Learning is most effective when learners are actively engaged, and educators create an inclusive safe environment. This workshop offers a framework for rethinking one’s teaching and strategies to ensure that learners have equitable opportunities to participate, be heard, and develop knowledge and skills.

While the future of health professions education may evolve, one constant remains - the enduring impact of quality instruction and active learning, grounded in proven teaching strategies and learning theories. Many institutions are using problem, case or team-based learning—along with other strategies to develop students’ problem-solving abilities (AAMC 2019). These shifts require educators to develop new skills as planners and facilitators so that sessions flow smoothly and every learner attains the intended knowledge and skills. Well-designed active learning approaches improve students’ deep mastery of content and promote academic success by students from diverse backgrounds (Freeman 2014, Tanner 2013). These outcomes, however, are only achieved when instructors create inclusive classroom environments with well-structured collaborative group work and activities aligned with course objectives. This session focuses on explicit strategies for faculty development and self-improvement in teaching, aimed at providing impactful opportunities for all learners to achieve the intended knowledge and competencies.

Agenda & Methods

• 5 min: Introductions at tables
• 10 min: Think-Pair-Share of challenges related to learner engagement in active learning.
• 15 min: Overview of an active learning planning framework developed and piloted at authors’ institution, with examples of pitfalls that can decrease learner engagement.
• 15 min: Each group completes a planning framework for a session (their own or selected from provided list). Framework considers what will happen: before a session (e.g., pre-class communications), during a session (e.g., explicit instructions for group work), and after a session.
• 15 min: Presentation of groups’ plans as posters, with discussion.
• 10 min: Overview of inclusive facilitation strategies that promote participation by all learners (including second-language speakers, and people with various backgrounds and abilities).
• 10 min: Groups revisit their posters and add inclusive strategies.
• 10 min: Concluding discussion about relevance of framework to own teaching and faculty development.

Many medical educators struggle to develop clear, concise, and measurable course objectives to guide student learning. Poorly structured objectives can lead to disjointed curricula, ineffective assessments, and a diminished student learning experience. Students often request more objectives with increasing granularity, which can overwhelm students.

Given the rapid pace of change in medical education and the growing emphasis on accountability and quality assurance, developing effective course objectives is now more essential than ever. A well-structured approach to objectives can help educators navigate these challenges and ensure that their curricula are aligned with best practices in medical education. The cascading approach, which involves breaking down broad course objectives into smaller, more specific learning outcomes, can help educators ensure that their curriculum is aligned with student needs and professional standards.
Well-structured course objectives provide a clear roadmap for both students and faculty, ensuring that teaching and learning efforts are aligned.

Participants will gain the knowledge and skills to develop objectives that:

1. enhance student learning by clarifying expectations and focus students’ efforts
2. improve teaching effectiveness by aligning teaching activities with specific objectives to meet students' needs and ensure they teach the most important topics
3. facilitate assessment by providing a foundation for developing valid and reliable assessments that accurately measure student achievement
4. promote curriculum alignment by cascading objectives from the course level to the session level, which ensures that all components of the curriculum contribute to achieving the overall learning goals.

By focusing on the interconnectedness between course, weekly, and session objectives, participants will learn to create a cohesive and meaningful learning experience for students.

Agenda & Methods

• 10 minutes: Introduction
  • Welcome, introductions, and topic overview
  • Warm-up activity. Participants will share their experiences with course objectives in their own teaching and challenges they have faced
  • Discussion of importance of well-structured objectives in medical education
  • Explain the benefits of a cascading approach to course objectives for mapping and assessments
• 15 minutes: Course Objectives
  • Discuss the characteristics of well-written course objectives and provide examples. Emphasize the importance of alignment with program objectives.
  • Hypothetical Case Study. Small group. Based on a hypothetical medical school course, participants will brainstorm potential course objectives.
  • Debrief the case study.
• 15 minutes: Weekly or Module Learning Objectives
  • Discuss how to break down course objectives into smaller, more manageable chunks.
  • Provide examples of well-written weekly or module learning objectives.
  • Discuss the importance of alignment with course objectives.
  • Collaborative, small group exercise: create weekly or module learning objectives for the case study course.
• 20 minutes: Session Objectives
  •  Discuss how to write effective session objectives for different types of sessions (lecture, lab, small group, TBL, PBL, etc.)
  • Small group activity on building effective session objectives.
• 20 minutes: Objectives vs Study Guide
  • Large group discussion about relationship between objectives, agendas, and study guides.
  • Small group exploration of how to create study guides and the role of students in their creation.
• 10 minutes: Q&A and Wrap-Up
  • Open floor for questions, comments, concerns
  • Individual: reflection activity about key takeaways and how to apply concepts to their teaching
  • Open discussion of key takeaways
  • Summarize key points of session

The healthcare sector is evolving to become more inclusive, yet neurodivergent individuals often face significant barriers due to a lack of understanding and support. This session addresses the timely and significant issue of neurodiversity, highlighting the importance of inclusivity for enhancing the educational and professional experiences of neurodivergent individuals. Embracing neurodiversity not only supports individual well-being but also enriches the collective capabilities of healthcare teams, ultimately leading to improved patient care and innovation. As we look towards the next 25 years of health professions education, it is imperative to prepare educators and institutions to inclusively integrate neurodiverse individuals, ensuring a diverse and capable healthcare workforce.

Agenda & Methods

• Introduction (10 mins): Welcome, session overview, and brief introduction to neurodiversity, including definitions and examples of neurodivergent conditions.
• Understanding Neurodiversity (20 mins):
  • Presentation on key concepts and benefits of neurodiversity in healthcare
  • Discussion on challenges faced by neurodivergent individuals, including personal narratives
• Inclusive Strategies and Best Practices (20 mins):
  • Interactive session on effective strategies for supporting neurodivergent individuals
  • Case studies of successful neurodiversity initiatives
  • Q&A and discussion
• Action Planning Workshop (30 mins):
  • Small group activity to develop actionable plans for enhancing inclusivity and support
  • Guiding questions provided
  • Group sharing and feedback, with facilitator input
• Q&A and Wrap-Up (10 mins):
  • Open floor for questions
  • Summary of key takeaways
  • Next steps and resources provided

The purpose of this focus session is to explore the integration of Artificial Intelligence (AI) in SDL sessions for medical education, specifically within the context of the IAMSE Conference theme. As we transition into an era dominated by digital technologies, it is essential to equip students with the skills to leverage contemporary AI tools for collaborative problem-solving in authentic case scenarios. This session aims to empower educators to utilize AI resources effectively to create case scenarios and facilitate self-directed learning whereby students utilize AI to identify learning objectives, find evidence-based advancements, and develop NBME-style questions. We will accomplish this by treating participants as learners, and immersing them in a collaborative, self-directed learning experience.

In the US, health professions schools are rapidly adopting self-directed learning (SDL) practices with little attention paid to the resources learners will use during the SDL cycle. With recent advances in technology, AI is poised to serve as a primary resource for the current generation of learners during the SDL process. Hence, it is important for educators to embrace AI when designing SDL experiences to foster an engaging, self-paced, and personalized learning experience that prepares students to develop the skills of lifelong learning.

Agenda & Methods
In this 90 minute session, we will create an immersive workshop environment where participants act as learners in a SDL experience. We will begin with an introduction to the AI tools that can be used in this setting (15 minutes). Following, participants will be divided into small groups, each receiving an authentic case scenario. Groups will use AI tools to analyze the case, identify learning objectives, and discuss evidence-based advancements and solutions (30 minutes). After a short debrief, groups will reconvene and generate NBME-style questions using AI tools (20 minutes). Groups will report out in the large group, where they will reflect on their learning process, the effectiveness of the AI tools they used, and the generation of their questions (10 minutes). The session will close with a large group discussion about challenges and advantages of using AI in self-directed learning (15 minutes).

The rapid rise of generative AI in education presents both opportunities and challenges in health professions education (HPE) where critical thinking and deep learning are essential. This workshop is designed to help health professions educators navigate these challenges by exploring how generative AI can be harnessed to enhance student learning without propagating passive acceptance. Participants will engage in collaborative discussions and hands-on activities to develop practical tools and strategies for instruction that support the effective use of generative AI (GAI) in HPE.

The session will begin with a brief overview of the current landscape of GAI in education, including common concerns about its impact on student learning behaviors. Participants will then work in small groups to identify specific learning experiences where GAI could be integrated to foster critical thinking and deep learning. Each group will develop instructional resources, such as checklists, instructional strategies, or guidelines, that can be used to guide students in their use of GAI, ensuring that GAI supports and augments, rather than hinders, their educational development.

By the end of the session, participants will have acknowledged and reframed their concerns about GAI, transforming these concerns into actionable strategies. They will leave with concrete tools and a better understanding of how to integrate GAI into their teaching practices to enhance, rather than diminish, the learning experience.

Agenda & Methods
Introduction and Overview (10 minutes) [LO1, LO5]:
The session will start with a brief introduction that outlines the current landscape of generative AI in health professions education, along with the workshop’s goals and expected outcomes.

Pair-and-Share followed by Facilitated Large Group Discussion (15 minutes) [LO1]:
Participants will discuss common concerns about AI’s impact on student learning, particularly the fear of fostering passive learning habits. They will also identify their own concerns.

Small Group Work (40 minutes) [LO2, LO3, LO4]:
Participants will be divided into small groups. They will identify a learning experience within their own teaching contexts where AI could be beneficial, then collaboratively develop tools and resources (e.g., checklists, guidelines, instructional strategies) to ensure AI supports critical thinking and active learning among their students. Each group will be encouraged to use generative AI to help them develop these tools by posing questions or challenges related to enhancing critical appraisal skills and deep learning in the context of student AI use.
Each group will have access to facilitators, one of whom is a medical student, to provide guidance and insights.

Group Report-Out and Discussion (15 minutes) [LO5]:
Groups will report their findings and share the tools and strategies they’ve developed, followed by a facilitated discussion on the applicability of these resources in different educational settings.

Wrap-Up and Next Steps (10 minutes) [LO5]:
The session will conclude with a summary of key takeaways, including how participants can implement the tools and strategies developed during the workshop in their own institutions. Participants will be encouraged to continue the conversation beyond the workshop and consider forming a community of practice focused on the effective use of generative AI in health professions education.

The Association for the Study of Medical Education (ASME) mission is to advance scholarship in health professions education. By scholarship, we mean innovation, evaluation, research, and practitioner inquiry.

