions based in the USA with international participants;

• FAIMER Regional Institutes have on-site sessions and participants based in their regions (including programs based in India, Brazil, China, and South Africa).

 

The core program faculty and leadership include

• FAIMER personnel,

• alumni of the fel- lowships (including local alumni for the Regional Institutes), and

• other international faculty.

 

Health professions educators apply in a competitive process to participate in the fellowship programs, with evidence of institutional support as part of the application process.

• The FAIMER programs are 2-year fellowships, with two residential sessions (at the start of each year) interspersed with an 11-month intersession of learning at a distance.

• An educational innovation project is central as an opportunity for hands- on application of fellowship learning and work towards institutional or regional change in health professions education.

• Community building occurs via extensive interaction during residential sessions, overlap of the on-site sessions of year 1 and 2 fellows, and continued engagement with program alumni.

Desired benefits of the programs include

• strengthening fellows’ skills in health professions education methods, leadership, management, research, and scholarship.

• At the institutional level, there is the desire to improve health pro- fessions education in the fellows’ home institutions and countries/regions, stimu- late growth in the field of health professions education, and improve opportunities for professional advancement.

• The programs also aim to build a transnational community of practice by creating a critical mass of health professions educators and facilitating interaction, resource sharing, and collaboration.

 

목표 달성의 근거

• • Fellows have reported applying knowledge and skills gained from the fellowship experience in their home institutions, including achievement of a range of project outcomes.

•  • The majority of fellows have reported that their educational innovation projects have been incorporated into the curriculum or institutional policy, and/or replicated in their institution or another setting.

•  • Follow-up data indicate that fellowship program alumni have health professions education career paths, produce education scholarship, engage in collaborative projects, and serve as resource experts in health professions education.

•  • Fellows have reported a community of practice characterized by support, shared learning and problem solving, and a network of expanded breadth in terms of geographic diversity and expertise.

15.3.2 학위 수여 기관

15.3.2 Health Professions Education Degree- and Diploma- Conferring Institutions

 

파트너 기관의 역할과 장기간의 지속가능성 계획에 따라 다양하다

International partnerships for health professions education degree/diploma programs (Tekian and Harris 2012 ) vary in

• the roles of each partner institution (including degree conferral), and

• plans for long-term sustainability (e.g. joint degree program versus capacity building for program administered by one partner institution).

The Joint Master of Health Professions Education (JMHPE) Maastricht University – Suez Canal University ( http://www.maastrichtuniversity.nl/web/ show/id=449891/langid=42 ; http://www.themedfomscu.org ; Mohamed et al. 2012 ) involves core program faculty and leadership from both Maastricht and Suez Canal Universities. Global faculty are chosen from program graduates. Participants are graduates of any health professions education institution (e.g. medicine, nursing, dentistry, pharmacy, health sciences, physiotherapy, and speech therapy).

The program is a 1 year (9 blocks) Master program, conducted entirely via distance learning. By the end of the program a master degree is jointly granted, and the certificate is co-signed by both Maastricht and Suez Canal Universities.

Desired benefits of the programs include

• 참가자들에게 건강 전문 직업 교육 및 연구 분야에서 필요한 지식과 기술을 갖추도록
  equipping participants with the knowledge and skills required for a career in health professions education and research, and

• 그들의 교육 기관에서 의학 교육의 향상에 적극적으로 참여할 수있는 졸업생의 critical mass을 개발합니다.
  developing critical masses of graduates who can actively participate in the enhancement of medical education in their home institutions.

 

목표 달성의 근거

Evidence of goal achievement includes the following:

• • Program graduates and participants (learners) report that the program supports increased knowledge of health professions education as well as enhanced capacity building and career development at the national, regional, and international levels.

•  • The Medical Education Department of Suez Canal University was awarded a Leadership and Management Award in 2010 by Management Sciences for Health, an international non-profi t organization working with individuals, communities and institutions in developing nations to build stronger health systems, improve health services, and respond to priority health problems.

Another example of a degree- or diploma-conferring partnership is the University of Illinois at Chicago (UIC) and KLE University in Belgaum, India – Diploma and Masters in Health Professions Education (MScHPE) program ( http://www. kleuniversity.edu.in/udeph/index.html ; A. Tekian, personal communication, August 22, 2012).

• 교수자
  The core teaching faculty for this program come from UIC and are full- time professors. There are other local faculty as well who were trained at UIC. All the participants come from India.

• 참여 우선권
  Priority is given to KLE University faculty members; however, a few health professionals from neighboring provinces are accepted as well.

