Singing the praises of learning objectives

This past Sunday afternoon, I had the pleasure of attending the Kingston Symphony’s matinee performance of Gene Kelly: A Life in Music at the Grand Theatre.  The show featured clips from Kelly’s most memorable performances, with live musical accompaniment by the symphony, under the direction of Evan Mitchell.

Throughout the show, Kelly’s wife and biographer, Patricia Ward Kelly, shared anecdotes and Kelly’s own insights into his choreography and performances.

She talked about the work he put into creating dances, painstakingly writing out the choreography plan, before working with his fellow performers to perfect the dances themselves. “He didn’t just show up and wiggle around on the stage,” she said.

My educational developer lens instantly compared this to the framework provided by well-written learning objectives. Objectives focus teaching and learning plans, and contribute to authentic assessment.

Yes, this is another blog about learning objectives.

In the abstract, learning objectives seem like just another box on a checklist or hoop to jump through.  Used the way intended, however, they are signposts that guide learning and teaching plans effectively—whether for a class or a single person—the same way Kelly’s planning delivered award-winning and inspiring choreography.

Yes, there’s a “gold standard” for writing objectives (that I’ve written about previously here). And there are verbs to use—and ones to avoid—and if it doesn’t come naturally to you to think this way, it can be pretty tedious.

What it’s really about is planning: knowing what you’re setting out to do. If you have an objective—a goal—then you can make your plan and communicate it to others effectively.

Well-crafted objectives also make things great for assessment, because it’s very clear what you have to measure at the end of the lesson, course, or program.

If you say, “I’m going to get better at taking patient histories” – what does that mean? What does “better” look like? If it means, “I’m going to note down details, or I’m going to ask specific questions, or I’m going to listen more than I have been, or interrupt less… then you know what you need to work on. You know what the focus needs to be, whether you’re a learner or a teacher.

Eventually, you’ll be able to do a history without thinking things through so deliberately – once you’ve achieved fluidity in that skill.  But before it’s a habit, you need to plan, your checklist, and I’m hitting all the boxes? Not just: “be better”.

For example, one of my plans in 2018 was to read more books that weren’t medical education and weren’t related to my PhD coursework. “Read more for fun.” That was it. My objective was pretty vague and, as a result, I didn’t create a workable plan. “Read more” didn’t get me very far. I read parts of eight non-work-related and non-course-related books. And three of those were cookbooks.

I set a more specific objective for 2019 that I would read more by spending five minutes every morning before I left for work reading something from my “recreational” “to be read” book stack (mountain).

I’ve finished two books, which is already a 200% improvement over last year. That specificity can make a difference.

And that’s really all objectives are: an outcome statement to focus your plan.

And that’s why we focus highlight objectives in our competency framework. It’s why we map things to them—learning events, assessments, EPAs—so we can be consistent and everybody knows what the plan is.

How much detail do you need in your objectives? This depends on how granularly you need to communicate your goals in order to be effective.

For his iconic Singin’ in the Rain, Gene Kelly had to map out the location of each of the puddles. His plan needed to be that detailed to get it right.

If you’re wrestling with learning objectives and how these relate to your teaching, give me a call.

Posted on

Scholars at Risk speaker

By Danielle Weber-Adrian (Meds 2021)

It’s easy to start medical school with a fixed idea of what it means to be a physician. For many, we visualize the patient-physician interaction as a series of investigations, treatments and confidences on the individual’s journey towards health. Although there is truth in this, the reality is that medicine represents so much more within the greater community. Being a physician, as many come to realize during medical school, means becoming an ally to those who are marginalized, and an advocate for the change we wish to see in our global and local macrocosm. So, it seems fitting that the Queen’s Medicine Class of 2021 project as of last year has been to promote the Scholars at Risk program at Queen’s with the help of the International Office.