Scholarship plays a pivotal role in curriculum development by providing a foundation of evidence-based practices and fostering innovation. It can ensure that curricula are designed, implemented, and evaluated rigorously to meet the evolving demands of education. Through its application, we can identify gaps in existing curricula, explore new teaching methodologies, and assess their impact on learner outcomes.

In this session, we will explore. examples of scholarly activity from across the ASME membership and consider how these practices may translate into your local context.

At the end of this session, participants will be able to

• Identify opportunities for scholarship in curriculum development
• Outline potential projects to improve curriculum effectiveness
• Draft a roadmap for engaging in scholarship and collaboration

Most medical science educators experience periods of their careers when they are particularly stressed or burned out, contributing to reduced career satisfaction. In addition to negatively impacting them personally, their burnout also can negatively impact their families, patients, coworkers, and trainees. According to the AAMC, the majority of US medical school faculty have symptoms of stress or burnout, with the highest rates reported in women faculty and associate professors. Most medical students also experience significant stress throughout their training. Many factors ranging across institutional, system, and personal levels can contribute to stress and burnout. While acknowledging the importance of advocating for changes within institutional and system levels, this session will focus on the individual level by equipping attendees with evidence-based tools to improve their own wellbeing and career satisfaction. This session will implement a variety of activities grounded in the Acceptance and Commitment Training (ACT) framework. This framework stems from a type of cognitive-behavioral therapy that has been supported by decades of research. To be clear, this focus session is not therapy! The evidence-based tenants of ACT have expanded to professional development, and research supports its utility in the workplace. During the focus session, attendees will experience active learning exercises to encourage focusing on the present, identifying personal values, and committing to action guided by one’s values. We will discuss how this approach can empower educators and trainees to rediscover purpose and joy in their careers.

Agenda & Methods

• 00:10 - Introductions and hearing from the audience (Anonymous Polling, Group Brainstorming)
  Goals: Learn about attendees current career satisfaction. Identify factors that dampen joy.
• 00:25 - ACT Introduction (Didactic)
  Goal: Provide introduction to ACT and our work as Health Professions Educators or Trainees
• 00:50 - Identifying Values (Think-pair-share)
  Goals: Identify our values as educators. Understand what brings value and meaning to us.
• 01:05 - Being Present (Individual and Large Group)
  Goal: Create mindfulness practices and a sense of presence in our work.
• 01:20 - Do what matters. (Individual worksheet and commitment)
  Goal: Create individual actions, including a follow up commitment from the presenters.
• 01:30 - Wrap up and questions (large group discussion)
  Goal: Answer remaining questions about the content and activities presented.

In the rapidly evolving field of health professions education, maintaining a strong foundation in bioethics is more important than ever. This session, titled “Heights are Defined by Roots: Emphasizing the Imperative for Strengthening Bioethical Foundations in the Growing Era of Health Professions Education,” is designed to address this need. We will explore the UNESCO Chair in Bioethics' 3T Program—Train, Teach, and Transfer—which has been successfully implemented to integrate bioethics into health professions education around the world.

The session will begin with an introduction to the 3T Program, highlighting its relevance and impact. Participants will then dive into the practical aspects of training educators in bioethics, exploring effective methods for teaching these crucial principles. We’ll also discuss strategies for transferring this knowledge across institutions and regions, ensuring that ethical considerations are deeply embedded in educational practices.

By the end of the session, participants will have developed actionable plans for integrating bioethical principles into their own educational programs. They will leave equipped with practical tools and strategies to promote a culture of ethical responsibility, ensuring that as our field continues to grow, it remains firmly rooted in the values that define it.
This session is not just about discussing bioethics—it’s about taking concrete steps to ensure that our educational practices are aligned with the ethical standards that are essential for the future of healthcare.

Agenda & Methods

1. Introduction to 3T Program and Its Implications in Health Professions Education (15 minutes)
   • Format: Interactive Presentation
   • Description: An overview of the UNESCO Chair in Bioethics’ 3T Program (Train, Teach, and Transfer), highlighting its success in integrating bioethical principles into health professions education and its relevance in today’s rapidly evolving educational landscape.
2. Training Health Professionals in Bioethics (20 minutes)
   • Format: Group Discussion
   • Description: A deep dive into the training component of the 3T program, focusing on methods and strategies for equipping educators and healthcare professionals with the necessary bioethical knowledge and skills.
3. Exploring Methods of Teaching Bioethics (20 minutes)
   • Format: Data-Driven Group discussion
   • Description: An exploration of effective teaching methods for bioethics, discussing how to integrate bioethical concepts into curricula and ensure that students engage with these principles meaningfully.
4. Transfer Strategies for Bioethical Knowledge (20 minutes)
   • Format: Interactive presentation & Group Discussion
   • Description: An examination of strategies for transferring bioethical knowledge across institutions and regions, ensuring widespread adoption and implementation of ethical practices in health professions education.
5. Develop Actionable Plans for Bioethical Integration (15 minutes)
   • Format: Small group activity
   • Description: Participants will work on creating actionable plans to integrate and reinforce bioethical principles within their own educational programs, drawing on the strategies discussed throughout the session.

This focus session will delve into the crucial topic of intergenerational collaboration in health professions education, a subject of increasing importance as we prepare for the next 25 years. The rapid pace of change in healthcare, coupled with the growing diversity in age, experience, and technological proficiency among students and educators, makes it essential to harness the strengths of multiple generations in the educational environment. Understanding how to bridge generational gaps, improve communication, and foster a collaborative learning atmosphere is vital for the continued advancement of health professions education.

During this 90-minute session, participants will explore practical strategies to enhance intergenerational collaboration through a combination of interactive activities, case study analyses, and group discussions. The session will begin with a brief overview of the significance of intergenerational collaboration, followed by an interactive icebreaker designed to help participants share their own experiences and perspectives on generational differences.

Participants will then engage in small group analyses of case studies that highlight common challenges and successful solutions in intergenerational collaboration. This will be followed by a strategy development workshop where groups will create actionable plans to enhance intergenerational collaboration within their institutions. The session will conclude with group presentations and a facilitated discussion to share strategies and receive feedback.

By the end of the session, participants will have gained practical insights and tools to implement in their own educational settings, fostering a more inclusive and effective learning environment that leverages the unique strengths of each generation. These strategies will be vital for preparing health professionals who are equipped to meet the challenges of the future.

Agenda & Methods
Introduction and Overview (15 minutes):
The session begins with a brief presentation on the importance of intergenerational collaboration in health professions education, outlining key challenges and opportunities. The objectives and agenda will be reviewed to align participants with the session’s goals.

Interactive Icebreaker Activity (10 minutes):
Participants will engage in small group discussions to share experiences and perceptions of generational differences in education. This activity encourages reflection and dialogue, helping participants understand the impact of generational dynamics on teaching and learning.

Case Study Analysis (20 minutes):
Participants will analyze real-world case studies in small groups, focusing on challenges and successes in intergenerational collaboration. Topics such as communication barriers and technology integration will be explored, promoting critical thinking and problem-solving.

Strategy Development Workshop (25 minutes):
Building on the case study analysis, participants will develop actionable strategies to enhance intergenerational collaboration in their institutions. This workshop emphasizes creative thinking and practical implementation.

Group Discussion and Sharing (15 minutes):
Groups will present their strategies to the larger group, facilitating an exchange of ideas and peer feedback. The discussion will be guided to ensure constructive and inclusive participation.

Q&A and Wrap-Up (5 minutes):
The session concludes with an open floor for questions, followed by a summary of key takeaways and action items to reinforce the session’s objectives.

This focus session addresses the critical generational shifts within health professions education, presenting challenges in aligning the values, expectations, and learning preferences of students and faculty. Compounded by rapid technological advancements, these shifts can lead to disengagement, misunderstandings, and a potential breakdown in the transmission of essential knowledge and professional values. The session emphasizes the urgency of addressing these challenges to ensure the continued effectiveness of educational programs and the preparedness of future healthcare professionals.

The session is structured to promote active engagement and practical application of strategies. It begins with an overview of generational challenges and the role of technology in either supporting or hindering the integration of generations in educational settings. Participants will then engage in small group discussions to identify and share the generational dynamics they have observed within their institutions.

Following a brief break, the session will delve into strategies for bridging generational divides, focusing on mentorship, active apprenticeship, and communities of practice (CoPs). Participants will work in groups to brainstorm examples of how these strategies can be implemented in their contexts. The session culminates with a crossover discussion where participants formulate comprehensive plans incorporating these strategies, with built-in criteria for evaluating effectiveness.

By the end of the session, participants will be able to identify key generational shifts, analyze the role of technology, and formulate actionable plans that integrate mentorship, apprenticeship, and CoPs to enhance educational outcomes in their institutions. This session ultimately aims to build a more resilient and integrated educational community that effectively harnesses the strengths of both seasoned professionals and younger generations.

Agenda & Methods

1. Introduction and overview (10 minutes)
   • Presenters will outline the key generational challenges and potential impacts if these shifts are left unaddressed. This section includes a facilitated discussion using audience engagement tools on the role of technology in the integration of generations.
2. Identification of generational dynamics (15 minutes)
   • Breakout group discussion - 10 minutes
   • Participants will be divided into small groups of 4-5 to identify generational challenges they have observed in their institutions and state briefly the impact of these challenges. A guiding question sheet will be provided with several areas to prompt discussion.
   • Sharing - 5 minutes
   • Each group will select a representative to share key discussion points with the larger group.
3. Break (5 minutes)
4. Strategies for integrating generations (25 minutes)
   • Introducing the overarching strategies - 5 minutes
   • Presenters will provide an overview of three strategies—mentorship, active apprenticeship, and communities of practice—highlighting the objectives and practical examples for each strategy.
   • Breakout group discussion - 20 minutes
   • Groups will reconvene to select and explore one strategy, brainstorming examples of implementation to address the generational challenges identified earlier.
5. Formulating a plan (30 minutes)
   • Crossover group discussion - 20 minutes
   • Participants will form new groups, ensuring representation from each strategy, to formulate a plan incorporating mentorship, apprenticeship, and CoPs to be applied to their educational context. The plan should include a brief description of criteria for evaluating effectiveness.
   • Sharing - 10 minutes
   • Groups will present key points of their plans to the larger group.
6. Closing (5 minutes)
   • Presenters will summarize key takeaways and encourage continued discussion on implementing strategies in participants’ own institutions.

