AMEE introduced a new Association Management System on 3 August 2020 . If you are logging in for the first time since then, please enter your username (your email address) and select 'Forgotten Password'. You will be sent an email with instructions for accessing your account.

Several symposia sessions will be held at AMEE 2019. Symposia sessions are a series of short presentations by panellists on issues that are topical, and may be controversial, to stimulate debate and discussion with the audience. 

The following symposia will be streamed live:

  • Symposium 3a:  Activity Theory and Medical Education: Foundations, findings and future perspectives
  • Symposium 4a:  Every way of seeing is a way of not seeing: Critical insights into the blind spots of entrustment language
  • Symposium 5a:  Transition for Surgical Training to Surgical Practice:  Challenges, opportunities and innovation
  • Symposium 7a:  Expanding the role of patients as partners in education
  • Symposium 8a:  Universal Health Education Coverage - Health and education for the global community
  • Symposium 9a:  Embracing CPD diversity.  Bridgin gaps!
  • Symposium 10a:  Achieving Practice Change through Outcomes Based CPD

Session 3: Monday 26 August - 1015-1200

3A - Activity Theory and Medical Education: Foundations, findings and future perspectives

  1. Yrjö Engeström, The Center for Research on Activity, Development and Learning, University of Helsinki, Finland (speaker)
  2. Alan Bleakley, Faculty of Medicine and Dentistry, University of Plymouth, UK (speaker)
  3. Tim Dornan, The Queen’s University, Belfast, UK (speaker)
  4. Loes Meijer, Julius Center for Health Sciences and Primary Care, University Medical Centre Utrecht, the Netherlands (speaker)
  5. Eeva Pyörälä, Center for University Teaching and Learning, University of Helsinki, Finland (moderator)

Summary of theme and why it is important:  Professor Yrjö Engeström is an internationally leading figure in Activity Theory, which is one of the featured topics at AMEE 2019. He developed expansive learning, an interventionist and participatory research approach, to studying change in complex organizations. AMEE will have the privilege of hosting a plenary lecture by Professor Engeström during AMEE. He has kindly agreed, also, to join researchers who have drawn on his ideas in providing a symposium, which will allow delegates to learn more about Activity Theory from illustrative examples, ask questions in a plenary discussion, and consider its implications for their educational practice.

Participants will gain theoretical and practical insights into applying Activity Theory to education research in complex clinical workplace environments and to the education of healthcare professionals. These types of studies actively involve all stakeholders, including patients, in collective problem-solving and boundary-crossing. This advances the activities of organisations while positively changing their cultures.

Speakers will share their experience of applying Activity Theory to demonstrate applications of theoretical foundations accessible to participants, stimulating discussion about the future directions of socio-cultural research and expansive learning.
Professor Yrjö Engeström, whose expertise spans a wide range of educational contexts, will examine what Activity Theory and expansive learning have to offer our field. Professor Alan Bleakley will bridge Activity Theory and educational practice by examining the introduction of humanities into a medical undergraduate curriculum. Professor Tim Dornan will use Activity Theory as an interpretive lens to examine an educational programme, in which patients and members of the various clinical disciplines caring for them co-produced change. Doctor Loes Meijer will describe how she has used Engeström’s change laboratory technique to study the learning of medical specialists and general practitioners during collaborative patient care.

We will encourage AMEE delegates to share their views of and passion for medical education research and explore new and revitalising directions for future studies.

Who should participate in the symposium?  This symposium will be beneficial to all delegates interested in medical education research, and particularly for scholars interested in studying learning in complex organizations in change and involving participants in the research process. The symposium will be of interest to researchers and academics at all levels. 

What will you gain from participating?  Participants in the symposium will gain:

  • Scholarly understanding of the potential Activity theory and expansive learning offer to medical education research.
  • Insights into a powerful approach to exploring learning in complex settings such as clinical workplaces.
  • Inspiration to involve patients and carers as active participants in medical education and research.

3B - Causes and prevention of cognitive errors (diagnostic error). How will they inform our methods of teaching this to our learners? Is this possible?

  1. Dan Mayer, Retired from Albany Medical College, USA
  2. Michelle Daniel, University of Michigan Medical School, USA
  3. Robin Hemphill, University of Michigan Medical School, USA
  4. Sorabh Khandewal, Ohio State University Medical College, USA
  5. Sandra Montiero, McMaster University, Canada
  6. Geoff Norman, McMaster University, Canada

Summary of theme and why it is important:  Diagnostic errors frequently cause adverse outcomes in medicine.  The causes of most diagnostic errors and proposed methods of preventing them should be taught to our learners across the medical curriculum.  The current debate is whether we can give our learners adequate training in recognizing potential cognitive ‘traps’ that lead to diagnostic errors?  Or, should we explore “just in time” approaches like content-specific checklists? Do we need to put more of our educational effort into honing the learner’s skills in ‘pattern recognition’ by increasing their experience in managing various cases?  The workshop will present this debate through case presentations informing the discussion to explore competing approaches to this problem.

Who should participate in the symposium?  This is aimed at medical educators at all levels of medical education (UGME, GME and CPD).  It will specifically be useful for faculty who develop clinical reasoning courses in medical school and residency.  It will also help those who supervise medical students, residents or practicing physicians in their clinical work.  It will also help researchers interested in studying clinical reasoning and cognitive error prevention in diagnosis.

What will they gain from participating? Appreciation of the controversy between teaching cognitive science and causes of diagnostic errors (‘debiasing’ and ‘diagnostic time outs’) compared to ‘just in time learning’ and content specific checklists.  The discussion will clarify how these perspectives could improve clinician diagnosis and what unforeseen consequence might occur.   Create unique mechanisms to teach techniques to reduce diagnostic error in various educational environments.  What current research is most likely to inform the optimal education our learners require to prevent diagnostic errors?