• 참가자 전공분야
  All participants are health professionals, with the majority from medicine, dentistry, and nursing.

• 이 과정은 2 년 과정이며 일정한 주간 코스가 정기적으로 제공됩니다.
  This is a 2-year program, with mandatory week-long courses offered at regular intervals.

• 모든 교재는 교육 및 문화에 대한 인도의 상황을 고려하여 UIC에서 개발됩니다
  All course material is developed at UIC taking into consideration the Indian context of education and culture.

• 프로그램을 완료하려면 관석이 필요합니다. 모든 관석 프로젝트는 Belgaum에서 개최 된 보건 전문 교육 연례회의에서 상영됩니다.
  Completion of the program requires a capstone. All capstone projects are presented at an Annual Conference in health professions education held in Belgaum.

The program is funded by KLE University and is housed at the University Department of Education for Health Professionals (UDEHP). UDEHP provides in- kind support for the daily operation of the program, including coordination of communication, educational resources such as handouts, and the physical facility.

학비는 보조금을 받고 참가자는 기관에서 지원 받거나 스스로 지불합니다.

Tuition fees are subsidized and participants are supported by their institutions, or pay themselves.

Desired benefi ts of the program include

• acquisition and improvement in knowledge and profi ciency in essential skills in medical education, including

• teaching and learning,

• curriculum development,

• scholarship, and

• leadership.

 

또한 프로그램 참여자가 대학 및학과 내에서 change agents 및 자원으로 활동하고, 기관 간 협업을 촉진하며, 교육 및 장학금 분야에서 탁월한 교육 환경을 조성하는 데 도움이되기를 기대합니다.

It is also hoped that program participants will

• act as change agents and resources within their colleges and departments,

• promote collaboration institution wide, and

• help to create an educational climate within the institution that fosters excellence in education and scholarship.

 

시스템 차원에서이 프로그램은 고등 교육 시스템 내에서, 보건 및 교육부와 관련된 기관 내에서, 그리고 전문 사회를 통한 교육 혁신의 보급을 촉진함으로써 전국적으로 교육 체계를 강화할 것으로 기대된다.

On a systems level, it is hoped that the program will strengthen the edu-cational system nation-wide by fostering dissemination of educational innovations within the country’s higher education system, within institutions associated with the Ministries of Health and Education, and through professional societies.

 

 

이 프로그램은 또한 아이디어를 교환하고 자원을 공유하는 건강 전문가들 사이에서 실천의 공동체를 만들기 위해 참가자들 간의 관계를 지원하는 것을 목표로한다. 데이터를 공유하고 기관 간 장학금을 실시하기 위해 기관 간 협력 관계 및 협업을 창출한다. 연구비 지원을위한 다기관 보조금 제안서를 준비하고 제출하는 것.

The program also aims to support relationships among participants in order to create a community of practice among health professionals who exchange ideas and share resources; to create working relationships and collaborations among institutions to share data and conduct inter-institutional scholarship; and to prepare and submit multi-institutional grant proposals to fund research.

 

목표 달성의 근거

Evidence of goal achievement includes the following:

• • Participants of the program have been involved in introducing education changes at their institutions (primarily KLE) and have published and presented education scholarship. For example, the concept of competency-based curriculum has been introduced for the fi rst time in the College of Dentistry.

•  • Faculty development activities in medical education are organized and conducted by the participants of the program. UDEHP and a few participants of the program organized the fi rst medical education conference in Belgaum in 2012.

•  • A select number of participants have been asked to serve as educational consultants to committees that guide national policies.

•  • Networking among the participants has initiated multi-institutional projects attracting research funding.

The examples above illustrate different models for partnership capacity building – i.e.

• creation of a joint degree program (Suez-Maastricht) versus

• enhancing capacity of one partner institution to independently offer degree/diploma conferral (KLE- UIC).

 

There are also differences in whether the degree/diploma program is

• focused on faculty from one of the partner institutions (e.g. KLE University) or

• whether it is geared to more broad dissemination (e.g. Suez–Maastricht, which also uses distance learning to broaden its reach).

15.3.3 Two-Institution Partnerships

There are several documented examples of partnerships between two institutions in different countries. These programs vary in their structures and goals, including faculty development as part of a larger initiative such as

• development of a new resi- dency program (e.g. Alem et al. 2010 ),

• bilateral exchange of faculty and students (e.g. Wong and Agisheva 2004 2007 ), and

• long-term institutional partnerships (twinning, e.g. Lacey-Haun and Whitehead 2009 ; Tache et al. 2008 ).