Rural areas in the US face significant health professions workforce shortages. Contributing factors include lower financial incentives for healthcare professionals, professional isolation, and fewer training opportunities. The health impact of these shortages is profound. Rural populations often experience higher rates of chronic diseases and lower life expectancy due to significant limitations to healthcare access. Workforce shortages can lead to longer wait times for appointments, increased travel distances for care, and higher rates of preventable hospitalizations, factors contributing to poorer overall health outcomes and reduced quality of life. The National Institute for Health Care Management reports that the mortality rate in rural areas can be up to 10% higher than in urban areas, resulting in significant economic and societal costs. Efforts to address these shortages include loan repayment programs, telemedicine initiatives, and other financial incentives for healthcare professionals to practice in underserved areas increasing the cost of care for these communities. We seek to shift and reduce costs away from post-graduate enticements to sustainable partnerships by identifying new novel medical student training models in rural settings.

Agenda & Methods

1. Introduction (10 mins)
   • Teaching Method: Brief presentation
   • Details: Overview of current challenges and opportunities in rural medical education.
   • Participation: Interactive Q&A to gauge audience understanding.
2. Innovative Models (20 mins)
   • Teaching Method: Case studies
   • Details: Present successful rural education programs and innovative strategies.
   • Participation: Audience members share their experiences and insights.
3. Interactive Workshop (30 mins)
   • Teaching Method: Group activity
   • Details: Participants form groups to brainstorm and develop solutions to common challenges in rural medical training.
   • Participation: Group discussions, role-playing, and solution development.
4. Expert Panel (20 mins)
   • Teaching Method: Panel discussion
   • Details: Experts discuss their experiences and answer questions on implementing successful rural education initiatives.
   • Participation: Attendees ask questions and engage in discussion with panelists.
5. Action Planning (10 mins)
6. Teaching Method: Individual planning
7. Details: Participants draft actionable plans to apply strategies in their own settings.
8. Participation: Individual reflection and goal setting.

The AFMC will present on a substantial project we conducted on the final year of Medical School. Often the final year of medical programs include electives, applications and interviews for residency positions consuming time and leaving little to show for the tuition paid and time spent for the medical education. We reviewed the final year content and processes at each of the medical schools in Canada. Multiple sources of data were then collated and analyzed to delineate best practices and a set of recommendations. We will share the processes used to collect data and the analysis and top recommendations.

Learning Objectives

• By the end of his session participants will
• Recognize the pitfalls in the content and processes for the final year of medical school
• Review the analyses used and results of this data collection
• Integrate the recommendations into planning for senior undergraduate medical learners

Allyship is the “actions, behaviors, and practices that leaders take to support, amplify, and advocate with others, especially with individuals who don’t belong to the same social identity groups as themselves.” In the context of medical education and healthcare, inequities and systemic racism persistently impact various stakeholders, including patients, learners, and faculty members from marginalized groups as they go about their work. Faculty and medical learners have a privileged position to build communities within their various healthcare environments and can act against inequities and racism. Faculty and medical trainees should leverage their strength and privilege through allyship to move towards health equity and justice. We interact with individuals who may need uplifting and amplification to reach their full potential, such as patients, learners or colleagues from an equity-deserving population facing discrimination or oppression.

This workshop will define allyship in its many forms (e.g. ally to co-conspirator). Armed with this knowledge and an exploration of one's own power, privilege and positionality, our workshop participants will be empowered to explore their own potential as effective allies in medical education. Through case scenarios, participants will actively practice allyship. To conclude, participants will plan strategies for implementing allyship in their own educational environment. Resources will also be provided to support participants to continue expanding their allyship skills after the session. We aim to enable our participants to further develop their allyship skills for contributing to social justice through forming inclusive communities and making stronger interpersonal connections and supporting others.

Agenda & Methods
The 90 minute session with begin with an introduction (5 min) and a large group icebreaker exercise with participants expressing their understanding of allyship (10 min). We will review ground rules of this work and set the stage for psychological safety as this is required to create an environment to share in these complex and emotionally charged topics around privilege and discrimination. There will be a brief didactic session using principles of universal design learning (engagement, representation; action and expression). We will cover the definition of different forms of allyship with examples (10 min). There will be a participant exercise of a privilege challenge where participants privately (respecting privacy and potential vulnerability) score their privilege. The exercise will be debriefed as a large group through a facilitated discussion on any revelations experienced from the privilege challenge (15 min). The next step will be a small group exercise using case scenarios to make the different types of allyship for the given case (10min). Large group discussion follows around the case scenarios to consolidate learning about the nuances of the different types of allyship. There will be a brief didactic session on communication tools for allyship for example calling in, out and on (5 min). We will then move into small group activities of practicing allyship using the communication tools with role play and troubleshooting for one case from a list of 3 scenarios (15 min). The larger group will hear from the groups about each of the cases and their experience working through the cases(15 min). We conclude with a wrap up of the workshop (5 min).

This interactive session engages participants to enhance healthcare education through a Health Humanities framework, emphasizing historical awareness, narrative medicine, and the arts. Using examples of humanities integration with content including anatomy and physiology, along with implementation of a Health Humanities curricular project from the Duke PA Program as models, we will outline strategies for embedding local historical and socio-cultural contexts into curricula to foster cultural humility and structural competency. Attendees will participate in hands-on experiences, including narrative medicine exercises, visual thinking, and literary analysis, designed to help learners deepen understanding and empathy towards diverse patient communities. Techniques demonstrated will help educators weave these elements into their teaching to connect healthcare concepts with personal and community stories. Expected outcomes include increased student engagement, improved cultural competence, and a commitment to addressing healthcare disparities. This session will equip educators with innovative tools to create more inclusive and effective learning environments, ultimately fostering better patient outcomes in diverse community settings.

This session addresses the critical gap in healthcare education regarding the integration of social determinants and community histories. In a landscape where healthcare disparities are prevalent, understanding the socio-cultural backgrounds of communities served is paramount. This workshop, grounded in the Health Humanities, provides timely, innovative strategies for incorporating historical awareness, narrative medicine, and the arts into health professions curricula. These approaches are vital for developing culturally competent healthcare professionals capable of delivering empathetic, informed care. As the healthcare sector shifts towards more holistic care models that emphasize understanding patient backgrounds, this session offers essential tools for educators to enhance student engagement with these critical issues, thereby addressing both current needs and future demands in healthcare practice. This is particularly significant in today's diverse healthcare environments where understanding and addressing historical and social injustices are crucial for effective patient care and community interaction.

Agenda & Methods
This session will be structured to maximize participant engagement through modeling, interactive learning, and action planning. The agenda is as follows:

1. Introduction and overview of Health Humanities (5 minutes)
2. Interactive visual thinking exercise (10 minutes)
3. Presentation of the Health Humanities project implemented at the Duke PA Program (10 minutes)
4. Hands-on narrative medicine exercise (15 minutes)
5. The walking tour – modeling and discussion of strategies linking historical context with clinical practice (10 minutes)
6. Small Group discussion - benefits of and barriers to integrating humanities into healthcare education (10 minutes)
7. Action planning - participants identify opportunities and begin planning curricular enhancements (20 minutes)
8. Wrap up, Q&A (10 minutes)

This format ensures a participatory and experiential learning environment, encouraging immediate application of the strategies presented.

This session focuses on improving the creation of pre-work materials for flipped classroom sessions by introducing strategies and guidelines to enhance the learner's experience. Crafting effective pre-work materials can be challenging, particularly when balancing content volume, choosing the best delivery medium, and fitting materials into the available schedule. The session will start with presenters sharing insights and experiences from various institutions. Attendees will then engage in small group discussions to explore their own challenges and success stories. Each group will present key points from their discussions to the larger group. By the end, participants should be equipped to design impactful and well-balanced pre-work materials for flipped classrooms. This interactive approach aims to provide educators with practical tools and strategies to improve their sessions and create a more engaging and productive learning environment for their students.

Agenda & Methods
The session will begin with introductions of presenters and a brief outline of the topic and objectives (5 minutes). This will be followed by a review of pertinent literature and institutional data shared by each presenter (15 minutes). Participants will then engage in collaborative small group discussions, where they will share experiences, discuss challenges, and propose solutions (20 minutes). Subsequently, a large group discussion will occur, with representatives from each group presenting their challenges and solutions to foster feedback and questions from all participants (40 minutes). To conclude, presenters will summarize key points, highlighting best practices and strategies derived from participant discussions (10 minutes).

This Focus Session introduces participants to Generative AI for teaching clinical and communication skills in healthcare education. As traditional Standardized Patient (SP) simulations are often costly and logistically challenging, Generative AI can offer a scalable, cost-effective alternative that can be easily integrated into healthcare curricula across diverse institutional and cultural settings. As an example, we introduce the publicly and freely available AI Patient Actor (https://geiselmed.dartmouth.edu/thesen/patient-actor-app/) developed at Dartmouth. Powered by an LLM, the app simulates realistic patient interactions, providing students with the opportunity to practice clinical communication skills with an AI patient actor and receive personalized feedback. Through this experience, medical educators will learn Generative AI skills that they can apply to develop and customize their own AI-driven educational tools. Participants will engage in hands-on activities, using the app to simulate patient interactions across different clinical scenarios. This will be followed by group exercises focused on developing advanced prompts to create nuanced, realistic patient characters and clinical scenarios. We will explore strategies for adapting the Generative AI cases for equitable use, ensuring that AI-driven tools can be implemented across diverse populations. In the final section, a guided discussion will allow participants to share their experiences, challenges, and discuss best practices, with a particular emphasis on how AI-driven simulations can be tailored to various educational contexts going forward. By the end of the session, participants will have a thorough understanding of how to develop and deploy cases at their own institutions and will be equipped with the knowledge to innovate and develop customized AI-driven solutions for clinical reasoning and communication skills training.