3C - Diversity across the globe: Sharing experiences and challenges with equity and inclusion in medical education

  1. Anna Vnuk, School of Medicine, College of Medicine and Public Health, Flinders University, Adelaide, Australia
  2. Sabine Ludwig Charité - Universitätsmedizin Berlin, Institute of Medical Sociology and Rehabilitation Science, Germany
  3. Maaike Muntinga, School of Medicine, Amsterdam UMC-location VUmc, the Netherlands
  4. Stephanie Okafor, School of Medicine, Amsterdam UMC-location VUmc, the Netherlands
  5. Arianne Teherani, Center for Faculty Educators, University of California, San Francisco School of Medicine, USA
  6. Brahm Marjadi, School of Medicine, Western Sydney University, Australia
  7. Margot Turner, St George’s University of London, UK

Summary:  We understand the need to address diversity in medical education and health care as a social justice issue and a basic tenet of quality of education and health care. Unfortunately, medical education lags behind in its efforts to create and sustain a diverse and equitable learning environment, and thus perpetuates structural and economic disparities. For instance, although many medical schools globally are committed to enrolling a diverse student body, increased diversity does not imply equity once students are enrolled; students from diverse backgrounds encounter obstacles to success including academic and learning environment pressures. At the curriculum level, medical education is slow to critically investigate for whom and under which conditions the knowledge it incorporates is ‘true’, and many schools overlook the increasing body of knowledge on diversity and health, including but not limited to sex and gender issues, ethnicity/race, ageism, and (dis)ability, as well as their intersectionality. These absences indicate the presence of barriers manifested in policies, practices, and norms within our institutions. In order to create societal change and prepare a diverse body of future doctors to provide health care for a diverse body of patients, medical education itself needs to change. The aims of this symposium are to share and discuss initiatives, experiences, and research on the far-reaching ways medical schools promote equality and equity.

In this interactive symposium, a range of advocates for diversity in medical education from across the globe, including medical students, will address a range of issues in teaching and learning about a range of ‘different differences’ and their intersections. We present four topics in short presentations. First, dr. Maaike Muntinga and Stephanie Okafor will present experiences and challenges with involvement of students in medical education projects. Second, dr. Arianne Teherani will discuss internal change in schools. Third, dr. Brahm Marjadi  will share experiences on mainstreaming diversity with the support of community partners and hospital-based clinicians. Finally, Margot Turner will present different approaches to assessing diversity, and the feedback on assessment from staff and students. Next, we will introduce practical examples, for instance video-art to discuss in- and exclusion in medical education, the critical-incident-in-the-classroom exercise, a checklist on diversity at the institutional level, or what an OSCE to assess diversity looks like. In doing so, we will have addressed diversity at three distinct levels (Schiebinger, 2008):

  1. Fixing the numbers refers to the composition of the student body in medical schools or to the numbers of female and minority students and staff in education, teaching, research, and management, thus, to ‘body counts’ and equal opportunity.
  2. Fixing the institutions refers to learning climates and organizational culture of medical schools: to legal regulations and professional standards, for instance whether admission policies are dedicated to equality, but also to unspoken assumptions and values behind ways of doing and behind claims of neutrality and objectivity.
  3. Fixing the knowledge emphasizes exclusion in our knowledge base. At this level, we focus on curricular and knowledge content, on implementing knowledge in the curriculum, and on assessment.

The symposium will discuss experiences across the globe at each level and suggest several tried and tested approaches.

Who should participate in the symposium?  Students, faculty, leaders, medical educators, researchers who

  • are interested in and curious about learning about initiatives and programs to improve equity and inclusion in medical education;
  • would like to address diversity and are in need of inspiration, ideas and tools;
  • are willing to share and exchange their experiences in addressing diversity; and
  • desire to be part of an international network (International Community of Practice on Diversity, Equity and Inclusion in Medical Education).

What will they gain from participating?  Participants will

  • gain insight and ideas in how to address diversity at different levels;
  • gain the experience of sharing and listening to others about diversity;
  • learn from global colleagues with different backgrounds and perspectives;
  • bring back knowledge, reflections, tools and resources to their institution, and;
  • have the opportunity to participate in an international network of researchers and educators who work on and have experience in diversity in medical education (ICoP Diversity, Equity and Inclusion in Medical Education).

3D - Adapting to the changing times in health sciences education

IAMSE Symposium coordinated by Peter GM de Jong

The world of health education across all disciplines and professions is changing rapidly. We face curriculum changes, we develop new learning resources, and new ways of assessment are being developed. As a result, the role and position of the educator is constantly changing. In this symposium an international panel of presenters will discuss several of these changes with the audience.

Session 4: Monday 26 August - 1400-1530

4A - Every way of seeing is a way of not seeing: Critical insights into the blind spots of entrustment language

  1. Daniel Schumacher, Cincinnati Children’s Hospital Medical Center, USA
  2. Lorelei Lingard, Western University, Canada
  3. Anneke van Enk, University of British Columbia, Canada
  4. Karen Hauer, University of California, San Francisco, USA
  5. Carol Carraccio,  American Board of Pediatrics, USA
  6. Olle ten Cate, Utrecht University; The Netherlands

Summary of theme and why it is important:  Every way of seeing is also a way of not seeing.” – Kenneth Burke
Over the last decade, the concept of “entrustment” has risen to enormous popularity and power in medical education. Underpinning the concept, however, is an elaborate yet fragile set of keywords and concepts which educators appear to conflate, interchange, and evolve to suit their purposes. This situation threatens to create a scholarly cacophony and to undermine robust entrustment decision-making in the clinical workplace. This symposium addresses this problem with three aims: to approach a more uniform lexicon of entrustment terms, to advocate the abolishment of problematic terms, and to illustrate the inherent complexity of entrustment language as a basis for high stakes decisions.
Five speakers will draw on empirical research to offer the audience specific examples across each of these areas and provide the basis for a rich discussion of how entrustment language shapes assessment decisions in the clinical workplace. “Independent practice” is often described as the goal for entrustment. When we focus on “independence,” we can become blind to the interdependent nature of how care is delivered. We can also lose sight of the fundamental task of tailoring supervision to learners’ abilities and progressively removing this until “unsupervised practice” can be entrusted. Does “independent practice” have a place in our vernacular? Is the goal for entrustment “unsupervised practice” or something else? Our first three speakers (Schumacher, Lingard, and van Enk) will explore these questions. We will next consider issues with the use of the word “entrustment,” word contains the word “trust.” What implications does that have for assessors? If you do not entrust someone does that mean that you do not trust them? Entrustment is not just about the individual to be entrusted. The bidirectional relationship between the person to be entrusted and person to entrust will be explored further in the third brief presentation during this symposium (Hauer). What is the role of the trustor’s propensity to trust? Do terms like “entrustment” and “trust” shift our focus too far from what a trainee can do to what a supervisor will allow them to do based on their trust propensity? Do these terms turn the clear performance of learners into myopic decisions of supervisors? Finally, we will explore how the inconsistent use of terms might impact high stakes decisions and standard setting in the entrustment framework (Carraccio). If we do not agree on terms and definitions, how do we develop a shared mental model of what the performance of a graduating student or resident looks like? How do we set performance standards when expectations of performance by clinical competency committees (CCCs) differ from actual performance of residents? What is the role of unclear and conflated definitions in creating this gap? If expectations and performance of some EPAs are lower than others, but the community feels these EPAs are critical for practice, what impact should this have on standard setting? Our discussant (ten Cate), will reflect on the presentations, offering insights as well as provocative questions to enrich the interactive large group discussion to follow the presentations. The symposium will conclude with a discussion of potential action steps that all can take as we work through the implementation of competency-based education and specifically EPAs.

