172 Chapter 6 whether they are reversible or unidirectional, and which factors they perceive to be of influence to their development. The new framework as presented in Chapter 2 (Table 2.1) could serve as a useful instrument for such a follow-up study. Moreover, such a study could confirm whether the development towards more learning-centred beliefs influences the maturation towards more inclusive educator phenotypes, and vice versa. Practical implications To support and facilitate student learning in a learning-centred educational context, we propose a holistic approach to the development of medical educators based on our research. This means that faculty development (FD) initiatives need to be diverse, and not just focus on the development of competencies: attention should also paid to beliefs about teaching and learning,1,5-10 to awareness of an educational identity,19,21,52 and in particular to awareness of a personal educational mission, of which the latter has so far received little attention in the literature. In addition, they should include the medical educational context.13-15 Before going into detail about how FD can address this development, we will first discuss some general recommendations for FD based on the results of our research. General recommendations First, FD can best be embedded in the workplace, thus extending over time, for example through communities of practice,53,54 as educators indicate that their maturation is most influenced by informal learning opportunities (Chapter 5). Second, since medical educators explicitly link their maturation as an educator to their role as a physician (Chapter 5), the role of physician should be included in FD interventions. This is in line with Steinert’s55 advice not to focus exclusively on the educational role in FD, but to target all roles that medical educators play. Third, involving practising physicians as faculty developers and mentors may be valuable in FD (Chapter 5). This recommendation is also supported by our finding in the initial study (Chapter 3) that the Inspirer phenotype consisted exclusively of Stanford University School of Medicine (SUSM) educators. As discussed in Chapter 3, one explanation for this may be the influence of the esteemed and influential faculty developer responsible for the professional development programmes at SUSM, who turned out to be a practising physician.
RkJQdWJsaXNoZXIy MTk4NDMw