Agenda & Methods

• 0-15 minutes: Introduction and Overview
  The session will begin with a brief introduction to the AI Patient Actor (https://geiselmed.dartmouth.edu/thesen/patient-actor-app/), its development, and its integration into medical curricula in the US and Kenya since November 2023. The facilitators will present an overview of the session’s objectives and the significance of AI-driven simulations in enhancing communication skills in medical education. This section will include a live demonstration of the app’s key features.
• 15-30 minutes: Interactive Demonstration
  Participants will engage in an interactive demonstration where they will use the AI Patient Actor in small groups. Each group will be assigned a different clinical scenario to explore, allowing them to experience firsthand how the app generates patient interactions and provides individualized feedback. Facilitators will circulate to offer guidance and answer questions.
• 30-50 minutes: Workshop on Advanced Prompting Techniques
  Participants will be divided into small groups to practice developing advanced prompts for AI-generated standardized patients. Each group will focus on different aspects, such as clinical case details, patient personality, and communication style. They will use the prompts within the app and generate their own to observe how varying inputs affect patient responses.
• 50-70 minutes: Equitable Adaptation and Implementation Strategies
  Participants will work in small groups to brainstorm adaptation strategies simulating patients from diverse backgrounds and for use in different cultural contexts and languages.
• 70-90 minutes: Group Discussion and Reflection
  Participants will share their experiences, challenges, and insights from the demonstration and prompting exercises. Facilitators will lead a discussion on best practices for creating effective AI-driven patient simulations, their promises and their limitations.

In today’s world, where environmental crises are increasingly affecting every aspect of our lives, it's become clear that the health of our planet is deeply intertwined with human health. As healthcare professionals, we are often at the forefront of dealing with the consequences of these environmental changes, whether it’s treating heat-related illnesses, managing respiratory diseases exacerbated by air pollution, or addressing the spread of vector-borne diseases due to shifting climates.

Yet, despite the obvious connections, planetary health remains a relatively neglected area in most health professions curricula. This gap in education means that many future healthcare providers might not fully grasp the environmental underpinnings of the health issues they encounter or feel equipped to contribute to solutions.

This session comes at a critical time. By integrating planetary health into the curriculum, we’re not just adding another topic to the syllabus; we’re fundamentally rethinking how we prepare students for the realities of modern healthcare. The United Nations Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) offer a valuable framework for this, particularly goals like Good Health and Well-being, Climate Action, and Life on Land. These goals remind us that health is not just an individual issue but a collective one, deeply connected to the world around us.

The goal of this session is to equip educators with practical strategies to weave these concepts into their curriculum. By doing so, we can help students see the bigger picture—that the health of our patients is, in many ways, a reflection of the health of our planet. This understanding is crucial if we are to train healthcare professionals who are not only skilled clinicians but also advocates for a healthier, more sustainable world.

Agenda & Methods

1. Opening Horizons: The Need for Planetary Health Education (15 minutes)
   • Format: Interactive presentation
   • Participants will be introduced to the concept of planetary health and its relevance to healthcare. The session will begin with an overview of the key environmental factors affecting health and their connection to the United Nations Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs).
2. Connecting the Dots: Strategies for Integrating Planetary Health (25 minutes)
   • Format: Interactive Presentation & Group discussion
   • Participants will explore strategies for integrating planetary health concepts into their curricula. They will brainstorm ways to align these strategies with the SDGs and create actionable plans to implement in their institutions. Each group will share their ideas with the larger group for feedback and refinement.
3. Navigating Challenges and Meeting Students’ Expectations (15 minutes)
   • Format: Presentation and interactive discussion
   • This segment will focus on understanding the challenges students face when engaging with planetary health concepts and their expectations from the curriculum.
4. Innovative Plans & Insights (20 minutes)
   • Format: Collaborative discussion and brainstorming
   • Participants will brainstorm and explore new plans for integrating planetary health into their curricula. Discussion will focus on incorporating innovative strategies such as electives, workshops, game-based learning, field-based education, and creative approaches like art and storytelling.
5. Reflecting on the Future: Preparing Healthcare Professionals for Planetary Health (15 minutes)
   • Format: Reflective discussion and Q&A
   • Participants will explore how these educational strategies can be applied to foster a new generation of healthcare providers who are equipped to promote sustainability and global health. The session will end with an open Q&A to address any remaining questions or concerns.

The need for a sex and gender perspective in medical education stems from the historical reliance on male models in medical research, which has led to significant healthcare disparities. The NIH's Sex as a Biological Variable policy and the development of educational materials by the NIH Office of Research on Women's Health highlight the importance of considering both biological sex and sociocultural gender in health. However, the adoption and integration of these materials into curricula have been slow. Faculty often lack the knowledge, skills, and resources to make these changes. This session addresses this gap by providing a validated toolkit and practical training to help faculty assess and revise their curricula, ultimately leading to more inclusive and effective medical education.

Agenda & Methods

1. Introduction (5 minutes): Overview of the session objectives and the importance of integrating sex and gender perspectives in medical education.
2. Presentation of the SG-CAR Toolkit (30 minutes): Detailed explanation of the toolkit, including its components and how to use it for curricular assessment and revision.
3. Small Group Activity (20 minutes): Participants will analyze a sample lecture using the toolkit. They will be provided with paper copies of the lecture and toolkit, with electronic access for those with devices.
4. Large Group Discussion (10 minutes): Sharing findings from the small group activity and discussing common themes and challenges.
5. Discussion and Q&A (10 minutes): Open floor for questions, further discussion, and sharing of experiences and best practices.

This session explores the evolving generational dynamics in health professions education, with a focus on integrating Gen Z and the emerging Gen Alpha into current educational paradigms. As Boomers, Gen X, and Millennials continue to lead educational efforts, Gen Z, now comprising the majority of students, and Gen Alpha, soon to enter the educational arena, present unique challenges and opportunities shaped by their distinct technological and social environments.

Participants will engage with generational research, national datasets, and reflective activities to better understand the experiences and expectations of today’s health professions students. Through an interactive literature review and case-based discussions, attendees will critically assess intergenerational strains and develop practical strategies to enhance engagement, teaching, and learning across generations. The session will culminate in a novel framework designed to support faculty and staff in creating inclusive, impactful educational experiences for the next 25 years of health professions education.

By the end of this session, participants will be equipped with actionable insights and tools to foster effective intergenerational collaboration at their home institutions, ensuring that they are prepared for the dynamic future of health professions education.

Agenda & Methods

1. Introduction (5 min): Agenda, anonymous participant demographic Poll Everywhere, and shared expectations for confidentiality and respect
2. Generational Reference Points (5 min): Discuss the Pew Research Center’s recommendations for generational thinking
3. Generational Reference Point Self-assessment (5 min): Anonymous multiple choice Poll Everywhere about educational and life experiences during high school and higher education
4. Interactive Literature Review (30 min): Overview of the four majority generations in health professions education (Boomers, Gen X, Millennials, Gen Z) and future students (Gen Alpha). Aggregate self-assessment data (collected in #3) will be interspersed to juxtapose participants with national- and medical student-level Gen Z datasets and stimulate reflection
5. Problem-solving exercise (25 min): Participants will be guided through our six critical areas of reflection for rethinking intergenerational issues at home institutions, and then apply the framework in small groups to solve provided case-based problems. The provided cases will be developed based on an optional needs-based survey sent to the participants before the session
6. Large group debrief (15 min): Participants will report their case-based discussions and reflections
7. Closing (5 min): Final Q&A, distribution of Gen Z and Gen Alpha literature and resources.

Creating a motivationally-supportive learning environment can increase medical students' well-being and resilience, especially in students with diverse identities. Participants will learn pedagogical techniques that can be immediately implemented to foster more supportive learning environments.

Learning Objectives Include:
1. Faculty and administrators will be able to explain how the learning environment connects with student well-being outcomes. More specifically, participants will be able to identify how cultivating a growth mindset in students, helping students identify the purpose and relevance of the course material, and fostering a sense of belonging all promote positive outcomes in students, especially those students from historically marginalized backgrounds.

2. Faculty and administrators will be able to explain how student perceptions of their instructors’ learning mindsets connect to student well-being.

3. Participants will also learn ways to extend their pedagogical toolbox for creating and sustaining a more supportive learning environment. The emphasis is placed on pedagogical changes and not curricular changes, so that faculty can be empowered to begin including these pedagogical practices without structural changes to their curriculum.

The dominant story circulating in higher education is partnerships are too difficult to forge, or if they exist, they must take just one form: faculty and staff leading students. However, when students are brought into the fold of curriculum creation, they become empowered to share their ideas and suggestions and are excited to be a part of the process. In turn, faculty and staff are re-energized by the thoughtfulness and innovation of students. With this spirit, the University of Kansas School of Medicine devised a plan recruiting a group of students, faculty, and staff across our multi-campus institution to come together to create a strengths-based professional development curriculum and coaching program.

Together, using a Students as Partners (SaP) framework, the group has co-constructed professional development modules utilizing a Build-a-Thon structure based on the Backwards Design model. The group constituents engaged one another to discuss best practices in the pursuit of flourishing through development of character, care, and practical wisdom, in alignment with the Kern National Network (KNN) Framework for Flourishing. Our remodeled coaching program aims to leverage learners’ inherent strengths to foster professional development and promote flourishing. Qualitative data were analyzed to examine the impact of SaP work on students, faculty, and staff. We will describe findings from our SaP work in academic medicine, engage participants in a Build-a-Thon activity, and lead participants through development of their own implementation plan for integrating SaP work at their institutions.

Agenda & Methods

1. Introductions and Welcome (5 minutes)
2. Overview of SaP Work (5 minutes)
   • History of SaP Work
   • Summary of Studies Demonstrating Benefits of SaP Work
3. Presentation of University of Kansas School of Medicine Case Study (10 minutes)
   • Description of Build-a-Thons (our SaP Work)
   • Results from Build-a-Thons
   • Presentation of Qualitative Data
4. Build-a-Thon (30 minutes)
   • Participants Engage in a Mini Build-a-Thon
     • Participants provided with scenarios choices and guidelines for conducting their Mini Build-a-Thon
   • Participants Debrief Their Experience
     • Padlet will be used to collect participants thoughts on the following:
       • Thoughts on their experiences
       • Perceived benefits of SaP work
       • Perceived challenges of SaP work
     • A whole group discussion will be facilitated to summarize benefits and limitations and brainstorm solutions to mitigate challenges to SaP work
5. Implementing SaP Work (20 to 25 minutes)
   • Participants Complete an Implementation Plan with Guidance from Presenters.
   • Implementation Plan guides participants through:
     • Identifying problems at their institutions that might be resolved using SaP work
       • Describe problem
       • Identify ways that student, staff, and educator voices can each uniquely contribute to problem resolution
       • Identify ways that problem resolution would benefit from collaborations across generations
     • Identifying potential partners to engage in SaP work
     • Identifying possible protocols for conducting SaP work
       • Who will be involved?
       • How will students be identified and recruited to participate?
       • What structure/format will be used to conduct SaP work
     • Anticipating challenges and resistance to SaP work
     • Identifying Next Steps to move from SaP ideas to SaP action
6. Closing (10 to 15 minutes)
   • Sharing of proposed implementation plans for feedback and discussion
   • Presenters will address questions and provide resources to support next steps

Medical students often struggle with effective study strategies and may not fully benefit from their mistakes, which can impact their academic performance and long-term professional development. Traditional approaches to addressing these challenges have shown limited success. This session addresses the timely need for innovative, scalable solutions that leverage emerging technologies to enhance student learning outcomes through systematic error analysis.