The Indiana University – Moi University (IU-Moi) Partnership (Einterz et al. 2007 ) involves collaboration between virtually all disciplines at both schools and relationships at both individual and department levels.

 

기대 이득

Desired benefits of the partnership include

• 파트너 기관과 개인 참가자 모두에게 상호 공평한 혜택을 제공합니다.
  achieving mutual, equitable benefi ts for both partner institutions and their individual participants;

• 미국과 케냐의 건강 관리 분야의 지도자 육성
  developing leaders in healthcare for the United States and Kenya; and

• 의료계의 가치를 키우고
  fostering the values of the medical profession and

• 협력과 교육을 통한 건강 증진.
  promoting health through collaboration and education.

 

두 가지 프로그램

• One program based on the Indiana-Moi partnership is the Academic Research Ethics Partnership (AREP).

• A second program based on the Indiana-Moi partnership is the Academic Model for the Prevention and Treatment of HIV/AIDS (AMPATH).

목표 달성의 증거로는 AREP 및 AMPATH와 같은 계획 수립 및 교수진, 학생 및 환자에게 제공되는 기회와 서비스를 포함한 이러한 프로그램의 성과가 포함됩니다.

Evidence of goal achievement includes establishment of initiatives such as AREP and AMPATH, and the achievements of these programs including the opportunities and services offered to faculty, students, and patients.

위의 예와 같은 파트너십의 특징 

• 다양한 요소 (예 : 학생 및 교수진 교환, 교수진 개발, 공동 프로그램),

• 파트너의 요구에 대한 대응 (예 : HIV 전염병에 중점을 둠) 및

• 추가 파트너와의 협력 (의료기관 및 병원, 정부 기관, 지역 사회, 기금 제공 업체)

Partnerships such as the above example are distinguished by

• having multiple components (e.g. student and faculty exchanges, faculty development, joint programs),

• evolution over time in response to partner needs (e.g. focusing on HIV pandemic) and

• collaboration with additional partners (medical institutions and hospitals, government institutions, communities, funders) to achieve specific goals.

 

 

15.4 Descriptors of International Faculty Development Partnerships

일반적으로 프로그램 제공의 핵심에는 두 개 이상의 기관간에 협업 관계 (파트너가 일부 독립성을 포기)가 있습니다. 그러나 종종 다른 기관이나 파트너 기관간에 다른 목적으로 다른 협력적이고 조정적인 관계가 있습니다. 예를 들어, 국제 의학 교육 연구 진흥 재단 (FAIMER) 프로그램은 지역 교수 개발 프로그램을위한 현물 자원을 제공하는 기관들과 참가자들이 참석하는 기관들과의 협력 관계를 수반한다.

Generally there is a collaborative relationship (i.e. partners giving up some independence) between two or more institutions at the core of program delivery. However, there are often other cooperative and coordinating relationships – either with additional institutions or between the partner institutions but for other purposes.

 

For example, the Foundation for Advancement of International Medical Education and Research (FAIMER) programs involve collaboration with the institutions hosting and providing in-kind resources for regional faculty development programs as well as cooperative relationships with the institutions from which participants come.

따라서 파트너십은 변화하는 요구 사항을 충족시키고 새로운 기회에 대응하기 위해 구조, 목적 및 독립 정도에서 시간이 지남에 따라 발전하는 일련의 관계로 개념화 될 수 있습니다.

Thus, partnerships can be conceptualized as a set of relationships that evolve over time in structure, purpose, and degree of independence in order to meet changing needs and respond to emerging opportunities.

15.5 Factors That Facilitate Successful Partnerships

 

국제 협력 개발을위한 성공 요인에 대한 더 많은 연구가 필요하지만 (El Ansari 외 2001, Glendinning 2002, Halliday 외 2004, O'Sullivan and Irby 2011), 국제 협력을 포함한 성공적인 파트너십에 관한 기존 문헌 의학 교육에서 iFDP의 관련 요인을 지적한다 (Kolars et al., Tekian and Dwyer 1998).

While there is a need for more research on success factors for international faculty development partnerships (El Ansari et al. 2001 ; Glendinning 2002 ; Halliday et al. 2004 ; O’Sullivan and Irby 2011 ), existing literature on successful partnerships, including international collaborations in medical education, point to relevant factors for international faculty development partnerships (Kolars et al. 2012 ; Tekian and Dwyer 1998 ).

'성공'은 파트너십의 과정과 결과에 의해 정의됩니다.

‘Success’ is defined by both the process and outcomes of the partnership.