Who should participate in the symposium?  This symposium will be of particular interest to assessment researchers, those leading assessment programs in medical education and training, members of competency committees, and administrators in the undergraduate and post-graduate medical education communities.

What will they gain from participating?  Participants will leave the session with an understanding and appreciation for the importance of having a shared language for entrustment decision-making. We hope this understanding will be deep enough that participants will leave with not only clear definitions of terms but also a commitment to using terms that promote a common understanding and avoid possible confusion.


4B - How to train your dragon: Transforming faculty development in social and behavioural sciences

  1. Betsy White Williams, University of Kansas School of Medicine, Clinical Program Professional Renewal Center, USA
  2. Jeni Harden, University of Edinburgh, UK
  3. Fred Hafferty, College of Medicine, Division of General Internal Medicine, Program on Professionalism and Values
  4. Hiroshi Nishigori, Kyoto University, Japan
  5. Tracey Collett, Plymouth University, UK
  6. Kathy Kendall, University of Southampton, UK

Summary of theme and why it is important: The film How to Train your Dragon tells the story of a boy, Hiccup who aspires to follow his Viking tribe's tradition of becoming a dragon slayer. During one attack, Hiccup shoots down a Night Fury but finding he cannot bring himself to kill the dragon, sets it free. Later Hiccup returns to the forest to find the Night Fury unable to fly because of its crippled tail fin. Hiccup gradually befriends the dragon (naming it 'Toothless' due to its retractable teeth) and makes a harness and prosthetic fin that allows him to guide the dragon in flight. Toothless and Hiccup successfully fight together against a common enemy ‘the Red Death’ that threatens the village. This changes the mind of the villagers about dragons and vice versa, and they begin to accept each other, working together in harmony.

AMEE has, for at least few years, undertaken workshops and symposia at its annual conference on aspects of social and behavioural sciences medical education. Based on comments and questions at these symposia, it appears that the translation of behavioural and social sciences (SBS) principles and concepts into clinical courses and into medical practice remains challenging. This symposium will address a key and persistent aspect of this challenge; faculty development in SBS. In many ways, SBS and clinical faculty are the villagers and the dragons of this story; we know that there is often a lack of understanding and poor communication between these groups. It can appear that they have very different experiences, priorities and goals, and at times may even seem to speak different languages. Yet, as in the story, they share common enemy; a concern over the preparedness for students working in increasingly complex health care settings and the ability of medical schools to adapt to these demands. Faculty development opportunities are foundational to the cultural transformations needed to tackle these challenges.
Through presentation of case-based teaching examples, we will invite the audience to consider who they are – villagers or dragons – and to participate in a discussion of how we can be the Hiccup and Toothless of our own stories: addressing cultural inertia; tackling the hidden curriculum; developing understanding and partnerships between SBS and clinical faculty; and setting examples to motivate others.  We will discuss opportunities and potential barriers to developing and implementing a faculty development curriculum across the educational continuum that promotes the enhancement of social and behavioral sciences principles and concepts into practice at the individual and system level. Although not final answers, we will provide guideposts for the field in this critical enterprise.

Who should participate in the symposium?  Medical educators, Medical education faculty, physicians, medical students

What will they gain from participating? 

  • Greater understanding of how social science (knowledge, skills and competencies) can form part of faculty development
  • Insight of the opportunities and barriers to faculty development in SBS from a range of national and educational contexts
  • An awareness of the benefit of teaching social sciences to physicians across the career span


4C - From simulation to workplace: translating lessons for clinical event debriefings

  1. Walter Eppich, Northwestern University Feinberg School of Medicine, Chicago, USA
  2. Cristina Diaz-Navarro, University Hospital of Wales, Cardiff, UK
  3. Ross Scalese, University of Miami School of Medicine, Miami, USA
  4. Andrew Coggins, The University of Sydney, Western Clinical School, Sydney, Australia
  5. Rebecca Szabo, The University of Melbourne, Melbourne, Australia

Summary of theme and why it is important:  Despite proven benefits, debriefing conversations that promote learning from clinical practice occur too infrequently. This impacts health care team functioning and, thus, patient care. Failures to implement debriefing programs are common in busy clinical environments where clinicians often think they do not have time or the skills to debrief, amidst other perceived barriers. This situation stands in stark contrast to other experiential learning domains such as health care simulation, which view structured feedback and debriefing as integral to their educational practices.
Clinicians and teams hone their clinical skills by talking about and reflecting on their performance in debriefings through regular participation in debriefings. In addition, they also hone their ability to talk about and reflect on their performance and patient care after real clinical episodes. Better translation of relevant lessons from health care simulation to clinical settings could enhance workplace learning and drive continuous performance improvements, benefitting both clinicians and patients. This symposium has three aims:

  1. to provide a theoretical foundation for clinical debriefings as a driver for workplace learning
  2. to translate principles from health care simulation to clinical debriefings, including the importance of psychological safety to promote honest reflective dialogue
  3. to offer practical strategies to support clinical debriefings in a variety of settings

To achieve these aims, we have brought together representative experts in healthcare simulation and debriefing, each of whom will contribute a valuable perspective:

  • What is debriefing and why it matters, (5 min, Walter Eppich)
  • Real world applications of clinical event debriefings (10 min each):
    • Debriefings during general internal medicine inpatient rotation for undergraduate and graduate medical education (Ross Scalese)
    • Debriefing in the operating theatre (Rebecca Szabo)
    • Charge nurse led clinical event debriefings in the emergency department (Andrew Coggins)
    • TALK Debrief: a novel framework for structured team self-debriefing in clinical environments to promote learning and patient safety (Cristina Diaz-Navarro)

After brief presentations (45 min total), panellists will welcome questions from the audience as part of a moderated discussion to explore further applications and strategies for clinical event debriefings.