The integration of AI in medical education is a rapidly evolving field with significant potential to transform how students learn from their mistakes. By exploring AI-supported wrong answer journal analysis, this session addresses the growing need for medical educators to understand and effectively implement AI tools in their curricula. The approach presented combines the power of structured error reflection with personalized, AI-generated study recommendations, offering a novel solution to longstanding challenges in medical education.

This topic is particularly significant given the increasing emphasis on self-directed learning and metacognition in medical education. By focusing on enhancing students' ability to learn from their mistakes and develop targeted study strategies, this approach has the potential to not only improve immediate academic outcomes but also to foster critical skills for long-term professional success and lifelong learning.

Agenda & Methods

1. Introduction and Overview (10 minutes)
   • Brief presentation on the rationale and potential of AI-supported wrong answer journal analysis in medical education.
2. Interactive Demonstration (20 minutes)
   • Live demonstration of the wrong answer journal template and AI-generated analysis report.
   • Participants will have the opportunity to interact with the tools in real-time.
3. Small Group Activity (25 minutes)
   • Participants will be divided into small groups to design a wrong answer journal template based on a sample course topic.
   • Groups will then brainstorm potential AI applications for analyzing student error data.
4. Large Group Discussion (20 minutes)
   • Groups will share their designs and ideas.
   • Facilitated discussion on the potential benefits and challenges of implementing this approach.
5. Q&A and Reflection (15 minutes)
   • Open forum for questions and discussion.
   • Participants will reflect on how they might apply these concepts in their own educational settings.

Since the term “integrated curriculum” first appeared in medical education literature in the 1980s, the integration trend has continued to gain momentum as it supports enhanced knowledge retention and application of biomedical, clinical, and health system sciences knowledge. Among integrated curricula, variations of case-based learning (CBL) modalities have been widely adopted. While these CBL approaches facilitate the development of critical thinking and application in a patient-centered context, they do not consistently provide a comprehensive, structured learning framework for students.

The Clinical Presentation Curriculum (CPC) model, an integrated curriculum framework that was reported first in the 1990s by the University of Calgary, organizes learning around common clinical presentations called “schemes” (schemas). These schemas serve as a visual map for concept relationships. They are inductive decision and concept-sorting trees that provide an important expert-guided framework for both content integration and critical reasoning development.

Incorporating schemas into CBL curricula can provide a framework to strengthen knowledge acquisition and content connections. Effective schemas include objectives (medical knowledge, clinical skills, behaviors, and health system science) that are linked to course objectives. With careful planning, schemas facilitate the organization of student learning as they practice connecting foundational and clinical concepts of increasing complexity.
Learning how to develop effective schemas takes practice. This focus session will provide tips and strategies for developing schemas that can be used to augment the learning experience for students in a variety of CBL curricula. Participants will have opportunities to build future collaborations by co-developing and sharing these useful tools.

Agenda & Methods
This four-part interactive focus session plan encourages active participation through a mix of group activities, real-time feedback, brainstorming, and hands-on practice.

• Part I: Building common ground- sharing of experiences and challenges with case-based learning (CBL). (20 min)
  Teaching Methods: Interactive presentation and small group activity
  Activity:
  • A short overview of the evolution of integrated curricula and the status of case-based learning.
  • Break into small groups to discuss experiences with case-based curricula. Each group identifies two strengths and two limitations and posts their findings on a shared digital whiteboard (e.g., Miro or Jamboard).
  • Reconvene as a large group to discuss an AI-generated summary of the discussion.
• Part II: Clinical Presentation (CP) curriculum schemas-examine key elements of schemas. (20 min)
  Teaching Methods: Interactive presentation and discussion
  Activity:
  • Short presentation on the background and design of the original clinical presentation-based curriculum.
  • “Anatomy of Schemas”: Large group discussion of example schemas to identify key elements of schemas and determine their effectiveness.
• Part III: Becoming a schema architect- Building schemas and fostering collaborative learning and refinement through peer feedback. (40 min)
  Teaching Methods: Interactive group work and feedback
  Activity:
  • Small group activity to develop a schema based on an assigned clinical presentation.
  • Presentation of small group schemas with feedback.
  • Large group discussion of the overall schema-building experience.
• Part IV: Beyond schema building- Generate collaborations and ideas for developing and integrating schemas in participants’ current curriculum. (10 min)
  Teaching Methods: Large group discussion based on specific prompts
  Activity:
  • Conclusion of session with sharing actionable ideas for integrating schemas into their existing curricula.

The USMLE Step exams are designed to assess students' critical analysis skills through questions that integrate clinical and basic science knowledge. To prepare effectively, students need to practice with multiple-choice questions (MCQs) that match the quality and complexity of USMLE items. However, many faculty face challenges in creating such high-quality assessments due to a lack of specialized training, the time-intensive nature of writing questions, and the demanding review process.

Generative AI offers a solution by assisting faculty in efficiently crafting USMLE-style MCQs. This workshop will introduce strategies for leveraging AI as a co-pilot in the question development process, enabling faculty to produce high-quality formative and summative assessment items that enhance student preparation for the USMLE Step exams.
Participants will review the purpose of the NBME licensing exam, identify the features of high-quality MCQs, and explore methods for transforming lecture, session, and clinical topics into content maps that guide question development. The session will then delve into principles of creating effective AI prompts and provide hands-on practice in using AI to develop MCQs.
The workshop integrates a combination of didactic presentations, think-pair-share activities, and small group work, culminating in a group discussion to consolidate learning. By the end of the session, participants will be equipped to use AI in producing USMLE-aligned assessments, ultimately improving student performance on the exam.

Agenda & Methods

1. Introduction - Purpose of NBME licensing exam and features of a high quality NBME USMLE Step MCQ. (10 minutes) (Method: didactic)
2. Identifying features of a high-quality NBME USMLE Step item. (10 minutes) (Method: Think-pair-share)
3. Lecture / session content mapping. (20 minutes) (Methods: small group activity)
4. Principles of developing AI prompts. (10 minutes) (Method: didactic)
5. Applying AI prompts to develop MCQ items. (25 minutes) (Method: small group activity)
6. Summary & attendee reflections (15 minutes) (Method: group discussion)

Medical students utilize several resources during their pre-clerkship curriculum. Usage of external resources has dramatically increased within the past decade. Understanding not only the type of resources used but why students prefer them is vital to assist in restructuring how institutions select core resources and improve student engagement. This focus session aims to explore the preferences of students regarding institutional versus third-party study materials along with addressing the major elephant in the room; majority of medical students do no read assigned literature. We hope to discuss how this phenomenon has evolve, is there a route to bring students back to assigned reading, and is this shift really all that problematic?

Findings from our institutional investigation on learning resources indicate students rarely or never use institutional readings, instead relying heavily on third-party resources. Majority of students believe supplemental third-party resources would increase their lecture engagement. This causes a divide between faculty and student perspective of readiness and comprehension of the assigned learning material. Strikingly, majority of students indicated that they did not utilize assigned textbook readings and more so believed investing time to read the content slowed the learner's ability to comprehend and retain the assigned concepts. In contrast, faculty believed the lack of use of these materials was indicative of less retention and appreciation of the topics. This focus is intended to address these contrasting concerns and identify mechanisms to optimized pre-assigned materials to be more compatable for the modern medical student.

Agenda & Methods

1. Introduction (20 minutes)
   Two forms: one for the learners in attendance and one for the faculty. The questions will focus on the perception of study tools and their use in the curriculum. The survey will also ask what tools they particularly prefer to use for studying. The goal is to highlight the wide range of strategies employed and highlight similarities and differences between each party. Data for both populations was previously collected at our institution and this will help us to prime the talking points.
2. Categorize common third-party software and how it is utilized by students for day to day preparation. (30 minutes)
   A small group discussion of these tools focused on faculty hesitation of the topic followed by a report out. Groups will report their findings and presenters will show data collected at their institution highlighting similarities and additional observations. The second discussion point will be focused on the benefits of third-party tools and how to focus their utility on a positive learning environment. Groups will report our findings and presenters will show data collected at their institution highlighting similarities and additional observations.
3. Discuss the impact of underutilization of classic resources including textbooks (30 minutes)
   Discuss data showing minimal to no utilization of textbook assignments. This conversation will explore types of learners (visual, kinesthetic, etc.). Groups will discuss implications of this shift and discuss the value of assigning non-traditional resources. Appropriating these third-party resources as institutional resources may increase buy-in with institutional sessions.
4. Q&A (10 minutes) - All presenters
   Time is allotted for free form conversation and questions to address lingering hesitations

A ubiquitous problem in adding the humanities into medical school curriculum is the lack of a systemic approach to integration which makes it difficult to judge the success of the intervention. “Humanities” here is construed broadly to include humanism, ethics, and arts and humanities disciplines. Humanities content can be assessed only with clear overall learning objectives, a coherent articulation of the objective knowledge and skills learners are expected to demonstrate, and a collaborative multidisciplinary approach to developing curricular units. With limited hours and an already bloated curriculum, small, focused, and impactful inclusion of humanities topics is key.

Of the most important skills the humanities offers medicine is moral competency, i.e. moral discernment, moral reasoning, moral imagination, and moral courage. In this focus session we will apply an approach we call “microdosing,” small doses of humanities-based teaching and learning, to develop moral competence in learners through an integrated medical curriculum we have implemented in the foundational years at Roseman University College of Medicine.