Dr. Evren Altinkas

Scholars at Risk is an organization which provides assistance to over 300 vulnerable scholars per year. These include physicians, journalists, lawyers and professors who have been targeted and threatened by their national governments because of their advocacy work or research. The scholars are matched with universities around the world where they receive temporary teaching and research positions. This provides the scholar with sanctuary and immediate stability, while benefiting the host institution by granting access to a world leader in their field. By joining the Scholars at Risk consortium Queen’s University is prioritizing academic freedom and human rights on a global scale.

As a new member of the Scholars at Risk organization, Queen’s University and the School of Medicine is hosting our first guest lectureship by Dr. Evren Altinkas. Dr. Altinkas is a Turkish historian and scholar at risk who is currently working at the University of Guelph. He studies the historical limitations of academic freedom as experienced by minorities in Europe and the Middle East. His lecture is open to the public and will take place on Friday, February 1st at 12:30 to 1:30 in the upper auditorium (room 132A) of the New Medical Building (15 Arch Street, Kingston, ON). Attendees are invited to join him later that evening for dinner and conversation. The dinner will be hosted at a local restaurant in Kingston; however, guests will be asked to cover the cost of their own meals.  To sign up please see the following form: https://goo.gl/forms/vdkzjy3AHCyCQK252

Posted on

Indigenous Health Care focus of February FHS events with Dr. Barry Lavallee

 

Dear Colleagues,

My name is Terry Soleas, I’m an Education Consultant with the Office of Professional Development and a PhD Candidate in Education. I have the privilege to work in your Faculty of Health Sciences.

In a collaboration between the Indigenous Health Education Working Group, Faculty of Health Sciences Decanal Leadership, and the Office of Professional Development and Educational Scholarship, we are pleased to present three days of extraordinary reconciliation in healthcare events. Our keynote speaker at all three events is Dr. Barry Lavallee of the University of Manitoba who is our guest for the three action-packed days on campus. Dr. Lavallee has proven to be a dynamite speaker who speaks plainly, practically, and passionately on issues of social justice in medicine, with a particular focus on rural and northern indigenous communities.

The three interactive events are:

1) Public Reception and Lecture

2) Faculty Development Half-Day

3) Education Round

These are remarkable and free events that go a long way in Queen’s ongoing Reconciliation efforts. I hope you will join us at many of these events and help us make our future at Queen’s and beyond better, kinder, and brighter!

I’d be delighted to answer any questions you might have😊

With grateful thanks,

Eleftherios K. Soleas, OCT
Educational Consultant
Professional Development & Educational Scholarship
Faculty of Health Sciences, Queen’s University
613-533-6000 x 79035

Posted on

20th Annual Travill Debate set for November 7

The 20th annual A.A. Travill Debate is set for November 7 in the Ellis Hall Auditorium, 58 University Avenue, beginning at 5:45 p.m.

This year’s topic is:

Be it resolved that… Publicly funded hospitals should not be able to have religious affiliation

On the “Yea” side, arguing for the proposition will be Dr. Andrea Winthrop and Meds 2022 student Nathan Katz while Dr. Michael Fitzpatrick and Meds 2021 student Sara Brade will argue the “Nay” side.

As described on the Travill Debate website, the debate will “run on a polite and rigorously timed schedule” which features:

  • 10 minutes for each member of the team, alternating back and forth – Yea and Nay – until all four participants have laid out their arguments.
  • Then two minutes for summary from one member of each side.
  • The Travill Debate Gavel is banged very loudly when the time limits are reached.
  • No Power Point or technological aids.
  • Humour is welcome. Formal attire and costumes have also been used to good effect.

