Other Titles

Executive Academic Leadership

Abstract

Session presented on Friday, September 26, 2014: Purpose: Due to the complexity of our current and emerging health care system, emphasis is increasingly being placed on the need for student education in interdisciplinary health care teams. The World Health Organization (WHO) defines interdisciplinary education as "when students from two or more professions learn about, from and with each other to enable effective collaboration and improve health outcomes." Models for interdisciplinary education have been developed and some institutions have provided interdisciplinary education using case-based scenarios. The WHO proposes that interprofessional education is a necessary step in preparing a collaborative ready healthcare workforce. Programmatic accreditation standards provide a public record of a profession's interdisciplinary values and beliefs. Methods: The Council of Higher Education Accreditation (CHEA) is a primary national voice for accreditation and quality assurance to the US Congress and the US Department of Education. It serves as a national voice for accreditation to the general public, opinion leaders and students. It is also represents the US accreditation community to international audiences. CHEA recognizes 60 institutional and programmatic accrediting organizations. Twenty-three of these organizations are human health-related. To identify interdisciplinary education programmatic standards, a content analysis of these 23 human health-related CHEA programmatic accreditation standards sets was conducted. Four (4) key words were used (interprofessional, interdisciplinary, intraprofessional, multidisciplinary) to locate potentially relevant statements within each accreditation organization's standards and guidelines documents. Identified statements were categorized as accountable, non-accountable or non-applicable. Results: Accreditation standards for 11 health professions included the reference words of interprofessional, interdisciplinary, intraprofessional or multidiciplinary. The expectation that students are educated regarding interdisciplinary teams was evident in two disciplines, Nursing and Pharmacy, but the outcomes for these professions' respective standards were not measurable. No structure or process expectations in the standards to support interdisciplinary education were evident. Conclusion: The majority of todays faculty are not credentialed to support interdisciplinary teaching as they were educated in a system reflecting traditional, professional silos. Accreditation standards do not specify the dean's role or the programmatic advisory board's role in supporting interdisciplinary education. The purposeful cultivation of skills built on the values and ethics for interdisciplinary practice requires programmatic accreditation structure and process mandated support.

Author Details

Janet Haggerty Davis, BSN,MS, MBA, PhD, RN

Sigma Membership

Alpha Lambda

Type

Presentation

Format Type

Text-based Document

Study Design/Type

N/A

Research Approach

N/A

Keywords:

Interdisciplinary, Programmatic Accreditation

Conference Name

Leadership Summit 2014

Conference Host

Sigma Theta Tau International

Conference Location

Indianapolis, Indiana, USA

Conference Year

2014

Rights Holder

All rights reserved by the author(s) and/or publisher(s) listed in this item record unless relinquished in whole or part by a rights notation or a Creative Commons License present in this item record.

All permission requests should be directed accordingly and not to the Sigma Repository.

All submitting authors or publishers have affirmed that when using material in their work where they do not own copyright, they have obtained permission of the copyright holder prior to submission and the rights holder has been acknowledged as necessary.

Acquisition

Proxy-submission

Additional Files

download (128 kB)

Share

COinS
 

Structure and Process for Interdisciplinary Education

Indianapolis, Indiana, USA

Session presented on Friday, September 26, 2014: Purpose: Due to the complexity of our current and emerging health care system, emphasis is increasingly being placed on the need for student education in interdisciplinary health care teams. The World Health Organization (WHO) defines interdisciplinary education as "when students from two or more professions learn about, from and with each other to enable effective collaboration and improve health outcomes." Models for interdisciplinary education have been developed and some institutions have provided interdisciplinary education using case-based scenarios. The WHO proposes that interprofessional education is a necessary step in preparing a collaborative ready healthcare workforce. Programmatic accreditation standards provide a public record of a profession's interdisciplinary values and beliefs. Methods: The Council of Higher Education Accreditation (CHEA) is a primary national voice for accreditation and quality assurance to the US Congress and the US Department of Education. It serves as a national voice for accreditation to the general public, opinion leaders and students. It is also represents the US accreditation community to international audiences. CHEA recognizes 60 institutional and programmatic accrediting organizations. Twenty-three of these organizations are human health-related. To identify interdisciplinary education programmatic standards, a content analysis of these 23 human health-related CHEA programmatic accreditation standards sets was conducted. Four (4) key words were used (interprofessional, interdisciplinary, intraprofessional, multidisciplinary) to locate potentially relevant statements within each accreditation organization's standards and guidelines documents. Identified statements were categorized as accountable, non-accountable or non-applicable. Results: Accreditation standards for 11 health professions included the reference words of interprofessional, interdisciplinary, intraprofessional or multidiciplinary. The expectation that students are educated regarding interdisciplinary teams was evident in two disciplines, Nursing and Pharmacy, but the outcomes for these professions' respective standards were not measurable. No structure or process expectations in the standards to support interdisciplinary education were evident. Conclusion: The majority of todays faculty are not credentialed to support interdisciplinary teaching as they were educated in a system reflecting traditional, professional silos. Accreditation standards do not specify the dean's role or the programmatic advisory board's role in supporting interdisciplinary education. The purposeful cultivation of skills built on the values and ethics for interdisciplinary practice requires programmatic accreditation structure and process mandated support.