What counts? Defining scholarship in continuing professional development using a national modified Delphi study
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.36834/cmej.81150Abstract
Background: In many domains within medical education, scholarship can have unique attributes. The accreditation standards for Canadian Continuing Professional Development (CPD) require scholarly output from each Office in Canada. However, it is unclear what scholarly outputs might be considered as CPD scholarship.
Methods: Representatives from a national cross-section of collaborators within the Association of Faculties of Medicine of Canada (AFMC) Continuing Professional Development (CPD) network and other national organizations assisted in this project. Collaborators participated in a 3-phase, modified Delphi study from October 31st, 2023- June 17th, 2024. The three phases included: 1) Registration and Ideation; 2) Consensus Process; 3) Group Validation.
Results: A total of 31 individuals registered as part of the consensus panel, and 29 individuals (93.5% response) completed the 3-stages of the modified Delphi. The endorsement of 18/31 types of scholarship, including novel forms such as Community Engagement, Testing/Pilot Approaches, and Advocacy Scholarship, reflects an important shift in how CPD scholarship is understood.
Discussion: In a first for our field, the results of this study comprise a consensus-based definition that defines CPD scholarship at a national scale. The results crucially inform national accreditation processes, strategic planning exercises, and overall, in expanding the types and acceptance of activities as recognized scholarly work for those seeking recognition and promotion within the domain of CPD. We do so with the voice of our community to inspire new and emergent scholarship. Periodic reviews of these concepts should be conducted, as scholarly pursuits evolve over time.
Downloads
References
1. CACME. Canadian accreditation standards for continuing professional development (CPD) provider organizations. 2023.
2. Boyer EL. Scholarship reconsidered: Priorities of the professoriate. ERIC; 1990.
3. Glassick CE. Boyer's expanded definitions of scholarship, the standards for assessing scholarship, and the elusiveness of the scholarship of teaching. Acad Med. Sep 2000;75(9):877-80. https://doi.org/10.1097/00001888-200009000-00007
4. Gusic ME, Baldwin CD, Chandran L, et al. Evaluating educators using a novel toolbox: applying rigorous criteria flexibly across institutions. Acad Med. Jul 2014;89(7):1006-11. https://doi.org/10.1097/acm.0000000000000233
5. Helton MR, Pathman DE. Scholarship Criteria for Promotion in the Age of Diverse Faculty Roles and Digital Media. Fam Med. Sep 2023;55(8):544-546. https://doi.org/10.22454/FamMed.2023.554380
6. Husain A, Repanshek Z, Singh M, et al. Consensus guidelines for digital scholarship in academic promotion. West J Emerg Med. Jul 8 2020;21(4):883-891. https://doi.org/10.5811/westjem.2020.4.46441
7. Johng SY, Mishori R, Korostyshevskiy VR. Social media, digital scholarship, and academic promotion in US medical schools.
8. Milner RJ, Flotte TR, Thorndyke LE. Defining Scholarship for Today and Tomorrow. J Cont Educ Health Prof. 2022;Publish Ah(2):133-138. https://doi.org/10.1097/ceh.0000000000000473
9. Law M, Wright S, Mylopoulos M. Exploring community faculty members' engagement in educational scholarship. Can Fam Physician. Sep 2016;62(9):e524-30.
10. Sandmann LR. Building and bridging: reflections of an engaged scholar. practical wisdom for conducting research on service learning. Routledge; 129-145. https://doi.org/10.4324/9781003446392-11
11. Meurer LN, Diehr S. Community-engaged scholarship: meeting scholarly project requirements while advancing community health. J Grad Med Educ. 2012 Sep;4(3) https://doi.org/10.4300/JGME-D-12-00164.1
12. Van Melle E, Lockyer J, Curran V et al. Toward a common understanding: supporting and promoting education scholarship for medical school faculty. Med Educ. Dec 2014;48(12):1190-200. https://doi.org/10.1111/medu.12543
13. Jordan C GS, Seifer SD, et al. How to earn tenure while doing community-engaged scholarship. Morgridge Center for Public Service, University of Wisconsin. Published 2017. Available from https://morgridge.wisc.edu/wp-content/uploads/sites/4/2019/06/How-to-earn-tenure-while-doing-community-engaged-scholarship-.pdf. [Accessed Feb 5, 2024].
14. YouTube. Resources for community engaged scholarship at duke [Video]. YouTube. Published Jul 23, 2020. Available from https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6uYGKTCX-pg [Accessed Feb 21, 2024].