 

프로세스 성공의 지표로는 파트너의 높은 참여와 참여, 파트너십의 목적과 필요에 대한 동의, 높은 수준의 신뢰와 존중,지지적인 주변 환경 (재정 환경, 제도 및 법적 구조,보다 광범위한 조직 간 관계) 파트너십에 대한 적절한 모니터링과 평가, 적극적이고 효과적인 리더십과 관리 (Dowling et al. 2004).

Indicators of process success include

• high engagement and commitment of the partners,

• agreement about the purpose and need for the partnership,

• high levels of trust and respect,

• supportive surrounding environments (fi nancial climate, institutional and legal structures, broader inter-organizational relationship),

• adequate monitoring and evaluation of the partnership, and

• active and effective leadership and management (Dowling et al. 2004 ).

프로세스 성공은 파트너십 형성을 통한 성공과 시간이 지남에 따른 파트너십 유지로 이어질 수 있습니다 (Leffers and Mitchell 2011).

Process success can further be divided into success with partnership formation and success with sustaining partnerships over time (Leffers and Mitchell 2011 ).

 

결과 성공 지표는이 장의 앞부분에서 설명한 개인, 제도, 시스템 및 관계 이점의 달성과 관련됩니다. 여기에는 파트너 기관(예 : 교수의 질)과 지역사회 (예 : 졸업생의 능력, 지역 사회의 건강)의 긍정적인 변화가 포함될 수 있습니다.

Outcome success indicators relate to

• achievement of the individual, institutional, system, and relationship benefits described earlier in this chapter.

• These may include positive changes in the partner institutions (e.g. quality of teaching) as well as the community being served (e.g. competence of graduates, health of community).

 

15.5.1 Partnership Formation

파트너쉽을 수립하는 세 가지 핵심 요소.

Three key elements in the establishment of partnerships are

• the respective partners;

• certain human, financial, and material resources; and

• a process of engagement (Leffers and Mitchell 2011 ).

 

파트너십 형성과 관련된 요소들

• Recognition and acceptance of the need for partnership,

• frequent and two-way communication,

• mutual goal setting,

• adequate resources (including not only tangible assets but also time, expertise, trust, and understanding of each other),

• knowledge and information sharing, and

• cultural competence

...are cited as factors sup- porting the establishment of partnership relationships (Asthana et al. 2002 ; Gajda 2004 ; Kolars et al. 2012 ; Leffers and Mitchell 2011 ; Tekian and Dwyer 1998 ).

파트너십, 빈번한 양방향 의사 소통, 상호 목표 설정, 적절한 자원 (유형 자산뿐만 아니라 시간, 전문 지식, 신뢰 및 서로 이해함), 지식 및 정보 공유, 문화적 역량. (Asthana et al., 2002; Gajda 2004, Kolars et al., Leffers and Mitchell 2011, Tekian and Dwyer 1998).

 

이러한 요소들을 파트너십에 통합하는 데는 주의 깊은 계획이 필요합니다. 예를 들어

• 기관 간 정보 공유를 방해 할 수있는 조직 장벽 (예 : 정보 공유 제한 정책)을 인식하고 최소화해야 할 필요가 있습니다.

• 상호 목표 설정은 모든 파트너가 이익을 얻도록 보장하는 데 중요할 뿐만 아니라, 한 파트너의 다른 파트너에 대한 의존도를 잠재적으로 조장(foster)하는 것을 피하는 데 도움이됩니다 (Kolars 외. 2012).

Incorporating these factors into a partnership requires mindful planning. For example, there is a need to recognize and minimize organizational barriers that may impede sharing information between institutions (e.g. policies restricting information sharing). Mutual goal setting is important to ensure that all partners benefi t; it also helps to avoid the potential fostering of dependency of one partner on the other (Kolars et al. 2012 ).

 

문화적 역량은 조직 문화의 차이로 인해 발생하는 문화적 차이와 함께 개방적이고 가치있는 차이를 평가하는 것을 포함합니다 (Asthana 외 2002).

• 문화적 인식, 지식 및 기술의 차이 해결 (Tekian 및 Dwyer 1998, Campinha-Bacote 2002)과 함께

• 언어 차이를 해결하는 것이이 부분 일 수 있습니다 (Wong and Agisheva 2007).

• 문화의 연결은 또한 교육 문화로 확장됩니다 (Wong and Agisheva 2007). 교수진은 교수 개발 활동 중에 다른 환경의 교수 전략에 복종하는 것에 익숙하지 않을 수도 있습니다.