Who should participate in the symposium?  Health professions educators across the educational spectrum, from undergraduate and graduate settings to continuing professional development

What will they gain from participating?  After the session, attendees will be able to:

  • Explain why clinical event debriefing are important and how they support workplace learning, team performance, and patient safety
  • Describe a practical yet theoretically grounded approach to clinical event debriefing
  • Outline practical strategies to implement clinical event debriefing in their own clinical environments

Session 5: Monday 26 August - 1600-1730

5A - Transition from Surgical Training to Surgical Practice: Challenges, opportunities and innovation

Moderator:  Ajit Sachdeva, American College of Surgeons, UK

Summary:  An international perspective on transition, taking account of the needs of patients, evolving healthcare systems in which surgical care is  delivered and career aspirations of individuals entering surgical practice


5B - Crossing the MedEd Threshold: Gateways to medical education from young educators to young educators


  1. Rille Pihlak, University of Manchester, UK
  2. Matthew J. Stull, Case Western Reserve University, USA
  3. Robbert Duvivier, Maastricht University, The Netherlands
  4. Margot Weggemans, University Medical Center Utrecht, The Netherlands
  5. Kevin Garrity, University of Glasgow, UK
  6. Susannah Brockbank, University of Liverpool, UK
  7. Kevin Gervin, University of Glasgow, UK

Summary of theme and why it is important:  Many trainees enter medical education as clinical teachers or by developing educational projects with only limited teacher training.  The field of medical education has rapidly expanded over the past 50 years into a specialist area of research and practice, which can often be inaccessible to trainees. This means that there is a mismatch between what the trainees entering the field expect and the reality of the world of medical education. Unless trainees take up structured training or degrees in medical education, they might feel lost in conferences such as AMEE where majority of the discussion is in a different ‘language’. 

The transition from student to teacher often happens quickly in clinical practice and, unfortunately, there is rarely any formal educational training and support available.  If one tries to read the literature on one's own, it can be daunting and filled with unfamiliar concepts. Many trainees who come to medical education conferences have similar difficulties identifying sessions that might be accessible, interesting or useful.  Furthermore, presentations and discussions may be littered with casual references to fundamental concepts, leaving junior educators feeling alienated from the conversation.  We propose that this is, in part, because junior educators have not yet grappled with some of the ideas that are fundamental to developing a broader understanding of medical education, so-called threshold concepts. 

This symposium is organised by young educators as peer teaching for students, junior doctors and new educators, to give an accessible insight into the world of medical education.  We will introduce key concepts, explore definitions and application of some threshold educational concepts to give participants a new understanding of terminology and ideas.  This will then allow participants to better engage with the medical education community and give junior educators an opportunity to question these concepts in a less intimidating forum. 

Who should participate in the symposium?  Junior healthcare professions educators from any background, clinical or non-clinical, particularly those attending AMEE for the first time.

What will they gain from participating?  Participants will gain:

  • A toolkit to better access medical education discourse based on an understanding of key concepts.
  • An understanding of how these ideas can be applied to understand their educational practice and projects.
  • A critical approach to engaging with AMEE based in educational evidence.

5C - Controversies and challenges in publishing health professions education research: a discussion with journal editors

  1. Anna Cianciolo, Teaching and Learning in Medicine
  2. David Cook,  Medical Education
  3. Erik Driessen, Perspectives on Medical Education
  4. Peter de Jong, Medical Science Educator
  5. Val Wass, Education for Primary Care
  6. Richard Hays, AMEE MedEdPublish

Summary of theme and why it is important:  Publishing health professions education research today is very different from 20 years ago. Along with proliferation of research activity, we see new venues for online publication (both peer-reviewed and non-peer-reviewed), evolving standards for publication, increased attention to human subjects’ rights, and examples of scientific misconduct of varying severity. This symposium offers an opportunity for journal editors, authors, potential authors and reviewers to discuss   these and other issues facing our field.
The panel of Editors of health professions education journals will focus on some of the timely issues related to research publication. New venues for publication, including pre-peer-review publication, expanding open access journals, post-publication peer review, and predatory journals create confusion for authors, reviewers, and editors alike. Reporting guidelines (e.g., CONSORT, STROBE, and extensions to these and other similar guidelines) have encountered both wholehearted acceptance and strong resistance. The standards for "research" meriting journal publication continue to be debated. Criteria for authorship and author order vary across disciplines and journals. Prepublication, duplicate publication, and self-plagiarism are becoming increasingly challenging. We anticipate a lively and thought-provoking discussion amongst panelists and audience participants on these and other related topics.

Who should participate in the symposium? The session will be relevant to all AMEE participants engaged in publication of health professions education research, at any stage of career, including authors, mentors, reviewers, and editors.

What will they gain from participating?  During this session, participants will have the opportunity to debate key controversies currently facing the academic community, making known their beliefs and priorities to both editors and peers. They will leave with a deeper understanding of these issues and will be better prepared to navigate the publication process as they look to disseminate their own work. 

5D - The political realities of designing and implementing a selection system: Implications for policy and practice

  1. Fiona Patterson, Work Psychology Group, UK
  2. Deborah O’Mara, University of Sydney Medical School, Australia
  3. Wolfgang Hampe, University of Hamburg, Germany
  4. Julia Blitz, Stellenbosch University, South Africa

Summary of theme and why it is important:  There is over a century of research on selection and recruitment and the field has both matured and expanded significantly over this time.  Many of the same challenges remain however, especially regarding diversity and fairness issues. There is growing recognition that selection is a complex, multi-layered and dynamic phenomenon. Such is the complexity, some authors argue selection to medical education is a ‘wicked problem’ (Cleland et al, 2018).

A new Ottawa consensus statement on selection and recruitment (Patterson, et al, 2018) recommends that greater consideration be given to understanding the political validity of selection practices, to better understand why there remains a persistent gap between the research evidence and policy enactment in many parts of the globe.  Given that selection and recruitment practices are inextricably linked to the cultural and social context in which they are conducted, in an opening editorial of a special issue of AMEE MedEd Publish on selection, the editors call for further international research evidence to inform future policy and practice.

With speakers from South Africa, Europe and Australasia, this symposium will explore the political influences upon designing and implementing selection systems, drawing upon case material in each locality. We will facilitate a plenary discussion and invite contributions from others internationally to optimise the learning. 
The latest research evidence will first be presented on the issues regarding good quality selection and recruitment methods and systems (both undergraduate and postgraduate) to provide background to the topic areas and the issues. Each speaker will then present research and case material from their home country (South Africa; Germany; Australia; UK), from an institution specific and national perspective.
For example, although Australian medical schools have employed a wide range of strategies in the past 10 years to increase the rural medical workforce, there has been little impact on workforce targets. The potential of designing a selection system that is matched with a targeted delivery of a medical program rather than a one size fits all approach will be explored.  In Germany, a judgement of constitutional court forces the legislative to change the highly regulated selection system. We discuss how admission research can influence judges and politicians to change admissions system to criteria which are better validated.
We will engage the audience in participation by asking them to reflect upon experiences in their own locality and encourage them to offer considerations for how countries or institutions could seek to mitigate the challenges. Questions will be offered to the audience to stimulate thinking and discussion including: how are we selecting for diversity within our programmes and are the methods currently employed truly achieving this? How can the political landscape within a country impact on selection within healthcare and what can we do to influence this? What are the challenges to consider in relation to ethnic diversity, language and widening access?
The panel will seek to both share experiences and ask questions to the audience. Throughout the symposium the panel will support the audience debate and seek to reach consensus as to the issues surrounding the complexities within selection experienced, particularly from a political validity perspective before sharing and agreeing on considerations for the future.