Award-winning humanities educators will facilitate an interactive design thinking session towards understanding medicine and science as human practices. There will be three rounds, each focusing on a different case use, allowing participants to collaboratively design towards discovering how moral discernment, reasoning, imagination and courage may be taught within basic and clinical science lessons. We will conclude with a talk-back and discussion, where participants can share insights and challenges. By the end of the session, participants will have a clear understanding of the microdosing approach to integrating moral competence into the medical curriculum. They will also gain practical experience in applying design thinking to create actionable plans for incorporating humanities generally into their own educational contexts.

Agenda & Methods

1. Introduction to the Concept (10 minutes): Overview of the session and the rationale behind microdosing the humanities in medical education.
2. Implementation at Roseman University (20 minutes): Presentation on how Roseman University integrated microdosing into their curriculum, including specific examples and outcomes.
3. Interactive Design Thinking Exercise (45 minutes):
   • Round 1 (15 minutes): Case Study 1 – Participants work in groups to design strategies for integrating ethics into medical education using a provided case example.
   • Round 2 (15 minutes): Case Study 2 – Groups rotate and build on the strategies developed in the first round, focusing on a new case.
   • Round 3 (15 minutes): Case Study 3 – Final round where groups refine their strategies and prepare to present their solutions.
4. Talk Back and Discussion (20 minutes): Groups present their strategies, followed by a facilitated discussion on the challenges, insights, and potential for broader application.
5. Q&A and Wrap-Up (15 minutes): Final questions, sharing of resources, and closing remarks.

As we prepare for the next generation of health professions education (HPE), course directors play a pivotal role in shaping curricula to optimize educational outcomes. Many educators step into this crucial leadership role without formal training. This session aims to equip health professions educators who direct foundational science or integrated courses with strategies to design and deliver courses that meet program outcomes, balance diverse stakeholder needs, and ensure quality education amid rapid changes in healthcare delivery and technology.

This session explores four key areas: leadership and ethical decision-making, team education and shared goal setting, logistics management with transparent supportive structures, and facilitation of precision education. Through interactive, realistic case discussions and collaborative problem-solving, participants will develop global, evidence-based strategies to enhance their effectiveness in these areas and advocate for continued faculty development in their own institutions.

This session will be valuable for faculty in HPE who want to grow in their leadership roles through excellent course directorship.

Agenda & Methods

• Introduction and Audience Survey (10 minutes) (Learning outcome, LO1 & 2)
  • Introduction of presenters
  • Interactive audience survey: "Where are we as course directors?"
  • Overview of learning outcomes and key concepts
• Case-Based Small Group Discussions (15 minutes) (LO2 & 3 a-d)
  • Participants divided into groups of 4-5
  • Each group is assigned one of four cases addressing course director challenges
  • Guided discussion using prompts: stakeholders, challenges, skills/knowledge needed
• Large Group Strategy Discussion (50 min) (LO2 & 3 a-d)
  For each case: Each group reads the assigned cases and reports out the facilitated discussion on strategies
  • Case 1: Leadership and Ethics
  • Case 2: Curriculum Integration and Shared Goal Setting
  • Case 3: Transparent structure and logistics management
  • Case 4: Facilitating precision education for student success
• Summary and Resource Sharing (15 minutes) (LO4 & 5)
  • Key takeaways and discussion of follow-up actions to take for further faculty development in own institution
  • Presentation of additional resources for continued learning

AMEE: The International Association for Health Professions Education has as its goal to help health professions educators around the world connect, grow, and inspire and be inspired in their work. In this special AMEE Session, four representatives of the AMEE organization will share their perspectives on the challenges of practicing, studying, and promoting health profession education in a range of contexts across multiple world regions. What are the answers that seem simple in one context but complex is others? What are the blind spots that each of us bring and that the others can help us see? What can we learn from each other, even as we operate in very different circumstances and spaces? Join Chen Zhi Xiong, Rachel Ellaway, Adi Haramati, and Ayelet Kuper as they explore a range of cutting-edge issues that are challenging global health profession educators.

This 90-minute Focus Session aims to address the critical gap between expecting students to provide feedback and effectively preparing them to do so. We will explore the Situation-Behavior-Impact (SBI) feedback framework as implemented at Rowan-Virtua School of Osteopathic Medicine (SOM), offering participants practical tools to improve student-generated feedback in various educational settings.

The SBI framework offers a structured, concise, and actionable method for delivering constructive feedback. By teaching this framework, we aim to improve the quality and effectiveness of student-generated feedback across various educational settings.

This session will start with a brief overview of our approach and an explanation of the SBI framework. We’ll then move into application exercises with the SBI framework to ensure participants understand and can provide feedback aligned with the framework. From there, we’ll have participants work in small groups to plan brief educational activities they can utilize at their institutions. We’ll then close in a large group discussion asking each group to share their plan.

This Focus Session emphasizes interactive learning and practical application, ensuring participants gain hands-on experience with the SBI framework and leave with actionable plans for implementation at their institutions.

Agenda & Methods

• Introduction & Workshop Logistics (10 min)
  • Icebreaker (connected to SBI)
  • Workshop Overview
  • Brief overview of the feedback challenge in education
  • Introduction to the SBI framework
• Interactive SBI Framework Demonstration (20 minutes)
  • Explanation and examples of SBI components
  • Guided practice in applying the SBI framework
• Small Group Application Exercise (30 minutes)
  • Participants collaborate to create SBI-aligned feedback scenarios
  • Groups develop brief educational activities for implementing SBI at their institutions
• Large Group Discussion and Sharing (20 minutes)
  • Each group presents their implementation plan
  • Collaborative problem-solving and idea exchange
• Wrap Up and Thank you (10 min)

Most information in medical education is framed in binary sex or gender categories (that is, information is categorized by male/female or men/women). The current generation of medical trainees grew up in a culture where expansiveness of gender identity and sexual orientation is more normalized than it was in the past. Because of this demographic shift, students are aware that binary sex/gender categories are limiting framings that exclude subsets of the population. This awareness leads to vocal student feedback that faculty should modify their teaching to be more inclusive. However, faculty often struggle to understand this feedback or how to respond to it.

The purpose of this workshop is to help educator faculty understand the rationale and motivations for such student feedback and to provide practical skills for reframing information. The facilitators will illustrate how the changing demographics of identity and acceptance underlie a true generational shift in perspective which mandates rethinking how sex- and gender-based information is framed in medical education. The presenters will illustrate how the traditional way that information is framed holds exclusionary and inaccurate assumptions that many faculty do not recognize yet are obvious to students. The presenters will provide practical ways to recognize such patterns in one’s own teaching and to adjust language to be more inclusive and accurate. Workshop participants will then work in small groups through a set of common teaching scenario examples to explore the nuances of this topic.

Agenda & Methods

• Translating the student perspective (15 minutes, lecture)
  Exploration of how the changing cultural perspectives on sex and gender drive the disconnect between student and faculty viewpoints. Definition and explanation of foundational concepts and terminology pertaining to sex/gender will be provided.
• Pulling off the blinders (15 min, interactive lecture)
  Exploration of three contexts in which medical educators regularly use sex and gender (discussions of biological traits, descriptions of groups of people, and descriptions of individual people) and how traditional framings in these contexts often reinforce limiting binaries. Practical approaches for ensuring inclusivity while teaching will be described for each context.
• Practice at the growth edge (45 min, small groups with facilitator guidance)
  Participants will work in groups of 5-8. They will be provided three common medical teaching scenarios and will work together to decide how to approach each scenario with inclusive framing around sex and gender. Scenarios will be appropriate for both basic science and clinician educators.
• Lessons learned and challenges (15 min, large group discussion)
  Groups will reconvene to describe their solutions and discuss challenges encountered during the exercise. Additional tools for continuing education will be shared.

The commonly used student rating of teaching, often mis-conceptually referred to as “student evaluation of teaching,” may be the most misunderstood instrument yet remains widely used in teaching assessment in medical education. Misinterpretation and misuse cause controversy, confusion, frustration, and unnecessary harm to teachers and impede student learning. Accurately interpreted student rating data, when combined with other teaching assessment methods properly, is crucial to ensure fair and balanced teaching evaluations that benefit both teachers and students.

Student rating of teaching has been the most extensively researched topic in higher education over the past 80 years. Experts in the field have obtained a comprehensive and nuanced understanding of the instrument and developed well-balanced guidelines for interpreting the data. Unfortunately, those guidelines haven’t reached most faculty members and evaluators, especially in medical schools, where interpretations heavily rely on personal experience and intuition. As a result, misinterpreting student rating data occurs too frequently, causing much confusion and frustration. When student ratings are improperly used as the sole measure of teaching effectiveness, the misinterpreted data can be very misleading and negatively impact both teaching and learning. Despite the ongoing development of other teaching assessment tools in many schools, the misinterpretation and misuse of student rating of teaching remain a significant issue. Formal training of medical educators in accurately interpreting student ratings is urgently needed.

Agenda & Methods

• Part One (30 minutes): Dispel Myths and Clarify Truths about Student Rating of Teaching
  The session will begin with a brief presentation summarizing over a century of student rating of teaching practices and more than 80 years of research on the topic (10 min). Afterward, participants will break into small groups to review published guidelines on interpreting student ratings and generate key takeaways (15 minutes). The session will also include two live polling activities using Kahoot (5 minutes), which are designed to help participants 1) differentiate between myths and truths regarding student rating of teaching; and 2) recognize common pitfalls in interpreting student ratings based on personal experiences and intuition.
• Part Two (30 minutes): Interpret Student Rating of Teaching Using Published Guidelines Grounded on Research
  The participants will work in small groups to interpret student rating data from two real-world case studies using published guidelines (20 minutes). After the groups report and share their findings from the case studies, the participants will work together to summarize the best practices and pitfalls when interpreting student ratings upon reflecting on their current and previous practices (10 minutes).
• Part Three (30 minutes): Develop a Comprehensive Toolkit for Teaching Evaluation
  The participants will again work in small groups to develop a comprehensive toolkit for teaching evaluation (20 minutes). Then each small group will report and share the following with the entire group: 1) Various tools in their toolkit and the key specifics of each tool; 2) Their plans for testing and adopting the tools; 3) Any anticipated challenges and strategies to overcome them (10 minutes).