Cultural competence includes being open to and valuing differences, with cultural differences arising also from differences in organizational cultures (Asthana et al. 2002 ).

• Addressing language differences may be part of this (Wong and Agisheva 2007 ),

• along with cultural awareness, knowledge, and skills (Tekian and Dwyer 1998 ; Campinha-Bacote 2002 ).

• The bridging of cultures also extends to educational cultures (Wong and Agisheva 2007 ). Faculty in one setting may not be accustomed to being subjected to teaching strategies in the course of faculty development activities that are commonplace in another setting.

Tekian과 Dwyer (1998)는 중국과 이집트의 보건 전문 교육 (MHPE)에서 석사 과정을 설립하기위한 국제 파트너십을 비교하여 효과적인 의사 소통의 중요성과 언어 차이의 문제점을 강조합니다. 여기에는 교직원들이 서로 의사 소통하고 의사 소통이 제한된 언어로 된 문학의 사용이 제한되어 있습니다 (번역사가없는 경우).

In a comparison of international partnerships to establish Masters programs in Health Professions Education (MHPE) in China and Egypt, Tekian and Dwyer ( 1998 ) highlight the importance of effective communication and the challenges of language differences. This includes potential diffi culty with faculty members communicating with each other and with students (in the absence of translators), and limited use of literature in languages where faculty and students have limited fl uency.

 

iFDP를 개발할 때 문화적 인식, 즉, 상대의 가치, 정치적 기후 및 국가의 사회 경제적 지위를 이해하는 것이 중요합니다. 따라서 파트너는 서로의 상황, 필요, 자원 및 우선 순위를 이해하고 이러한 인식을 파트너십 아젠다 개발의 기초로 사용하도록 노력해야합니다.

Cultural awareness, understanding of accepted values, political climate, and the socioeconomic status of the country are important when developing international faculty development partnerships. Thus, partners need to work toward understanding each other’s contexts, needs, resources, and priorities, and using this awareness as a basis for developing the partnership agenda.

 

 

문화적 역량을 성취하기위한 전략에는

• 문화적으로 친숙한 교수 및 평가 도구를 찾고,

• 선입견에 저항하며,

• 다른 사람들과 문화의 특징에 대해 토론하고,

• 정체성에 관한 문학을 검토하고,

• 문화적 역량을 다루는 전문성 개발에 참여할 수 있습니다 (Willis 1999).

 

Strategies to achieve cultural competence may include

• seeking culturally- friendly teaching and assessment tools,

• resisting stereo-types,

• discussing features of culture with others,

• reviewing the literature on identity, and

• participating in professional development that addresses cultural competence (Willis 1999 ).

프로그램을 현지 요구에 맞게 조형 및 조정하고 지역 환경에 적합한 사례 및 사례 연구를 통해 내용을 적용 및 보완하는 등의 신중한 준비도 성공에 필수적입니다 (Tekian and Dwyer 1998).

Careful preparation, including

• molding and tailoring a program to local needs and

• adapting and supplementing the content with examples and case studies appropriate to local environments,

is also imperative to success (Tekian and Dwyer 1998 ).

 

 

 

문화적 시각, 개인적 특성, 개인적 기대, 파트너 국가에 대한 지식은 모두 파트너 관계 개발에 중요한 역할을합니다. 다른 문화에서 가르치려는 교수진을 주의 깊게 선택하면 교수진의 생산성과 기여도가 향상됩니다.

또한 문화적 오해를 최소화하고 여러 렌즈를 통해 세상을 보는 것에 대한 관용을 증대시키기 위해 국제 과제 수행에 관심있는 교수진을 준비하는 데 충분한 시간을 할애해야 합니다 (Tekian and Dwyer 1998).

Cultural perspectives, personal attributes, personal expectations, and knowledge of the partner country all play a role in the development of the partner relationship. Careful selection of faculty who are willing to teach in a different culture improves the productivity and contribution of the faculty. Additionally, suffi cient time should be devoted for preparing faculty interested in undertaking international assignments in order to minimize cultural misunderstandings and increase tolerance to seeing the world through multiple lenses (Tekian and Dwyer 1998 ).

다양한 논문을 인용하면서, Leffers and Mitchell (2011 p 99)은 효과적인 파트너십을위한 다양한 특질의 역할을 강조했다.