Who should participate in the symposium?  The symposium will be designed to maximise audience discussion, whilst drawing upon the international perspective both of the panel and the audience. In particular, anyone who has an interest in selection within healthcare, in particular those that may be experiencing challenges in how best to design their admissions processes or have suggestions to deal with the political influences within selection will find the symposium of great interest.
Within the symposium, each speaker will be limited to 10-15 minutes offering up to 30-40 minutes for discussion. As part of this discussion, views will be sought on other experiences internationally to share learning and experiences in relation to the complexities faced within different institutions as part of selection systems. The varying perspectives and experiences from within the panel will support the audience debate.

What will they gain from participating? 

  • Gain a greater awareness and understanding of the complexities of selection within healthcare
  • Knowledge of risks and opportunities regarding selection in different countries
  • Awareness of how other institutions/countries are dealing with the political realities of selection, in particular from institutions and countries that may not be publishing research in a formal way
  • An opportunity to interact and discuss these topics with others that may be in similar situations


Session 7: Tuesday 27 August - 1015-1200

7A - Expanding the Role of Patients as Partners in Education

  1. Gerard Flaherty, National University of Ireland Galway, Ireland
  2. Robina Shah, University of Manchester, UK
  3. Subha Ramani, Harvard Medical School, USA
  4. Neil Johnson, National Institute for Preventive Cardiology, Ireland 
  5. Jools Symons, University of Leeds, UK

Summary of theme and why it is important:  The passive role of patients in the education of health professionals is being reimagined in the context of a greater global focus on patient-centred care and patient safety. This symposium will explore a more active engagement of patients and their caregivers in instruction, development and assessment of professional qualities. The theoretical and research base underpinning an augmented patient-educator role will be discussed and existing models of practice in various countries considered. Patients as partners in health professions education is a novel area of research enquiry and the assembled speakers will propose unmet research questions and practice needs for an evolving healthcare system. A broad involvement of patients in education will be discussed, including an expanded role for patients in curricular design, student selection, student remediation, medical education research design, and health literacy. The speakers are engaged on multiple levels with patient and public involvement in education and share a passion for the translation of a deeper patient-educator role into improved care for patients and their family caregivers.

Who should participate in the symposium?  This symposium would interest any patient, family caregiver, faculty, clinician, student or administrator who has an interest in cultivating a deeper and more meaningful involvement of patients as educational partners. 

What will they gain from participating?  By the end of the session, participants will be able to:

  1. Reflect on the benefits of a deeper engagement of patients and their caregivers in undergraduate and postgraduate health professions curricula.
  2. Identify aspects of their own educational practice which would be enhanced by facilitating an expanded role for patients as health professions educators.
  3. Critically appraise the published literature and examples of best practice in relation to patient involvement in the governance, development and delivery of educational programmes.

7B - Understanding student behaviour: The role of digital data

  1. Jennifer Hallam, Leeds Institute of Medical Education, University of Leeds, UK
  2. Martin V Pusic, NYU Langone Health, USA
  3. Stephanie Clota, ModMed, Australia
  4. Marie-Christine Rousset, Université de Grenoble-Alpes, France
  5. Fabrice Jouanot, Université de Grenoble-Alpes, France
  6. Tamsin Treasure-Jones, Leeds Institute of Medical Education, University of Leeds, UK

Summary of theme and why it is important:  With the advent of more ‘just in time’ technology in medical education, it presents us with the opportunity to capture more digital data about student and trainee behaviour in relation to formative and summative assessments, the use of knowledge resources and consequently determine the impact of teaching and curriculum on student outcomes. With the abundance of data that we can collect about student behaviour, together with the availability of tools for automatic processing, educational institutions have exciting opportunities to innovate. However, institutions are often faced with the daunting task of exploring this voluminous data and not knowing where to begin, what information to capture and what pedagogy to apply. How can we explore this readily available data to better understand student behaviour and thus appropriately refine health professions education?
This symposium will present original thoughts and visions of the use of digital data in order to understand learner behaviour at scale. Alternate ways of how this data can be explored, as an effective learning and assessment resource, will be discussed based on examples from University level (undergraduate and postgraduate) medical education activities. The speakers approach the gathering and exploration of digital data in different ways and employ multiple theoretical and pedagogical perspectives. This symposium will explore these different approaches such as:

  • Adoption of self determination and self-regulation theories
  • Ontology based learning analytics
  • Intervention development (e.g. behavioural nudges)
  • Innovation of curriculum and assessment
  • Analytical methods in trainees professional development to personalise CPD opportunities

It will also offer insights into research directions in this area.

Who should participate in the symposium?   This symposium will be beneficial to all colleagues from within the health professions education community who have an interest in adopting innovative techniques to explore digital data in order to understand and explore student data in detail. It would also be beneficial for those who would like to learn more about utilizing the techniques in their research/ teaching, specifically for innovation within the curriculum. Those who are involved in policy making for health professions education programs would also be encouraged to participate.

What will they gain from participating?  Participants in the symposium will gain a better insight into the different techniques and approaches that have been used to explore digital data to understand behaviour in order to optimise learner outcomes, improve decision making and organisational efficiencies. A variety of different approaches and theoretical models have been adopted by the speakers so participants will gain a better understanding of the philosophy behind the approaches used and how they can apply them to their own data.

