The research scholars in the field of development of faculty members rely on specific assumptions, which can be helpful to better understand this field.
- The development of faculty members refers to a process of enhancing the current situation that varies from institution to institution, college to college and one department to another (
10). This development process varies concerning the capabilities and facilities of a university and its faculty members, as well as the different temporal and spatial conditions. The programs administered in an institution may not be effective at other institutions (
11).
- The specific needs of faculty members should be identified when developing faculty members (
12). New behavioral patterns are formed in children along with physical growth; adults, however, need to grow various social roles, for which motivation and feeling of success are necessary. Faculty members would therefore not seek development without feeling successful and motivated (
13-
15).
- Planning does not necessarily cause changes, and the determination to make changes can cause resistance. To create changes, the personal views need to be changed first, followed by sharing the vision and goals of the intended change (
16). The goals proposed for the faculty members of universities of medical sciences are defined as per university goals. The vision and individual goals of the faculty members should ultimately conform to university goals (
17). In recent years, much emphasis has been placed on the importance of focusing on faculty members’ development programs, which are not only based on individuals’ needs, but also on organizational aspects. Although individual improvement is undoubtedly vital, it is sometimes less important than organizational development. Hence, faculty members often need to strike a balance between the goals of personnel and those of the institution and organization (
9).
Most development centers provide similar programs and services, and traditional organizational structures still dominate the centers for faculty members’ development. In most universities, traditional strategies, including participation in classrooms, educational workshops, assemblies and conferences, are used for specific, specialized, educational and research topics (
18). The most common formats include workshops and seminars, short courses and fellowships and scholarships, and alternative formats include integrated longitudinal plans, decentralized activities, mentoring courses, counseling, self-guided education and computer-assisted learning (
5).
- Comprehensive programs for faculty members’ development should be formally established by considering the specific features of institutions and the requirements of different disciplines. Supporting sources are crucial for increasing the program quality, since the creation of a formal and organizational program appears to cause widespread acceptance and participation in the development activities by faculty members. One of the main elements of development program for faculty members can point at counseling, reducing workload, increasing support and workshops (
19). A comprehensive plan for faculty members not only helps accomplish the university goals, it can also lead to the realization of university goals in a wider community (
20).
- Faculty members’ development is a continuous process requiring the expenditure of a great deal of time, budget, and effort. Resource accessibility for supporting faculty members’ development, i.e. financial resources including external sources or research grants, technological or organizational resources, and reducing faculty members’ workload are the factors contributing to faculty members’ development (
19).
- The positive reinforcement of leaders’ and policymakers’ program for implementing a development program for faculty members is an important issue (
21) that differs with the capacities and facilities of a university and its faculty members and with different temporal and spatial development conditions. Generalizing development needs and setting rigid rules and regulations for faculty members’ development in different universities is therefore futile and may lead to the demotivation and frustration of faculty members. Localizing the development model in different universities and institutions is therefore crucial (
22).
- Development programs vary in terms of structure and function. The most appropriate alternative depends on key factors including financial support, human resources, university resources and recruitment of interested employees. No models can be considered perfect from all aspects; each model has its own advantages and disadvantages (
23,
24).
- Faculty members of medical departments do not receive any training in professional development before beginning their career. Given the complexity of their occupational duties, they need to receive training regarding a wide range of professional development skills (
2).
In the 1960s, faculty member development was seriously proposed and has continuously grown up to date in terms of quantity and in other development fields, most of which established within different structures. The main focus, however, appears to have been on learning and education in all types of institutions (
25). In fact, most of these centers offer similar programs and services, while traditional organizational structures still govern in many of these centers (
18). The first article published on the development of faculty members comprised a report on a survey of medical faculty members. This study was conducted in the US in 1977, and showed that most faculty members feel under-prepared to play their role as a teacher and welcome the opportunities provided to learn more about education and teaching. Thereafter, Jason worked through educational workshops, films, and educational materials with a special emphasis on group discussion and received help from the Association of American Medical Schools (AAMC) to create clinical education opportunities. Today, a more stringent student evaluation of faculty members in the US higher education system has led to the emergence of programs that improve the teaching methods of faculty members in colleges and universities. The most common type of faculty development activities in medical reports involves teaching methods improvement. These common topics found in all articles on different fields of medical sciences include curriculum design skills and learner support and assessment. How these competencies should be taught is also addressed in literature, with a focus on answering the major question of what knowledge and skills and attitudes are required for faculty members involved in medical sciences education. All these articles concern educational development plans, faculty member training programs and methods of evaluating these programs (
26,
27).
The most common type of faculty members’ development activities in medical reports is associated to education method improvement. Although teaching is the main role of most faculty members, the education quality is affected by the performance of a faculty member in other areas such as research; faculty member development should therefore be also incorporated in areas which are not limited to education and teaching (
27).
Although the term development of faculty members’ is often used to describe the activities and programs designed to improve faculty members’ teaching skills, scholars and experts in this field have recently considered the term for development of the activities and plans associated to the multiple roles of faculty members (as mentor-researcher-faculty member and member of a larger academic community), and to support them in their multiple roles such as education, research and services, considering four types of development in their plans, i.e. individual, educational, organizational and professional.
- Steinert argued that faculty members’ development involves the preparation of individuals’ knowledge and skills in terms of teaching and learning, curriculum design and planning, evolution and assessment of learners, evaluation of programs and leadership, and seeking knowledge and research (
5). It can also change or reinforce the attitudes and beliefs about the different aspects of the roles and responsibilities of faculty members (
28).