• 상호 동의

• 커뮤니케이션, 상호 지원, 상호 신뢰, 존중, 평등 및 분쟁 관리를 포함하는 호혜적 동료 관계;

• 전문가 간의 공유, 협력 및 시너지를 포함하는 상호 의존성;

• 빈번한 피드백;

• 합의하고 평등 주의적 인 권력과 리더십 '
  

Citing various papers, Leffers and Mitchell ( 2011 p. 99) highlight the role of various attributes for effective partnerships, including the following:

• ‘agreement to partner;

• collegial relationships that include reciprocity, communication, mutual support, mutual trust, respect, equality and confl ict management;

• interdependency that involves sharing, cooperation, and synergy between professionals;

• frequent feedback; and

• power and leadership that is consensual and egalitarian’.

 

아래는 효과적인 협업을 위한 중요한 기술입니다 (Kolars 외, 2012; Leffers and Mitchell 2011, Tekian and Dwyer 1998).

• 효과적인 의사 소통,

• 공유 된 의사 결정

• 협상

Effective communication, shared decision making, and negotiation are important skills for effective collaboration (Kolars et al. 2012 ; Leffers and Mitchell 2011 ; Tekian and Dwyer 1998 ).

 

이는 협력자 들간의 직접 대면 회의 (Kolars et al. 2012)에 의해 지원됩니다. 상호 합의 된 목표를 수립하는 것은 진행중인 교환 과정의 일부입니다. 이것은 서로 공유하는 가치를 개발하는 과정입니다.
This is aided by face-to-face meetings between collaborators (Kolars et al. 2012 ). Establishing mutually-agreed goals is part of the on-going process of exchange. Implicit in this process is the development of a shared set of values.

 

적절한 목표를 구성하고 목표를 측정하는 방법에 대한 명확한 의제를 설정하면 효과적인 파트너십을 확보하는 데 도움이 될 수 있습니다. 이를 달성하는 한 가지 방법은 요구도 평가 프로세스를 함께 고안하고 착수하는 것입니다 (Guo et al. 2009). 북아메리카와 사하라 사막 이남 아프리카 기관 들간의 협력 관계 중 하나는 그들의 토론과 처음에 원하는 증거의 틀을 알리기 위해 10 가지 학습 질문을 고안했다 (Kolars 외. 2012). 이 단계를 더욱 발전 시키려면 잠재적 이득와 위험을 평가하여 협력에 참여한 당사자들이 관련 이슈에 대해 알리고 최적으로 해결할 수있는 견고한 접근 방식을 개발해야합니다 (Kanter 2010).

Setting a clear agenda for both what constitute appropriate goals and how those goals will be measured may help ensure an effective partnership. One way of achieving this is devising and undertaking a needs assessment process together (Guo et al. 2009 ). One collective of partnerships between North America and sub-Saharan African institutions devised ten learning questions to inform their discussions and a framework of desired evidence at the outset (Kolars et al. 2012 ). Taking this a step further, robust approaches need to be developed to assess potential benefits and risks so that parties engaging in a collaboration are both informed about and optimally able to address relevant issues (Kanter 2010 ).

15.5.2 파트너십 지속가능성

15.5.2  Partnership  Sustainability

이 장의 시작 부분에서 설명한 것처럼 파트너십 구조와 목표는 시간이 지남에 따라 발전 할 수 있습니다. 상호 지원 및 격려(Mutual support and encouragement )는 파트너십의 모든 단계에서 중요합니다. 프로세스의 여러 단계에서 에너지를 제공하는 파트너는 상호 이익과 마찬가지로 지속 가능성에 중요 할 수 있습니다. 이타주의 만이 파트너십을 유지하기에 충분조건이되지 못한다 (Einterz 외. 2007).

As discussed in the beginning of this chapter, partnership structures and goals may evolve over time. Mutual support and encouragement are important at all stages of partnerships. Partners contributing energy at different stages of the process can be important for sustainability, as are mutual benefi ts. Altruism alone is not a suffi cient condition for maintaining a partnership (Einterz et al. 2007 ).

능동적이고 효과적인 리더십과 관리 및 공유 된 프로젝트 소유권은 파트너십의 지속 가능성을 지원하는 것으로 나타났습니다 (Asthana 외 2002, Leffers and Mitchell 2011). 관계가 지속 가능하기 위해서는 특정 개인에 대한 의존성을 초월할 필요가 있습니다 (관련된 개인은 시간이 지남에 따라 변경 될 수 있기 때문에). 관계와 가치가 파트너십이 운영되는 방식과 과정의 일부분이되도록 네트워크를 제도화하여 지원할 수 있습니다 (Asthana 외 2002). 파트너쉽의 평가는 파트너쉽을 개선하고 유지하는데 유용한 정보와 책임성을 제공 할 수도있다 (Asthana 외. 2002).

