Skip to main content
. Author manuscript; available in PMC: 2016 Dec 8.
Published in final edited form as: J Fac Dev. 2016 Sep;30(3):49–64.

Table 6.

General Recommendations

Based on the findings of this analysis, we provide a few recommendations for future iterations of ACIT that may be applied to other mid-career faculty development programs:
The protected time was critical for some participants, but not for others. Recommendation:
    • Redesign the program for 20-25 faculty with enough scholarship funding to provide up to 5% of protected time, while continuing to provide the menu of less-intensive development opportunities currently utilized by the remaining faculty each year.
The primary staff members were ideally suited for their roles, as they set high expectations for the program and the participants (Mclean et al., 2008). Their commitment and finesse planted the seeds for connectivity and buy-in among all parties. Recommendation:
    • The program organizers should be carefully selected and supported.
The off-site location and two-day sessions were essential to maximize participant engagement. Recommendation:
    • Keep the program off-site and maintain consecutive two-day modules.
Although there were suggestions for additional topic areas that could be added, there was greater support for curtailing the content to allow more time for processing and application. Recommendations:
    • Retain the content areas that received the highest ratings and integrate those speakers into the core faculty to create more continuity.
    • Ensure that core faculty are committed to
        ○ Using interactive activities that will focus on experiential learning and allow for movement throughout the day and
        ○ Making the language and material relevant to participants from all schools and backgrounds. If necessary, incorporate break-out sessions to allow sub-groups to work together (e.g. clinicians, administrators, researchers, and teachers).
    • Reserve time at the beginning and end of each module to discuss the participants’ practical applications of the material (Carroll, 1993)
The capstone projects were ambitious, difficult to coordinate, and not well supported by all sponsors. Recommendations:
    • Either
        1. Chose one project with a committed sponsor and let individuals or groups tackle different aspects of the project
        2. Let participants chose a project where they can apply the content to their pre -existing work and responsibilities.
    • Build the group-work time into the program.
    • Employ facilitators to assist in successfully launching the project(s) and helping groups stay on track.
    • Require regular meetings with the sponsor(s) during and at the completion of the program.
    • Conclude with a formal agreement between group members and sponsor(s) about the “next steps” for the project.
    • Given the importance of institutional culture to the success of faculty development initiatives (Laursen & Rocque, 2009), a true partnership between the participants and leaders would set a valuable precedent for future cohorts.
The learning communities’ camaraderie was appreciated by all, but their utility and effectiveness were mixed. Recommendations:
    • Keep the learning communities, but have group members set ground rules and expectations at the beginning and schedule regular check-ins with facilitators.
    • Ensure that participants’ career goals are congruent with their values (Banks, 2012), and then use their personal development plans to provide structure and accountability to the learning communities.
    • Consider having members of the original cohort return to speak with the next cohort about how to maximize the effectiveness of the groups.
The longitudinal design was key to creating the cohort effect and increasing connectivity to the institution. However, the program lacked the robust level of cohesion that was desired. Recommendation:
    • Maintain the longitudinal design, but be more intentional about interlacing the content and bridging the modules in order to connect the various components (Garet, Porter, Desimone, Birman, & Yoon, 2001).
ACIT's long-term impact on the participants and the institution would be enhanced by a self-sustaining peer mentoring system, which has also been shown to improve recruitment efforts and increase retention (Heinrich & Oberleitner, 2012). Recommendations:
    • Formally integrate mentor training and peer coaching into the program or provide supplemental training to interested participants.
    • Provide feedback to department chairs so that the strengths of their participating faculty members can be utilized most effectively by mentoring colleagues and serving as liaisons to the institutional leaders.