15. Humphrey-Murto S, Varpio L, Gonsalves C, Wood TJ. Using consensus group methods such as Delphi and nominal group in medical education research(). Med Teach. Jan 2017;39(1):14-19. https://doi.org/10.1080/0142159x.2017.1245856
16. Trevelyan EG, Robinson PN. Delphi methodology in health research: how to do it? Euro J Integr Med. 2015 Aug;2015;7(4):423-428. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1016/j.eujim.2015.07.002
17. Nasa P, Jain R, Juneja D. Delphi methodology in healthcare research: How to decide its appropriateness. World J Methodol. Jul 20 2021;11(4):116-129. https://doi.org/10.5662/wjm.v11.i4.116
18. Chan TM, Yarris LM, Humphrey-Murto S. Delving into Delphis. CJEM. Mar 2019;21(2):167-169. https://doi.org/10.1017/cem.2019.3
19. Irby DM, O'Sullivan PS. Developing and rewarding teachers as educators and scholars: remarkable progress and daunting challenges. Med Educ. Jan 2018;52(1):58-67. https://doi.org/10.1111/medu.13379
20. Maldonado G, Smart J, Wiechmann W, et al. Frequency of social media and digital scholarship keywords in US medical schools’ promotion and tenure guidelines. Acad Med. 2022;97(1):105-110. https://doi.org/10.1097/ACM.0000000000004324
21. Fitzgerald JJ, Losee JE, Roth RN, Pettigrew C, Thamman R. A worksheet to quantify social and digital media content as scholarly products for academic promotion. Acad Med 2023:10-1097. https://doi.org/10.1097/ACM.0000000000005628
22. Burton JH, Chan TM, Kuehl DR. On lampposts, sneetches, and stars: a call to go beyond bibliometrics for determining academic value. Acad Emerg Med. 2019;26(6) https://doi.org/10.1111/acem.13707
23. Bell M, Lewis N, Jr. Universities claim to value community-engaged scholarship: so why do they discourage it? Public Underst Sci. Apr 2023;32(3):304-321. https://doi.org/10.1177/09636625221118779
24. Boyer EL. The scholarship of engagement. Building the field of higher education engagement. Routledge; 2016:15-25. https://doi.org/10.4324/9781003443353-2
25. Richards L, Montgomery S, Bradford J. Reconceptualising the conference: An imaginative, inclusive and innovative approach to CPD in the digital age. Narratives of innovation and resilience: Supporting student learning experiences in challenging times. 2021:86.
26. Hafferty FW. academic medicine and medical professionalism: a legacy and a portal into an evolving field of educational scholarship. Acad Med. Apr 2018;93(4):532-536. https://doi.org/10.1097/acm.0000000000001899
27. Ackerman-Barger K, Bakerjian D, Latimore D. How health professions educators can mitigate underrepresented students' experiences of marginalization. J Best Pract Health Prof Divers. 2015;8(2):1060-1070.
28. Barker D. The scholarship of engagement: a taxonomy of five emerging practices. J High Educ Outreach Engagem. 2004;9(2):123-137.
29. Nerlinger AL, Shah AN, Beck AF, et al. The advocacy portfolio: a standardized tool for documenting physician advocacy. Acad Med. 2018;93(6):860-868. https://doi.org/10.1097/ACM.0000000000002122
30. McMahon GT. Learning Together: Engaging Patients as Partners in CPD. J Contin Educ Health Prof. Oct 1 2021;41(4):268-272. https://doi.org/10.1097/ceh.0000000000000388
31. Kirkpatrick J. An introduction to the new world Kirkpatrick model. Kirkpatrick Partners. 2015;10:9781580468619. https://doi.org/10.1515/9781580468619
32. Liblik K, Desai V, Yin G, et al. Professional development in health sciences: scoping review on equity, diversity, inclusion, indigeneity, and accessibility interventions. J Cont Educ Health Prof. 2022:10-1097.
33. Chang A, Karani R, Dhaliwal G. Mission critical: reimagining promotion for clinician-educators. J Gen Intern Med. 2023;38(3):789-792. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11606-022-07969-5
Downloads
Published
How to Cite
Issue
Section
License
Copyright (c) 2025 Eleftherios K Soleas, Clare Cook, Teresa M Chan, Stephen G Miller
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International License.
Submission of an original manuscript to the Canadian Medical Education Journal will be taken to mean that it represents original work not previously published, that it is not being considered elsewhere for publication. If accepted for publication, it will be published online and it will not be published elsewhere in the same form, for commercial purposes, in any language, without the consent of the publisher.
Authors who publish in the Canadian Medical Education Journal agree to release their articles under the Creative Commons Attribution-Noncommercial-No Derivative Works 4.0 Canada Licence. This licence allows anyone to copy and distribute the article for non-commercial purposes provided that appropriate attribution is given. For details of the rights an author grants users of their work, please see the licence summary and the full licence.