Active and effective leadership and management and shared project ownership have been noted to support sustainability of partnerships (Asthana et al. 2002 ; Leffers and Mitchell 2011 ). For relationships to be sustainable, there is a need to transcend dependence on specifi c individuals (since the specifi c individuals involved are likely to change over time). Institutionalizing networks so that relationships and values are part of the structure and process of how the partnership operates may support this (Asthana et al. 2002 ). Evaluation of partnerships may also provide information and accountability that is useful for improving and sustaining the partnership (Asthana et al. 2002 ).

관련 업무에 종사하는 다른 단체와의 연계를 구축하면 파트너십의 성공과 지속 가능성이 강화 될 수 있습니다 (Asthana 외 2002). 대규모 협력은 대학, 정부 부처 및 중앙 정부가 참여하기 전에 개인, 부서 및 기관 수준에서 관계를 수립함으로써 효과적으로 수립 될 수있다 (Einterz et al., 2007).

Establishing linkages with other organizations engaged in related work may strengthen the success and sustainability of partnerships (Asthana et al. 2002 ). Large collaborations may be effectively established by fi rst establishing relationships at personal, departmental, and institutional levels, before involving universities, government ministries, and central governments (Einterz et al. 2007 ).

 

지속 가능성에 대한 관심은 파트너 사가 일시적인 관계 및 이익보다는 제도적 강화에 초점을 맞추기 위해 그 자체로 중요합니다 (Kolars 외. 2012). 이러한 능력 구축은 챔피언, 리더십, 전문 지식 구조, 정책, 절차 및 자원에 대한 관심을 수반 할 수 있습니다 (Leffers and Mitchell 2011). 궁극적 인 파트너십 목표에 따라 시간이 지남에 따라 성공하려면 충분한 용량이 확보 된 후에 공동 소유권에서 파트너로 프로그램 소유권을 이전해야합니다. 또한 개발 도상국의 보건 시스템 구축에 영향을 줄 가능성을 높이기 위해 정부 및 자선 기금 제공처에 장기 제도적 파트너십 구축을 지원할 것을 촉구했다 (Einterz 외. 2007).

Attention to sustainability is in itself of great importance so that partners focus on institutional strengthening rather than transitory relationships and benefits (Kolars et al. 2012 ). This sort of capacity building may entail attention to champions, leadership, expertise structures, policies, procedures, and resources (Leffers and Mitchell 2011 ). Depending on the ultimate partnership goals, success over time may involve transfer of program ownership from joint to one partner, once sufficient capacity exists. There has also been a call for government and philanthropic funders to direct support to the establishment of long-term institutional partnerships so as to increase the likelihood of impact on building developing countries’ health systems (Einterz et al. 2007 ).

15.6 Conclusion

성공적인 파트너십 형성을 지원하는 일반적인 요소로는 잦은 양방향 의사 소통, 상호 목표 설정, 분명한 의제 설정, 적절한 자원 및 문화적 역량이 포함됩니다. General factors that support successful partnership formation include

• fre- quent two-way communication,

• mutual goal setting,

• setting a clear agenda,

• ade- quate resources, and

• cultural competence.

파트너쉽의 지속 가능성은 상호 이익의 실현, 효과적인 리더십 및 관리, 프로젝트 소유권 공유, 타 조직과의 연계성 제정 및 강화 및 역량 강화를 통해 지원됩니다.

Partnership sustainability is supported by

• realization of mutual benefits,

• effective leadership and management,

• shared project ownership,

• establishment of linkages with other organizations, and

• insti- tutional strengthening and capacity building.

15.7 Key Messages

• Building relationships is crucial for productive, sustained international faculty development partnerships.

• Well-functioning partnerships allow faculty exposure to methods, materials, opportunities, contexts, and contacts/networks that they may not encounter locally.

 • Cultural bridging, effective and frequent communication, and mutual goal setting are important to partnership success.

 • Success in partnerships is defined by both process and outcomes success, and rests on attention to and planning for not only partnership formation but also sustainability.

 • International faculty development partnerships vary in their structures and purposes, with both potentially evolving over time in response to partner needs and goals.

 

 

 

 

Armstrong, E. G. & Barsion, S. J. (2006). Using an outcomes-logic-model approach to evaluate a faculty development program for medical educators. Academic Medicine, 81 (5), 483–488.

Armstrong, E. G., Doyle, J., & Bennett, N. L. (2003). Transformative professional development of physicians as educators: Assessment of a model. Academic Medicine, 78 (7), 702–708.

