Conclusion
Ambulatory care faculty are taking on a role of unprecedented importance. Development of methods to assist them in this important role is essential. I have not attempted to include all possible approaches to improve faculty effectiveness and enthusiasm in this paper. Nevertheless, I hope that the framework used in this article will provide a basis for thinking about the roles of ambulatory care faculty and the support system they need to remain effective and enthusiastic. These teachers are important to the changing field of medicine and medical education. They now deserve our attention.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Similar content being viewed by others
References
Skeff KM. The evaluation of a method to improve the teaching performance of the attending physician. Am J Med 1983; 75:465–70
Skeff KM, Campbell M, Stratos G. Process and product in clinical teaching: a correlational study. Proceedings: Research in Medical Education (RIME), 1985; 25–30
Skeff KM, Stratos G, Campbell M, Cooke M, Jones H. Evaluation of the seminar method for improving clinical teaching. J Gen Intern Med 1986; 1:315–22
Berman J, Weise-Slater SM, Bergen MR, Skeff KM. House officers’ and independent observers’ ratings of clinical teaching. Clin Res 1987; 35:730A
Kosecoff J, Fink A, Brook RH, et al. General medical care and the education of internists in university hospitals. Ann Intern Med 1985; 102:250–7
Kantor SM, Griner PF. Educational needs in general internal medicine as perceived by prior residents. J Med Educ 1981; 56:748–56
Kroenke K. Ambulatory care: practice imperfect. Am J Med 1986; 80:339–42
Mager RF. Preparing instructional objectives. Belmont, CA: Pitman Learning, Inc., 1984
Lipkin M, Quill TE, Napodano RJ. The medical interview: a core curriculum for residencies in internal medicine. Ann Intern Med 1984; 100:277–84
McClelland DC. Toward a theory of motive acquisition. Am Psychologist 1965; 20:321–33
Jones JG, Cason GJ, Cason C. The acquisition of cognitive knowledge through clinic experiences. Med Educ 1986; 20:10–2
Moore GT. HMO’s and medical education: fashioning a marriage. Health Affairs 1986: 147–53
Ende J, Pozen JT, Levinsky NG. Enhancing learning during a clinical clerkship: the value of a structured curriculum. J Gen Intern Med 1986; 1:232–7
Skeff KM, Campbell M, Stratos G. Evaluation of attending physicians: three perspectives. Proceedings: Research in Medical Education (RIME), 1984; 277–81
Ende J. Feedback in clinical medical education. JAMA 1983; 520:777–81
Skeff KM, Campbell M, Stratos G, Jones H, Cooke M. Attending physicians’ assessment of the seminar method for improving clinical teaching. J Med Educ 1984;59:944–50
Bland CJ, Schmitz CC. Faculty vitality on review: retrospect and prospect. Paper presented at the AERA Meeting, San Francisco, CA, 1986
Gjerde CL, Colombo SE. Promotion criteria: perceptions of faculty members and departmental chairmen. J Med Educ 1982; 57:157–62
Nelson WC. The AAC project on faculty development: content, process, and motivation in faculty renewal. Liberal Educ 1980;66:208–9
Bland CJ, Schmitz CC. Characteristics of the successful researcher and implications for faculty development. J Med Educ 1986; 27:307–10
Stritter FT, Baker RM, McGaghie WC. Congruence between residents’ and clinical instructors’ perceptions of teaching in outpatient care centres. Med Educ 1983; 17:385–9
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Skeff, K.M. Enhancing teaching effectiveness and vitality in the ambulatory setting. J Gen Intern Med 3 (Suppl 1), S26–S33 (1988). https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02600249
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02600249