Competently supporting the current and future generations of medical education students requires an in-depth look at how and why our current generation of learners struggles and how to intentionally support the behavioral, emotional, and cognitive struggles of our learners. The consensus of medical educators is that our learners have changed. They resist in-person class attendance, desire individualized feedback even at the earliest stages, and struggle with anxiety and stress in profound ways. Have our medical school supports for struggling learners shifted along with the learners they are intended to serve? Often, supports or interventions for struggling learners target only cognitive struggles and solely prioritize cognitive engagement. However, the current body of medical education literature calls for a holistic view of our medical learners accompanied by holistic supports that engage the whole learner. It is clear that medical students encounter non-cognitive struggles that can manifest in academic struggles. Learning to identify the source of a student’s struggle and creating interventions that can deliver timely support while engaging the learner behaviorally, emotionally, and cognitively is critical for the future of medical education. The significance of this focused session is that it demystifies the engagement domains and the non-cognitive struggles our medical learners face, encourages collaboration across institutions, stages, and academic offices, and equips medical educators with practical supports they can begin using as soon as they return home.

Agenda & Methods

• Part One: Struggling Learners (30 minutes)
  • Poll Everywhere (3 minutes)- Characteristics of a struggling learner
  • Small Group Discussion (7 minutes)- What are common struggles learners in your context face?
  • Small Groups Report (5 minutes)
  • Presentation (10 minutes)- Engaging the whole student & the cognitive/non-cognitive domains of struggle among the current generation
  • Q&A (5 minutes)
• Part Two: Interventions (30 minutes)
  • Poll Everywhere (3 minutes)- When do learners in your context need the most support?
  • Small Group Discussion (7 minutes)- What are some interventions or strategies do you or your institution currently employ to support struggling learners? What domain of struggle does that assist with?
  • Small Group Report (5 minutes)
  • Presentation (10 minutes)- TAMCOM Interventions, their alignment with the Engagement Framework & Domains of Student Struggle, and outcomes (10 minutes)
  • Q&A (5 minutes)
• Part Three: Put it into Practice (30 minutes)
  • Small Group Activity (15 minutes)- Reflecting back on the most common struggles learners face in your context, brainstorm at least one intervention for each of the three engagement domains: Behavioral, Emotional, and Cognitive. Consider: How, when, and by whom would these interventions be delivered?
  • Small Groups Report (10 minutes)
  • Q&A (5 minutes)

Longitudinal interprofessional education (IPE) yields collaboration-ready physicians with an enduring orientation and skillset for team-based care delivery. Its creation benefits from deliberate integration of the IPE core competencies via student-oriented, team-based pedagogy that centers on patients and populations and is bookended by preparation and reflection. Often IPE is offered to students in standalone, perhaps one-off, preclinical experiences that primarily introduces the importance of collaboration. Continued, intentional IPE beyond the preclinical offerings could enable students to derive stronger meaning and relevance, deepening its connection to future clinical practice.

Traditional medical education curricula, especially existing curricula, can often limit the opportunity to offer longitudinal IPE that support the formation and integration of an interprofessional identity with a discipline specific professional identity. As healthcare delivery is team-based in practice, future healthcare practitioners benefit from early socialization of the culture of collaboration that scaffolds the applications into clinical learning and practice. Moreover, continued learning, layered on top of early introduction of teaming and communication skills, creates greater meaning and purpose into future practice.

Accreditation standards driving new thinking have catalyzed innovation in medical education, especially for IPE. Wholesale disruption of existing curricula might not be the sole path to the creation of meaningful, longitudinal learning of interprofessional collaborative practice. The advent of newer medical schools has generated worthwhile approaches and models for IPE integration into medical education. Gathering interested colleagues working in this space could catalyze greater rethinking of the opportunity and sharing of ideas that would benefit the medical education community and ultimately our students.

Agenda & Methods
The session will employ two rounds of hackathon activities to achieve the session’s learning objectives.

• 5 minutes. Welcome and Introduction to Session. Introduction of Session Leaders. Presentation of Session Experiences and Learning Objectives.
• 10 minutes. Tableside Meet/Greet. At each table, participants will meet and greet each other and share their answers to the prompt: What are the characteristics of effective longitudinal interprofessional learning among health professions students?
• 5 minutes. Brief orientation to the hackathon process followed by presentation of the challenge around which each table will attempt to hack solutions and/or innovations. The challenge will be for participants at their tables to draft a plan to integrate interprofessional collaborative practice learning across the entire medical school curriculum.
• 15 minutes. Hackathon First Round.
• 10 minutes Session leads will present the Dell Medical School Interprofessional Integration Curriculum as a case study. Participants will be instructed to enter into a second round of hackathon to expand, evolve, or pivot their first round drafts.
• 15 minutes. Hackathon Second Round.
• 15 minutes. Each table presents in 1-minute its final approach. Session leaders will highlight interesting and innovative facets of presented approaches. Participants will vote via applause for a winner.
• 10 minutes. Closing Synthesis. Session leads will engage participants in a synthesis of next steps and lessons learned.

The rapid advancement of AI presents significant opportunities and challenges for medical education. Many medical schools are adopting AI, often referred to as 'integration.' However, these efforts are fragmented, lacking a unified vision, leading to inconsistent AI adoption across institutions. In July 2024, the AICAI developed best practices and steps for advancing AI integration in medical schools for different stakeholders: learners, educators, institutions, medical education organizations, and global consortia. The purpose of this framework is to assist in not only implementing AI initiatives, but also embedding AI into the core of medical education. This session introduces the AI Integration Framework and refines it based on participant input. By engaging participants in refining vision statements and providing feedback, the session aims to validate and strengthen the framework, ultimately sharing it across medical schools. This session will collect participant input through a research project entitled, Integrating AI in Medical Education: A Framework for the Future.

Agenda & Methods
The session will include four main segments:

1. Introduction to IACAI and Framework Overview (15 min): A brief introduction to the IACAI and its AI Integration Framework. Handouts will be provided.
2. AI Vision Statements Refinement (25 min): Each participant will receive two copies of the AI vision statement document: one to keep and one to mark up. Session leaders will ask participants to work in pairs to consider the vision statements. One partner will take notes on a shared team copy. Participant comments may be general or specific. At the end of this pair discussion, the session leaders will collect the shared team copies with the notes, and then will ask for a few comments about the vision statements. A sample vision statement is as follows: “AI-Literate Faculty: Medical educators will be fluent in AI technologies, understanding their applications, limitations, and ethical considerations. Educators will possess the skills to effectively use AI tools for continuous learning, teaching, research, and clinical decision-making.”
3. AI Integration Matrix Charts Feedback (25 min): Participants will work in small teams of five to review the Integration Framework in two matrix charts. providing feedback to enhance practical application in diverse educational settings. This exercise will begin with a 5-minute self-assessment exercise using a given AI integration matrix chart to inventory one’s own program. Finally, each team will fill out a brief questionnaire to provide their group’s matrix chart feedback.
4. Summary and Discussion (25 min): The session concludes with a summary and open-floor discussion, allowing participants to share final thoughts and discuss applications for their institutions. First the session leaders will project the vision statements on the large screen, and ask for commentary on the vision statements, and record these comments. Finally, session leaders will invite participant comments on the integration framework.

The rapid evolution of AI in healthcare education presents both opportunities and challenges. As AI's role expands, educators need help in implementing it effectively. This session addresses a critical gap, moving beyond general AI use and providing tools to create custom AI solutions that meet specific educational needs. This approach aligns with evidence-based pedagogy and equips educators to lead in the future landscape of healthcare education.

This session aligns with the conference theme of preparing for the next 25 years of health professions education, equipping participants to design and implement cGPTs that address current educational challenges and anticipate future needs. AI tools are going to continue to become more sophisticated. Future healthcare professionals and their educators today need to utilize this technology to prepare for the best patient care.

This session prepares participants to design cGPTs that are customized for specific tasks and versatile enough to be implemented across different institutions and contexts. The focus on cGPTs enables educators to not only embrace AI but also shape its use to address the unique challenges of healthcare education.

Agenda & Methods
In this session, participants will engage in small group activities with facilitated instructions to develop a custom GPT (cGPT).

1. Introduction (15 min): Overview of AI’s role in education, identifying tasks for cGPT customization. (LO1, LO2)
2. Task Definition (10 min): Small groups define specific tasks for cGPTs, completing a design worksheet. (LO1, LO2)
3. Instruction Design (15 min): Guidelines on writing effective instructions and selecting knowledge sources, with examples. (LO3, LO4)
4. Hands-On cGPT Building (45 min): Groups create a cGPT using provided pre-built templates and step-by-step examples, applying what they’ve learned. (LO4, LO5)
5. Sharing and Wrap-Up (10 min): Groups share their cGPTs, discuss implementation, and add links to a shared document. (LO5, LO6)

Through identifying specific tasks relevant to their educational practices, participants will have an immediate, real-world application of a cGPT. The focus on step-by-step facilitation will build participant confidence and allow participants to clarify areas of confusion. Participants will peer-review the cGPTs created, offering constructive feedback to ensure each tool is effective and applicable.

To address the students’ reluctance to attempt and their apparent discomfort with clinical vignette based MCQs, we suggest inclusion of MCQ writing exercises in small groups. We will exhibit several ways of conducting these exercises and the attendees will then create different (NBME style) MCQs based on the same patient scenario. Students struggle with clinical vignette based MCQs because they mostly utilize identification of “buzz” words and rote memorization, without attempting to identify the clinical approach to a patient. The session should help the educators identify effective methods to address these issues with students involving them in both instruction and assessment.

1. Due to the increased cognitive load on medical students today, combined with the stress of clinical vignette based MCQ examinations, students attempt to “surface” learn instead of conceptually identifying the right approach to a clinical vignette. When they create a whole patient scenario with MCQs from scratch, it improves meta-cognitive development and encourages higher order thinking.
2. Students think of a case in a linear manner based on the module/ course they are taught a particular topic in. By encouraging the students to work on forming appropriate distractors, this exercise gives them an opportunity to revise what they have learned before and address any gaps in their knowledge.
3. Revision of the learning material is time consuming. By applying what they have learned in creating a clinical vignette and the subsequent MCQs, they will summarize the key revision points of the topic in addition to the differential diagnosis, thus helping to evolve the right approach to cases.
4. Traditional didactic methods of instruction are unidirectional and promote passive learning which can be less engaging and effective for both the instructor and the learner. By actively involving students in creation of a case and MCQs with well formed distractors, the small group session can be an excellent team building exercise relying on principles of both self-directed and peer-learning.