7C - Transformative Learning: a pedagogy for the health professions

  1. David Davies, Warwick Medical School, United Kingdom
  2. Jennene Greenhill, Flinders University College of Medicine and Public Health, Australia
  3. Ayelet Kuper, Wilson Centre, University of Toronto, Canada
  4. Tina Martimianakis, Wilson Centre, University of Toronto, Canada
  5. Susan van Schalkwyk, Centre for Health Professions Education, Stellenbosch University, South Africa

Summary of theme and why it is important:  Transformative learning is rapidly becoming a buzzword in health professions education (HPE), but it is actually a complex theoretical construct. It speaks to learning experiences that challenge students’ long-held assumptions and perspectives and encourage critical reflection on one’s worldview. In so doing, it influences the formation of students’ professional identities and leads to greater self-awareness, ultimately influencing behaviour in practice. Built on notions of social justice and accountability, transformative learning occurs over time and is typically catalysed by a ‘disorienting dilemma’ that results in critical reflection about oneself and one’s assumptions, leading to new ways of being in the world.  
First introduced through the work of sociologist Jack Mezirow, transformative learning is increasingly being taken up in the HPE literature, including featuring strongly in the Lancet Commission 2010 article that proposed a new direction for HPE in the 21st century. It is evident that there is much synergy between the fundamental principles of transformative learning theory and growing awareness around issues of health equity, person-centred care, and advocacy for changes in the structures and process of health care and of HPE.
In this symposium, we will explore transformative learning theory as a pedagogy for HPE from a number of different perspectives:

Susan van Schalkwyk:  Introduction to the symposium identifying some of the issues that will be probed during the symposium. Will provide an overview of transformative learning as it currently is being taken up in the HPE literature, highlighting both the ontological and epistemological dimensions of the construct. Thinking around the affordances that transformative learning theory can offer educators in the health professions will be highlighted.
David Davies:  Explore the role that threshold concepts potentially play in transformative learning. Thinking about transformative learning in the curriculum, given how personal it is to the individual, is it something to be welcomed when it happens, but cannot be expected for each and every student? Can we maximise the pre-conditions for it by identifying and agreeing threshold concepts that once crossed, can lead to a cognitive and/or affective transformation for all?
Jennene Greenhill:  Medical students learning in different contexts can transform their world view. Our research on transformative learning spans from clinical simulation to rural settings. Whilst many students do have transformative learning experiences some don’t. Why and how transformative learning happens is it the context, the curriculum design, or the characteristics of our learners perhaps? 
Tina Martimianakis:  What does reflexivity look like when educational programs adopt transformative learning pedagogies? Is transformative learning only a tool in the hands of the teacher or can it be used to make teachers and organizations accountable to social reform mandates by offering important insights into curriculum gaps, hidden curriculum effects and other features of organizational structures and culture?
Ayelet Kuper:  We have many lofty individual and structural goals for transformative learning, but how will we know when we have achieved them? The constructs promoted through transformative learning seem incongruent with traditional HPE assessment modalities, so how can we assess our learners and/or evaluate our curricula and pedagogy?

Who should participate in the symposium?  Transformative learning has been described as a theory that offers educators a lens through which they can view their students’ learning. Anyone who is involved in the practice of HPE, as well as anyone whose research relates to current hot topics like equity and person-centredness, will be able to find touchpoints in the different presentations and engage meaningfully in the subsequent discussion.

What will they gain from participating?  Participants will have the opportunity to critically reflect on the different positions explored during the session and contemplate how these resonate with their own understanding of how learning happens. They will be able consider (a) what sort of learning is needed to ensure a cadre of healthcare professionals who will be equipped to engage with global health challenges going forward; and (b) how HPE needs to change (globally or in their local context(s)) to accommodate that sort of learning.

Session 8: Tuesday 28 August - 1400-1530

8A - Universal Health Education Coverage - Health and Education for the Global Community

  1. Nick Bass, East London NHS Foundation Trust, London, UK
  2. Jibril Handuleh, Amoud University, Borama, Somaliland
  3. Ming-Jung Ho, Georgetown University, Washington DC, USA
  4. Ruti Stashefsky-Margalit, Technion, Haifa, Israel
  5. Manuel Mendes Costa, University of Minho, Braga, Portugal

Summary of theme and why it is important:  Much of medical education is conducted, published, presented at conferences and shared among wealthy countries with a marked publication bias towards a handful of countries and resources and innovations largely confined to high and middle-income countries.
The greatest health needs are concentrated in low income countries but beyond a handful of delegates these countries are largely left out of conferences and publications rarely cover their educational needs or activity.
There is a wealth of educational activity, innovation and resourcefulness occurring in such settings, often out of sheer necessity, which remains invisible to many other resource poor countries and also richer ones. However, those of us who work with partners in such countries are aware of such learning and innovation which is beginning to spread across so-called South-South networks and also starting to be adopted and adapted in richer countries (so-called Reverse Innovation). Such learning is harder to access but can be invaluable and more appropriate in many parts of the world and can be just as valid as that developed in higher resource countries.
We would hope that anyone who values medical education would wish to learn from anyone who is advancing this regardless of the difficulties of access and communication. There is a large body of essential learning which is overlooked and which can be invaluable to all of us.

Who should participate in the symposium?  Anyone with a wide interest in medical education and a willingness to value good work regardless of where it takes place

What will they gain from participating? 

  • A better understanding of why education is vital to the health and wellbeing of all.
  • A better understanding of some of the examples of reverse innovation developed in resource-poor settings but of wider benefit to others.
  • An appreciation of the need to make medical education – as an essential underpinning of health – an aspiration in terms of Universal Coverage every bit as much as direct health delivery

8B - Cost and value in medical education

  1. Martin G. Tolsgaard, University of Copenhagen, Denmark
  2. David A. Cook, Mayo Clinic, USA
  3. Steven Maloney, Monash University, Australia
  4. Jennifer Cleland, University of Aberdeen, UK

Summary of theme and why it is important:  The global cost of medical education surmounts to more than 80 billion Euros annually. However, despite the massive cost of medical education, little is known about how to optimize the return on investment.  In other words, how can we ensure that medical education delivers maximum educational value for any given spend?
Building on the concepts examined in a recent AMEE Guide, the presenters will review opportunities and limitations regarding the study of cost and value in health professions education.

The challenge of context in the study of cost will be specifically considered, along with the potential role of theory and conceptual frameworks as bridges enabling research findings to generalize across contexts. They will also describe several cost evaluation designs, and explore practical issues regarding the conduct, interpretation, and application of these evaluations and their results.

Finally, the presenters will engage the audience in identifying how to improve the future study of cost and value in medical education, and how such research can be used for the benefit of all health professions educators.

Who should participate in the symposium?  Everyone with an interest in the design, delivery and evaluation of health professions education will benefit from engaging in this discussion, including education leaders, teachers, administrators, researchers, and students. Essentially everyone with a stake in training health professionals should participate, and thereby learn more about key concepts and controversies in the measurement and application of cost and value in education.

What will they gain from participating?   Participants in this symposium will benefit by learning about the conduct and interpretation of research in the study of cost and value in medical education. In particular, they will gain insights into the limitations and practical challenges of cost research, and gain a basic understanding of how to conceptualize cost and value in medical education.