Burdick, W. P., Amaral, E., Campos, H., & Norcini, J. (2011). A model for linkage between health professions education and health: FAIMER international faculty development initiatives. Medical Teacher, 33 (8) , 632 – 637.

Burdick, W. P., Diserens, D., Friedman, S. R., Morahan, P. S., Kalishman, S., Eklund, M. A., et al. (2010). Measuring the effects of an international health professions faculty development fellowship: The FAIMER Institute. Medical Teacher, 32 (5), 414–421.

Burdick, W. P., Friedman, S. R., & Diserens, D. (2012). Faculty development projects for international health professions educators: Vehicles for institutional change? Medical Teacher, 34 (1), 38–44.

Burdick, W. P., Morahan, P. S., & Norcini, J. J. (2006). Slowing the brain drain: FAIMER education programs. Medical Teacher, 28 (7), 631–634.

Burdick, W. P., Morahan, P. S., & Norcini, J. J. (2007). Capacity building in medical education and health outcomes in developing countries: The missing link. Education for Health, 20 (3), 65.

Clinton, Y., Anderson, F. W., & Kwawukume, E. Y. (2010). Factors related to retention of postgraduate trainees in obstetrics-gynecology at the Korle-Bu Teaching Hospital in Ghana. Academic Medicine, 85 (10), 1564–1570.

Einterz, R. M., Kimaiyo, S., Mengech, H. N. K., Khwa-Otsyula, B. O., Esamai, F., Quigley, F., et al. (2007). Responding to the HIV pandemic: The power of an academic medical partnership. Academic Medicine, 82 (8), 812–818.

Guo, Y., Sippola, E., Feng, X., Dong, Z., Wang, D., Moyer, C. A., et al. (2009). International medical school faculty development: The results of a needs assessment survey among medical educators in China. Advances in Health Sciences Education, 14 (1), 91–102.

Kanter, S. L. (2010). International collaborations between medical schools: What are the benefits and risks? Academic Medicine, 85 (10), 1547–1548.

Kolars, J. C., Cahill, K., Donkor, P., Kaaya, E., Lawson, A., Serwadda, D., et al. (2012). Perspective: Partnering for medical education in Sub-Saharan Africa: Seeking the evidence for effective collaborations. Academic Medicine, 87 (2), 216–220.

Leffers, J. & Mitchell, E. (2011). Conceptual model for partnership and sustainability in global health. Public Health Nursing, 28 (1), 91–102.

Norcini, J. J. & Banda, S. S. (2011). Increasing the quality and capacity of education: The challenge for the 21st century. Medical Education, 45 (1), 81–86.

Norcini, J. J., Burdick, W. P., & Morahan, P. (2005). The FAIMER Institute: Creating international networks of medical educators. Medical Teacher, 27 (3), 214–218.

Tekian, A. & Dwyer, M. (1998). Lessons for the future: Comparison and contrasts of the Master of Health Professions Education programs offered in China and Egypt. Teaching and Learning in Medicine, 10 (3) , 190 – 195.

Tekian, A. & Harris, I. (2012). Preparing health professions education leaders worldwide: A description of masters-level programs. Medical Teacher, 34 (1) , 52–58.

Wong, J. G. & Agisheva, K. (2004). Cross-cultural faculty development: Initial report of an American/Russian experience. Teaching and Learning in Medicine, 16 (4), 376–380.

Wong, J. G. & Agisheva, K. (2007). Developing teaching skills for medical educators in Russia: A cross-cultural faculty development project. Medical Education, 41 (3), 318–324.

---

Chapter

Faculty Development in the Health Professions

Volume 11 of the series Innovation and Change in Professional Education pp 311-329

Date: 17 December 2013

International Faculty Development Partnerships

• Stacey Friedman 
• , Francois Cilliers
• , Ara Tekian
• , John Norcini

Abstract

International faculty development partnerships are motivated by a desire to achieve mutual goals. They are also a response to the globalization of health professions education, research, and practice. For participating institutions, partnerships may build global awareness, improve recruitment, and provide resources for students, faculty members, and alumni. Well-functioning partnerships allow faculty exposure to methods of teaching and learning, opportunities for research, and clinical contexts, materials, and methods that they may not encounter locally. Partnerships allow faculty to expand their networks of collaborators and the communities of scholarship in which they work. This chapter will describe various examples of international faculty development programs. We will also discuss facilitators of success for international partnerships, including the need for cultural competence, shared values, and mutual support.