- Both organizational and individual development is essential for developing faculty members (
29). Boyce et al. emphasized the organization, in terms of structure and roles and responsibilities, student-related activities, teaching abilities, knowledge and research abilities as well as practical and professional abilities, i.e. leadership and professional planning, as the components required for a comprehensive model of faculty members’ development (
30).
- Bergquist and Phillips considered faculty members’ development a combination of activities associated with individual development (changes in beliefs and values), educational development (changes in the process of communication and human interaction) and organizational development (changes in organizational structure and authorities) (
29).
According to Wilkerson and Irby, a comprehensive faculty plan should comprise (A). Professional development (the promotion of scientific and research achievements) (B). Leadership development (fostering planning and change skills) (C). Educational development (teaching improvement through mentoring) and (D). Organizational development (empowerment and participation in targeting and policy planning and development of reward systems) (
31).
- Camblin and Steger found the main development dimensions to comprise educational development (promoting the skills of faculty members in the application of teaching technology, curriculum and lesson plans), professional development (the growth and development of faculty members in their professional roles), organizational development (needs, preferences and organization of the university), occupational development (preparation for job promotion) and individual development (life planning, interpersonal skills, and individual faculty development) (
32).
- Power classified faculty members’ development into three levels of educational, professional, and organizational development and considered educational and professional development at the micro level and organizational development at the macro level (
33).
- Steinert classified faculty members’ development into five dimensions, namely (1) - Development in education (2) - Development for leadership and management (3) - Development for research (4) - Development for professional and academic progress and (5) - Development for organizational changes (
5).
- Ghourchian et al. also divided development into three sections, namely organizational, individual, and moral development (
34).
- Pourkarimi and Nave Ebrahim proposed three dimensions for faculty members’ development, namely professional development (skills associated to teaching, service provision, interpersonal relationships, research, writing, technology and education), organizational development (creating motivation, academic leadership, organizational structure, organizational climate and culture, innovation in the design and implementation of the program, holding meetings, support, access to technology, reward system and networking between members and team-building) as well as individual development (independent action, autonomy and self-regulation, self-efficacy, empowerment, occupational guidance, creativity, risk-taking and innovation, job commitment, job quality, organizational wellbeing, professional moral and time management) (
35).
- According to Pourkarimi, the factors influencing faculty members’ development include rules and regulations, managerial support, program orientation, organizational structure, participation of faculty members and managers’ attitudes. This author concluded that the factors predicting professional development include managers’ attitudes and organizational culture, and that the predictor variables of organizational and individual development include managerial support and organizational culture. Moreover, he noted the methods required for faculty members’ development, include educational workshops, educational seminars, study opportunities, inviting professors, consultation, research grant, facilitating access to scientific resources, educational and research awards as well as the factors affecting the effectiveness of development programs, include acceptance and organizational support, acceptance by faculty members, valid and appropriate and regular programs, considering a suitable leadership for the program, appropriate dissemination of information about development programs, focusing on one topic, establish relationships between development programs and reward structures, creating an atmosphere of interest and trust in the program, providing the required financial and human resources, strong managerial support, creating interest and motivation in faculty members and academic culture. Pourkarimi believed that proper leadership and accurate needs assessment are key factors contributing to the success of development programs (
36).
The components and sub-components of faculty members’ development were identified and summarized in
Table 1 through a literature review.
| Component | Researcher |
|---|
| Professional development | |
| Specialized services | Camblin and Steger (32), Srinivas and Adkoli (37), Centra (7), Pourkarimi and Nave Ebrahim (35) and Ahmady (17) |
| Research activities | Centra (7) and Pourkarimi and Nave Ebrahim (35) |
| Individual | |
| Organizational skills | Wilkerson and Irby (31), Skeff et al. (4) and Steinert (5) |
| Individual skills | Bergquist and Phillips (29), Camblin and Steger (32), Ghourchian et al. (34), AhmadAbadi et al. (38),Pourkarimi and Nave Ebrahim (35), Bland and Schmitz (9) |
| Ethics skills | Bergquist and Phillips (29), Ghourchian et al. (34) and Steinert (5) |
| Educational | |
| Teaching | Wilkerson and Irby (31), McKee et al.(18), Steinert (5), Pourkarimi and Nave Ebrahim (35), Centra (7) and Amady (12) |
| Design lessons and strategies | McKee et al. (18), Camblin and Steger (32), Wilkerson and Irby (31), Amady (12), Srinivas and Adkoli (37) |
| Assessment and advice | McKee et al. (18), Steinert (5), Wilkerson and Irby (31), Srinivas and Adkoli (37) |
| Organizational | |
| Policy making | Wilkerson and Irby (31), Camblin and Steger (32), Steinert (5), Clark et al. (38), Pourkarimi and Nave Ebrahim (35) and Bland and Schmitz (9) |
| Organizational structure | Bergquist and Phillips (29), Pourkarimi and Nave Ebrahim (35), Amundsen and Wilson (28) and Bland and Schmitz (9) |
The faculty development of medical sciences can be considered in two general dimensions.
The first dimension focuses on the faculty and includes:
- Professional development such as the skill of providing specialized services and performing research projects
- Individual development such as managerial and leadership skills and life planning
- Educational development such as classroom management and mastery of educational content
The second dimension focuses on the contextual and environmental factors supporting faculty members and includes organizational development such as academic leadership and organizational culture.
Figure 2 shows the conceptual framework of faculty development in medical education comprising the identified codes and primary and secondary components.
The conceptual framework of faculty development in medical education