8C - The Scope of Faculty Development: How Conceptual Frameworks Can Inform Educational Practices and Program Evaluation

Organised by the AMEE Faculty Development Committee:

  1. Ivan Silver (moderator), University of Toronto, Canada
  2. Clare Morris, Queen Mary University, London, UK
  3. Karen Leslie, University of Toronto, Canada
  4. Olanrewaju Sorinola,  University of Warwick, UK
  5. Diana Dolmans, Maastricht University, The Netherlands

Summary of theme and why it is important:  Faculty development activities have moved beyond their historical origins in higher education, where the focus was on helping individuals develop their teaching practices. Faculty developers now work with individuals, teams and organisations.  They generally support the development of teaching and educational practices, with an increasing emphasis on building educational leadership and research capacity. Furthermore, they have moved their work beyond the walls of the academy, from workshop to the workplace.
We would argue that alongside these visible changes, there has been a parallel broadening of the conceptual frameworks that inform faculty development programmes and activities. These frameworks help to guide faculty development practices and frame programme evaluation. This symposium aims to shine a light on some of these conceptual frameworks, making them visible through international faculty development case studies. We will also provide participants with opportunities to consider how these frameworks might be used in their faculty development work.

Who should participate in the symposium?  The symposium is relevant for teachers, educators, leaders, managers, researchers, and scholars interested in faculty development or continuing professional development.

What will they gain from participating?  Participants will gain an opportunity to: think about the scope of faculty development, get new insights into diverse approaches to faculty development activities, consider some of the conceptual frameworks that can inform our work as faculty developers, educators, scholars and researchers, and discuss how these approaches can be applied in practice.

Session 9: Tuesday 27 August - 1600-1730

9A - Embracing CPD diversity. Bridging gaps!

Organised by the AMEE CPD Committee:

  1. Lawrence Sherman, The Academy for Global Interprofessional Learning and Education (AGILE), USA
  2. Dave Davis, Center for Outcomes and Research in Education (CORE), Mohammed Bin Rashid University of Medicine and Health Sciences (MBR-University), Canada
  3. Helena Filipe, Faculty of Medicine, University of Lisbon, Portugal
  4. Three CPD representatives reflecting global diversity

Summary of theme and why it is important:

  • Welcome, Agenda

  • Keynote Speech

  • A series of up to three case based short presentations (3 invited global CPD representatives  (America, Europe, Africa, Asia, Australia/New Zealand) online/recorded/onsite).  Structure: (a) Region CPD Case picture; b) Challenges ahead, c) Plan to overcome them, d) How will your region’s CPD look in 10 years)

  • Audience Participation: share a different experience and personal views

  • Summary and wrap up

Who should participate in the symposium?   All AMEE members and non-members onsite or online with or likely to have a leadership role and responsibilities in Continuing Professional development (CPD) and all those finding interest in CPD.

What will they gain from participating?

  • Better insight on CPD span and complexity

  • Broader perspective on diverse ways of running CPD

  • Reflect on the future of CPD - CPD in the future

  • Approach the AMEE CPD SIG and Committee


9B: Teaching and Engaging the Millennials: What has changed?

  1. Dujeepa Samarasekera, National University of Singapore, Singapore
  2. Shuh Shing Lee, National University of Singapore, Singapore
  3. A speaker from Canada
  4. A speaker from Finland
  5. A speaker from Australia
  6. A speaker from Africa

Summary of theme and why it is important:  The millennials, also referred to as Generation Y, and Generation Z (post-millennials) are now in your classroom, cafeteria, wards and clinics. They are now interacting with you and your colleagues as well as helping you and your colleagues in your work setting. Born after 1982, their characteristics have been found to be different from Baby Boomer and early Generation X. Notable differences that define this generation are: lack of professional boundaries influenced by socialisation, a need to have immediate feedback, a sense of entitlement, unrealistic expectations and an anticipation of a “how to guide” to succeed in and out of the classroom. They are also digital natives and use technology for most of their learning as well as interactions. It is well known that the present day instructors who are mostly Baby Boomers and Generation X need to change their strategies to engage the new learners. For this, the use of a wide array of instructional delivery methods is critical. The symposium will focus on the characteristics of millennials, how they learn and how to engage them effectively in the learning process be it in a clinical or classroom environment and how to train our faculty to equip with the skills required to teach these students.

Who should participate in the symposium?  Everyone from different health professions education especially educators and leaders.

What will they gain from participating?  After attending this symposium, the participants will gain an understanding on the following:

  1. Characteristics of the millennials in learning

  2. Methods to effectively engage the millenials in learning environment

  3. Faculty development approaches to equip the faculty with the necessary skills to support the learning process of the millennials

9C: Local responses to the complexities of European Medical Education: Dealing with globization, migration and increased mobility

  1. Richard Marz, Medical University Vienna, Austria
  2. Janusz Janczukowicz, Medical University of Lodz, Poland
  3. Marius Raica, Medical University of Timisoara, Romania
  4. Anca Dana Buzoianu, Medical University of Cluj-Napoca, Romania
  5. Ferenc Bari, University of Szeged, Hungary
  6. Cosmin Sinescu, Medical University of Timisoara, Romania
  7. Thikiri Yee, Medical University of Lodz, Poland
  8. Michael Ramirez, medical student from the USA studying in Szeged, Hungary

Summary of theme and why it is important:  Many medical students receive their education at universities located outside their country of origin, most of them because of capacity limitations at home. Drawn by better opportunities – perceived or real - they and many other graduates leave the country in which they received their training to practice medicine in yet other countries. The European Union has made mobility inside its borders rather easy but has issued little guidance to standardise the outcomes of medical education. Thus, individual universities are left to struggle on their own to triangulate national needs and expectations, international demands, and regulatory requirements. A very complex intersection of local, European and oversea licensing requirements characterizes numerous medical courses for non-European students. The symposium will explore how medical universities in Romania, Hungary, and Poland are responding to the challenges posed by globalization, migration and increased mobility.

Who should participate in the symposium?  Those willing to consider the global political implications of educational issues.

What will they gain from participating?  The issues raised are urgent and include educational as well as political aspects. Participants will gain needed information to join the in-depth discussion at an international level which must follow.

