Simulation Faculty Development

To the Editor: We appreciate the comments of Kumar et al1 in their response to our article, Peterson et al.2 We agree that mentorship, a customized education plan, and incentives are each essential in simulation faculty development. We would like to take the opportunity to highlight each of these within the context of our tiered faculty development program. Mentorship is certainly important in developing expertise in any area. Many formal and informal mentoring relationships are fostered even within our structure. Faculty participating in our certification plan may choose their mentor or may ask for help in finding a mentor who is a good match for their content area or area of interest. Our structure also supports mentorship in that we provide suggested, evidence-based tools for use in giving feedback. We agree with the authors that mentees often carry a heavy load of clinical, administrative, and personal responsibilities leading them to need additional support in finding constructive ways to mentor their peers. In our experience, this structure provides the support needed for effective mentoring. We also agree that a customized education plan can be valuable and is an alternate approach for programs without an existing structure. However, it is our assertion that an “informal” approach as suggested by the authors could result in profound variability that could have a detrimental impact on the learning environment for those who participate in simulation activities. We recognize that the creation of a tiered faculty development program may be difficult at some institutions; however, we believe that our structure as presented provides ample room for customization and meeting the needs and/or requirements of other institutions. Our tiered and structured plan is inclusive of all levels of involvement. Entry level simulationists are encouraged and welcome, and the plan creates a path for advancement if they wish to continue. We have partnered with more than 1000 simulation facilitators in the past 4 years, and each has had very different experiences in their development as simulationists. The content of our tiered program merely serves as a core set of institutional priorities and assumptions about simulation best practices that allow us to provide our learners (>21,000 in 2017 facilitated through our office alone) with a recognizable, stable learning environment across seven health schools and the health system within which we operate. Examples of “structured educational components” as mentioned by the authors (ie, discussing peer-reviewed articles, recommending national meeting attendance, networking) are also accomplished at our institution but through a series of regular monthly gatherings. We also agree that incentivization is vital to building a cadre of competent and skilled simulationists within any institution. One way this can be accomplished is by working with promotion and tenure committees to ensure that this work is recognized. We strongly encourage all individuals who participate in our development plan to include their simulation faculty development training on their curriculum vitae to be recognized. Many of the simulationists at our institution have received university-wide teaching awards and are viewed as expert educators in their fields. We also offer continuing education credits for each of the simulation faculty development workshops offered within our program. In addition to the incentives mentioned previously, our university has also developed a simulation fellowship program as well as a Master of Science in Healthcare Simulation for those who desire to gain additional expertise in a more formalized way. In conclusion, we have not found a structured and tiered approach to simulation faculty development to be a barrier. We find that it actually helps legitimize the work we do in simulation and provides a welcome path for those who want to participate in high-quality simulation activities. Dawn Taylor Peterson, PhD Department of Medical Education School of Medicine Department of Health Services Administration School of Health Professions Office of Interprofessional Simulation for Innovative Clinical Practice University of Alabama at Birmingham Birmingham, AL [email protected]Penni I. Watts, PhD, RN, CHSE-A University of Alabama at Birmingham School of Nursing Birmingham, ALChad A. Epps, MD Center for Healthcare Improvement and Patient Simulation The University of Tennessee Health Science Center Memphis, TNMarjorie Lee White, MD, MPPM, MA, CHSE Departments of Pediatrics and Medical Education School of Medicine Department of Health Services Administration School of Health Professions Office of Interprofessional Simulation for Innovative Clinical Practice University of Alabama at Birmingham Birmingham, AL