Search

This study examined and enriched our understanding of the career choice process for doctoral students of color in science, technology, engineering, and math (STEM) fields. In addition, it explored the challenges facing all doctoral students in STEM in understanding and making meaning of diversity as it relates to individual perspectives and actions. We used an agency theoretical framework to explore career-related decisions of doctoral students. This framework captured how students "navigate, negotiate, reframe, and act" during the career decision-making process of a doctoral program.

For years, football and basketball players at Prestige University were earning college credit for classes that never existed. The students were enrolled in fake courses, known as "ghost classes," with no formal instruction or required meeting times and requiring only a single term paper. Faculty, staff, and administrators were complicit in quietly providing student athletes in revenue-generating sports academic credit for coursework they did not complete. However, the scandal became nationwide news, forcing Prestige to reconsider its key values and mission and placing the integrity of the university's academic and athletics programs in jeopardy.

The majority of research on faculty-student interaction has been primarily quantitative to date and has focused primarily on determining what kinds of interactions students have with faculty. This study furthers the literature on faculty-student interaction, taking a qualitative approach to examine what types of interactions with faculty students find meaningful. Our findings indicate that students appreciate the types of interactions that research shows benefits them the most, suggesting that there is less of a disconnect between the types of faculty behaviors that benefit students and the types of faculty behaviors that students appreciate than many might assume.

Mixing political appointments and university operations can prove challenging and, in this case, caused the resignation of three senior officials at State University. Bolman and Deal's four frames provide a structure for analyzing this complex case. The political frame and issues of power and coalitions offer a particularly useful lens to understand a volatile university situation.

Background: This study reviews and appraises the articles published about anesthesiology education in 2020. The objective is to highlight high-quality evidence while showcasing articles with innovative ideas and high relevance to the practices of the anesthesiology education community., Methods: Three Ovid MEDLINE databases, Embase.com, ERIC, PsycINFO, and PubMed were searched, followed by a manual review of articles published in the highest impact factor journals in both the fields of anesthesiology and medical education. Abstracts were double screened, and quantitative articles were subsequently scored by 3 randomly assigned raters. Qualitative studies were scored by 2 raters. Two different rubrics were used for scoring quantitative and qualitative studies. In addition, reviewers rated each article on its overall quality to create an additional list of top articles based solely on the opinion of the reviewers., Results: A total of 2,491 citations were identified through the search criteria and the manual review. Of those, 61 articles met the inclusion criteria (57 quantitative and 4 qualitative). The top 12 quantitative papers and the top qualitative papers with the highest scores are reported and summarized., Conclusions: We found that teaching clinical procedures continues to be a topic of interest, with more studies of improved rigor identified. New trends in wellness studies and increasing attention to distance learning and technology-assisted instructional methods were additional topics covered over the year., (© 2023 Society for Education in Anesthesia.)

Background: This study reviews and appraises the articles published about anesthesiology education in 2019. Through this critical appraisal, those interested in anesthesiology education are able to quickly review literature published during this year and explore innovative ways to improve education for all those involved in the practice of anesthesiology., Methods: Three Ovid MEDLINE databases, Embase.com, ERIC, and PsycINFO were searched followed by a manual review of articles published in the highest impact factor journals in both the fields of anesthesiology and medical education. Abstracts were double-screened and quantitative articles were subsequently scored by 3 randomly assigned raters. Qualitative studies were scored by 2 raters. Two different rubrics were used for scoring quantitative and qualitative studies; both allowed for scores ranging from 1 to 25. In addition, reviewers rated each article on its overall quality to create an additional list of top articles based solely on the opinion of the reviewers., Results: A total of 2374 unique citations were identified through the search criteria and the manual review. Of those, 70 articles met the inclusion criteria (62 quantitative and 8 qualitative). The top 12 quantitative papers and the top 2 qualitative papers with the highest scores were reported and summarized. Conclusions: This critical appraisal continues to be a useful tool for those working in anesthesiology education by highlighting the best research articles published over the year. Highlighting trends in medical education research in anesthesiology can help those in the field to think critically about the direction of this type of research.

Background: Through a critical appraisal of the education research in anesthesiology, this article enables those interested in the field to read the high-quality articles for the past year and possibly implement these evidence-based interventions and concepts into practice. This study reviews and appraises all medical education studies published in 2018 in anesthesiology and summarizes the highest-rated articles evaluated., Methods: Three Ovid MEDLINE databases, Embase.com, ERIC, PsycINFO, and PubMed were searched followed by a manual review of articles published in the highest impact factor journals in both the fields of anesthesiology and medical education. Abstracts were double-screened and quantitative articles subsequently scored by 3 randomly assigned raters. Qualitative studies were scored by 2 raters. Two different rubrics were used for scoring quantitative and qualitative studies, both allowed for scores ranging from 1 to 25., Results: A total of 888 unique citations were identified through the search criteria. Of those, 39 articles met the inclusion criteria (36 quantitative and 3 qualitative). The top 11 quantitative papers and the top qualitative paper with the highest scores were reported and summarized., Conclusions: As the second article to critically review the literature available for education in anesthesiology, we are able to add to this annual series to help further disseminate the articles of the highest quality in anesthesiology education. Because this is only the second year, we can only report on initial suggestions of trends that we hope will help guide future research., Competing Interests: Sources of support: This study was funded internally through each department of the authors., (© 2020 Society for Education in Anesthesia.)