9D: Lessons from Surgery Track

Moderator: Ajit Sachdeva, American College of Surgeons, USA

Summary:  Take home messages relating to current best practice in surgery education and
cutting-edge trends

Session 10: Wednesday 28 August - 0830-1015

10A: Achieving Practice Change Through Outcomes Based CPD

  1. Betsy White Williams, University of Kansas School of Medicine, Professional Renewal Center ®, USA
  2. Mary Turco, Center for Learning and Professional Development, Dartmouth-Hitchcock and Geisel School of Medicine, Lebanon, NH, USA
  3. David Davis, Mohammed Bin Rashid University of Medicine and Health Sciences, Dubai, United Arab Emirates
  4. David Wiljer, Education Technology Innovation, University Health Network; Department of Psychiatry, University of Toronto, Canada
  5. Helena Filipe, Faculty of Medicine, University of Lisbon, Portugal
  6. Mila Kostic, Penn Medicine, USA
  7. Sanjeev Sockingalingham, Department of Psychiatry, University of Toronto, Canada

Summary of theme and why it is important:   Continuing professional development is critical to sustained life long learning and the delivery of effective and high quality care based on the best available evidence. Traditional methods of continuing professional development have not often resulted in sustained practice change. This has resulted in a renewed call for outcomes focused continuing professional education.
In this symposium we will highlight key principles and theories that inform scholarly, effective CME/CPD programs. Learners will have the opportunity to hear multiple different examples of scholarly CME/CPD activities that incorporate best practice in program design and outcome measurement.  We will achieve this through rapid-fire short focused panellist examples from international experts in the field.  Participants will have the opportunity to incorporate these principles and think about how they might start a process of incorporating these principles into their CME/CPD programming.
This symposium will focus on effective methods of outcomes based continuing education that lead to shifts and change in knowledge, skills and attitudes. The symposium will include discussion of the role of theory in driving practice change. We will explore the role of developing master and adaptive learners who can rapidly adapt to transformational change in the clinical and practice environment. We will offer practical approaches to incorporating practice improvement and quality improvement methods into continuing education. These examples may include the use of practice data, audit and feedback, morbidity and mortality rounds, communities of practice and information systems. The symposium will explore issues of feedback, mentorship and professionalism within the paradigm of life long learning in order to enable health professionals to adapt to new knowledge through shifts in skills and attitudes.  
Symposium participants will be asked to think about how they might begin a process of designing CME/CPD outcomes based programming that follows the principles of a scholarly CME/CPD activity. They will discuss challenges and solutions to designing and implementing these approaches as part of CPD programming.

Who should participate in the symposium?  This symposium will be applicable to all AMEE participants who are interested in outcomes based education and in particular outcomes based CPD. In addition, this will be of particular interest to attendees who are involved in the administration, delivery and research of continuing education activities. In addition, this will be important for students and learners as they are thinking and planning around life long learning.

What will they gain from participating?  Participants will hear from a diverse group of world experts working in outcomes based education. This will result in a rich conversation around outcomes based education with practical examples and concrete tools and lessons to apply in their own contexts.


10B: The 21st century medical undergraduate curriculum: What's in and what's out?

Chairs: Val Wass, Keele University UK &  Peter Dieter President AMSE, Germany


  1. Neil Johnson, Chief Executive - Croi, The West of Ireland Cardiac & Stroke Foundation, Ireland
  2. Evangelos Papageorgiou, EMSA Medical Education Liaison Officer, Greece
  3. Harm Peters, Executive Committee, AMSE, Germany
  4. Trudie Roberts, President, AMEE, UK  
  5. Catarina Pais Rodrigues, Medical Education Director in IFMSA, Portugal
  6. Fedde Scheele, Professor in Health Systems Innovation and Education, Netherlands

Summary of theme and why it is important:   As highlighted in the Lancet report1 “Health Professionals for a New Century” radical change is needed if we are to produce a workforce fit for purpose for the 21st century. The rapid changes we face in population needs and health care delivery are placing unacceptable pressure on the clinical workforce globally.  The AMEE 2018 conference highlighted many areas where the undergraduate curriculum needs to adapt to encompass increasingly important areas: social accountability; public health, artificial intelligence, organisational management to name a few. At the same time medical students are bringing different approaches to learning which challenge traditional educators. We can no longer “add in” to the curriculum without “taking out”. Yet this in turn meets resistant from educators set in their established ways and can even threaten their job plans.

These issues must be tackled. This AMEE-AMSE-joint symposium will open transparent debate with all stakeholders interested in medical curricula development and delivery. Panel members will offer brief presentations raising questions to then fuel an interactive discussion session.

Who should participate in the symposium?   All stakeholders: students, trainees and clinical educators. We hope to include the patient perspective on the panel. We believe this is a topic challenging many AMEE and AMSE members.

What will they gain from participating?  A deeper understanding of evidence for change and how the medical curriculum can be revolutionised or evolved to follow the recommendations of the Lancet report. A topic essential given the current workforce crisis internationally.

10C: Case Based Blended Learning (CBBL) – a strategy to foster the transfer of declarative to procedural knowledge or more?

  1. Sebastian Ertl, Medical University Vienna, Austria
  2. Bela R. Turk, Medical University Vienna, Austria and Johns Hopkins University, Baltimore, USA
  3. Tamara Seitz, Dept. for Internal Medicine, General Hospital Vienna, Austria
  4. Monika Himmelbauer, Medical University Vienna, Austria
  5. Isabella Klaus, Dept. for Psychiatry, General Hospital Vienna, Austria
  6. Henriette Löffler-Stastka, Medical University Vienna, Austria

Summary of theme and why it is important:  The close connection of theory and practice is a common aim of Case Based Learning courses, as is the development and fostering of the transfer from declarative to procedural knowledge. This transfer-learning in medical education has been highly advocated in the 2010 Lancet report.

The aim of the first study is to show how procedural knowledge, measured as students competence performing three procedural clinical reasoning skills could be improved by a case based blended curricular element, consisting of eLearning cases with interactive questioning format and clinical training seminars with standardized patients. 

The aim of the second paper is to show, how a case-based, e-learning system influences the learning effectiveness and grades among medical students at the medical university of Vienna (and pharmacy students at the faculty of life science at the University of Vienna). This study was designed to measure and quantify the potential of e-learning as a new teaching technique.

The third paper reports the students’ satisfaction and acceptance of the implemented case based eLearning program in the fields of psychiatry, microbiology and laboratory medicine and orthopedic surgery pointing on the value of autonomous motivation and affective involvement fostering efficient learning styles. Fourth, the clinical case/standardized patients (SP) - based training seminars and the importance of the quality of the SP’s roleplay and feedback are presented as one part of the didactic efficiency. Another important aim while fostering procedural knowledge is the development of metacognitive reflecting functioning in clinical practice. Possibilities of implementation are show in the fifth paper. Last, an international comparison of case-based eLearning methods (Basel, Vienna), including the comparison of distant learning and blended learning (Vienna, London) is presented.

Who should participate in the symposium?  Persons, who are interested in didactic considerations to foster international, multidisciplinary team work and new eLearning methods.

What will they gain from participating? Get insight into procedural skills training, its interdependence with learning surroundings and autonomous motivation

Twitter_001 facebook_001 Google_Plus_001 Linkedin_001 YouTube_001