Agenda & Methods

• 20 minutes: Formal presentation including
  1. Introduction of the presenters
  2. Present the rationale behind the session
  3. Enlist the learning outcomes for the attendees
  4. Demonstration of ways to create a case and MCQs based on the case scenario
  5. Describe the team exercise for the day
• 10 minutes: Group formation to
  1. Assign team leader
  2. Finalize topic for case and MCQ creation
• 30 minutes: Group discussion and exercise to
  1. Decide at least one method of creating a clinical vignette
  2. Assign parts of vignette among the members of the teams
  3. Identify at least 3 higher order lead-in questions for the vignette
  4. Develop reasonable and justifiable homogenous distractors for each lead-in question
  5. Collaborate to write a clinical vignette for each distractor (optional)
• 20 minutes: Team leader presents the clinical vignette and questions
• 10 minutes: Open discussion to
  1. Usefulness of the session
  2. Possibilities for incorporation into the curriculum

As the healthcare landscape rapidly evolves due to digitalization and AI, the traditional concept of professional identity within health professions education is being redefined. This focus session addresses the critical need for educators to develop advanced coaching skills that enable them to guide students through these changes. By focusing on coaching as a key strategy, the session will help participants support students in forming adaptive and resilient professional identities in a digitally driven environment.
The 90-minute session will employ a Team-Based Learning (TBL) approach, beginning with an overview of coaching principles and their distinction from mentoring and advising. Participants will engage in readiness assessments, case-based discussions, and interactive group activities to explore how coaching can address the challenges posed by digitalization and AI. The session will introduce motivational frameworks such as the ARCS Model and Self-Determination Theory, providing practical tools for enhancing student engagement.

Expected Outcomes: By the end of the session, participants will have developed strategies to integrate coaching into their educational practices, fostering an environment that supports adaptive learning and professional identity formation. This session aims to empower educators to be change agents in healthcare education, preparing students to thrive in a dynamic and culturally diverse healthcare landscape over the next 25 years.

Agenda & Methods

1. Introductions & Team Formation (10 minutes):
   The session will start with brief introductions and forming small working groups. Participants will be grouped to ensure diverse perspectives during discussions.
2. Individual & Team Readiness Assessments (iRAT and tRAT) (25 minutes):
   Participants will complete an individual readiness assessment (iRAT) to gauge their understanding of coaching, PIF, and the impacts of digitalization and AI. This will be followed by a team readiness assessment (tRAT) to discuss and reach consensus on key concepts, allowing for thorough understanding within the groups.
3. Application 1 & Discussion 1: Coaching in the Digital Age and Leveraging AI Tools (30 minutes):
   Participants will engage in case-based discussions exploring real-world scenarios related to PIF in a digitalized healthcare environment. They will analyze how AI and digital technologies influence professional identities and how coaching can guide students through these challenges. Additionally, groups will evaluate AI tools for coaching, focusing on enhancing effectiveness and supporting adaptive professional identities. A plenary discussion will follow, where groups share their insights.
4. Application 2 & Discussion 2: Future-Proofing Professional Identity (15 minutes):
   In this final application, participants will brainstorm strategies for "future-proofing" PIF in the face of ongoing technological advancements. They will consider the long-term implications of AI and propose coaching approaches to address these challenges, consolidating learning and providing actionable strategies.
5. Q&A and Closing (10 minutes):
   The session will end with an open Q&A for participants to clarify concepts and discuss practical applications. A summary and closing remarks will conclude the session.

This interactive focus session will explore the transformative journey undertaken to reimagine the Undergraduate Medical Education (UME) curriculum at the Cumming School of Medicine (CSM). Grounded in Design Thinking, this initiative responds to the ever-evolving demands of healthcare and society. Participants will work through a facilitated Design Thinking activity to gain insights into the drivers necessitating this overhaul, the alignment of educational goals with the future of healthcare, and the innovative strategies employed to equip future physicians for the challenges ahead. The session will highlight the process undertaken, challenges faced, solutions developed, and the lessons learned throughout the process. By the end of this session, participants will be equipped to apply these insights to their own educational settings, fostering innovation in medical education globally. The session aims to not only share the successes of this initiative but also to engage participants in a dialogue that advances the discourse on educational reform, offering a blueprint for navigating the complexities of significant curricular change.

Agenda & Methods

• Introduction & Overview of Design Thinking (10 minutes): Overview of the session's objectives and the context for the curriculum reimagination at CSM.
• Part 1 - Identifying the Need for Change (30 minutes): Interactive exercise exploring the drivers of change, including stakeholder engagement, understanding of pain-points, and defining the problem. Through engagement in this activity, participants will identify similar drivers in their own contexts.
• Part 2 – The Overhaul (10 minutes): A deep dive into how Design Thinking was applied to the curriculum redesign. This segment will highlight the changes made at the CSM.
• Part 3 - Overcoming Barriers (20 minutes): Discussion of the challenges faced during the implementation of the new curriculum, including resistance to change, resource constraints, and pervasive narratives. Participants will reflect on the CSM’s experiences and share experiences and strategies in the larger group.
• Part 4 - Lessons Learned and Future Directions (10 minutes): A reflective discussion on the outcomes of the curriculum reimagination, focusing on lessons learned and the implications for future educational innovations. Participants will contribute to a collaborative action plan for applying these insights in their institutions.
• Q&A and Closing (10 minutes): Open floor for questions, followed by closing remarks and key takeaways.

This agenda is designed to be interactive, providing participants with practical tools and strategies to apply in their own educational settings.

In highly polarized times, how can we cultivate deep respect and strong relationships with those whose views and experiences may differ from our own? Join this session to begin a practice of bridging across differences toward common ground, mutual understanding, and flourishing. This 90-minute interactive workshop is part of the Kern National Network’s commitment. It is specifically designed for leaders, educators and administrators who are striving to build inclusive and resilient academic communities and learning environments.

As leaders in medical education, you play a critical role in shaping the culture and environment of your institutions. In an era where social and political polarization can impact every aspect of academic life, it is essential to develop the skills and strategies needed to bridge differences effectively. This workshop will equip you with the tools to foster an environment where all members of your community feel respected, heard, and valued.

By the end of this workshop, you will be empowered with the knowledge and skills necessary to lead your institution through the complexities of polarization while upholding the core values of diversity, equity, inclusion, and belonging. This session is ideal for leaders in the health profession or the healthcare ecosystem who are dedicated to creating environments where all members of the community can flourish together.

Agenda & Methods

• Introduction and Setting the Stage (10 minutes)
  • Brief overview of the workshop objectives.
  • Establish ground rules for creating a brave and supportive space for dialogue.
• Interactive Bridging Exercises (25 minutes)
  • Participants will engage in hands-on exercises simulating real-world scenarios.
  • These activities are designed to practice bridging as a facilitative process in a supportive environment.
  • Focus will be on developing techniques for open, respectful dialogues on contentious issues. [Handout and worksheet]
• Reflective Group Discussions (20 minutes)
  • Participants will join in a reflection activity based on the KNN Framework for Flourishing.
  • Participants will join small groups for guided discussions on personal and institutional challenges related to bridging toward belonging.
  • Participants will share experiences and explore effective strategies for fostering mutual understanding and respect.
• Case Studies and Real-World Applications (20 minutes)
  • Analyze case studies from medical schools that have successfully used bridging practices to reduce polarization and build inclusive communities.
  • Discussions will focus on identifying actionable steps participants can apply in their own institutions.
• Wrap-Up and Action Planning (15 minutes)
  • Recap key takeaways from the session.
  • Participants will be encouraged to develop a personalized action plan for implementing bridging practices in their respective institutions.
  • Q&A and final reflections.

Problem: As our organization (IAMSE) grows globally and locally, it is important for our members to practice and promote policies that are inclusive and equitable, at the same time ensuring that the needs of diverse members are met. While there are several tools and opportunities to conduct DEI training in educational institutions, we would like to bring our members’ attention to the DEI toolkit that has been recently developed with free access for IAMSE members, to allow a deeper dive into the vast and varied resources the toolkit has to offer for the individual, curricular/classroom, program and organizational levels. The goal of this session is to increase understanding and utilization of the DEI toolkit, and ultimately, to enhance the inclusive environment that IAMSE offers to all its members.

Timeliness: As we consider the next 25 years in health professions’ education, it is important to ensure that as a diverse organization, we maintain the highest levels of inclusion and equity in our teaching and learning as educators.

Significance: The topic of DEI is considered important, yet can be controversial, complex, and challenging. The DEI toolkit was created and published in 2023 by members of IAMSE’s EnGAGE (Encouraging Growth and Advocacy in Gaining Equity) committee with the goal of providing resources to assess/evaluate DEI at various levels including individual, classroom, program, and organization. The EnGAGE committee has since merged with the REC (Racial Equity Committee) to form the EAC (Equity & Advocacy Committee). As we move forward towards the next 25 years and encounter change and growth, it is important to remain committed and grounded in principles of DEI.

Agenda & Methods
Teaching Methods: The session will include presentation by the speakers on the topics outlined in the DEI toolkit, which include:
an introduction to the organization of the toolkit, differences between assessments and evaluations, and
tools and resources for awareness of DEI for use at the individual, classroom/curricular, program, and organization level.

Participation: We will use interactive instruction methods for the topics stated above, to promote and encourage participation. Attendees will be informed ahead of time to bring their laptops to access resources and participate in small groups. Small groups of 4-5 members per group will be formed at tables, and each group will be given a list of assessments and evaluations for DEI from the toolkit. Groups will perform at least two from the list. After each assessment/evaluation, there will be a debrief with the larger group for discussion and reflection.

Activities: We will conduct two activities in small groups. For Activity 1, participants will be given options to choose from the list of resources for either assessment/evaluation of DEI at the individual, classroom/curricular, program, or organizational/institutional level. Activity 1 will include participants accessing an online resource, completing the activity (looking at a video or taking a questionnaire), and discussing their thoughts/ideas within the small group, followed by a large group discussion. For Activity 2, participants will use backwards design to incorporate the resources they used in Activity 1 in their own institution, followed by a large group discussion.

Agenda & Methods

• Introduction of speakers: 5 minutes
• Presentation of topics: 10 minutes
• Activity 1 in small groups: 20 minutes
• Large group debrief and discussion: 15 minutes
• Activity 2 in small groups: 20 minutes
• Large group debrief and discussion: 15 minutes
• Wrap-up and Closing: 5 minutes