This annual debate – featuring a controversial topic in medicine – was created in memory of A.A. “Tony” Travill. As described on the debate’s web page:

Dr. Travill came to Canada in 1957 after serving as aircrew in the RAF (WWII) and reading Medicine at the London Hospital Medical School. He did a residency year in Montreal and practised in Orillia with Dr. Philip Rynard (Queen’s ’26) before coming to Queen’s to study Anatomy under Dr. John Basmajian. After two years at Creighton University in Omaha, Nebraska, Dr. Travill returned to Queen’s in the Department of Anatomy in 1964, becoming Professor and Head from 1969-1978. His research interests were in embryology, teratology and education. Dr. Travill was a strict parliamentarian and noted Faculty Historian (Medicine at Queen’s; 1854-1920, the Hannah Institute for the History of Medicine, 1988: Just a Few: Queen’s Medical Profiles, 1991). He served the community as a Trustee of the Separate School Board and in 1964 was a founding member of the John Austin Society, the still thriving local history of medicine club. In particular, Dr. Travill had a passion for debate on current social, political and educational issues, and for many years he delivered a rigorous and challenging lecture to incoming first year medical students during orientation week.

As further noted by Dr. Jaclyn Duffin, then-Hannah Chair for the History of Medicine, in the original proposal for the memorial debate:

“As his friends and colleagues know, A.A. ‘Tony’ Travill was intelligent, quick, witty, a great teacher, who loved to talk—preferably to argue. Proud of his credentials in clinical medicine and his origins in practice, he rose to head a basic science department (Anatomy). He was an erudite historian, with distinguished publications… Travill also had a deep interest in Philosophy, especially logic, ethics, and epistemology. He loved to cast doubt, to stir up trouble, but he didn’t really mind losing.”

Please join us! All are welcome!

Posted on

History of Medicine Week: 100 years later… Looking Back on the First World War and the Spanish Influenza October 22-26th

By Kelly Salman (Meds 2021)

The What Happened in Medicine (WHIM) Historical Society is proud to host the fourth annual History of Medicine Week! This year’s theme highlights a significant anniversary for both medicine and the world. A century ago in 1918, two major and interconnected events in history occurred: the Spanish flu and WWI. Learn more about what happened in medicine then and consider how things have (or haven’t) changed in our present day 2018 — 100 years later…

Students, Faculty, and Community members are all welcome to attend.

Museum of Health Care Showcase

Monday October 22nd, 8:30am-3:30pm

New Medical Building Grande Corridor, 15 Arch St.

Many of our greatest medical technologies and advancements have come out of times of crisis. Come and peruse a sampling of century-old artifacts from both the Spanish Flu and WWI. Curated by the Museum of Healthcare.


Speaker Panel Followed by Wine and Cheese Reception

Tuesday October 23rd, 5:30-8:00pm

Speaker panel: New Medical Building, Rm 132 A, 5:30-7:00pm

Reception: Museum of Healthcare, 7:00-8:00pm

 

“We Forgot to Remember – young Canadians commemorating the stories of the 1918 Pandemic”

Award-winning Neil Orford will discuss the Spanish Flu and its impact in medicine.

 

“Brock Chisholm and the Legacy of War Trauma”

Military historians Dr. Robert Engen and Matthew Barrett will discuss the trauma of war through their research on the experiences of Lt. Brock Chisholm in the first world war before he became a physician and the first director general of the WHO. Dr. Engen and Mr. Barrett created a graphic novel to illustrate this narrative, as featured in the Queen’s Alumni Review this summer: https://www.queensu.ca/gazette/alumnireview/stories/battle-hill-70

 About the Speakers:

In 2017, Neil Orford retired from teaching History at Centre Dufferin District High School in Shelburne, ON. His work as a teacher has seen him win numerous awards for his teaching, most recently the 2015 Government of Canada History Award for Teaching; as well as the prestigious 2013 Canadian Governor General’s Award for History Teaching and the 2012 Ontario Premier’s Award for Teaching Excellence. In July 2013, Neil Orford founded a consulting business, Canadian Historical Educational Services, Ltd. to assist school boards, museums, non-profits & government agencies with designing educational programs for historical thinking and commemoration. This work has led him to consultation work with the Federal Ministry of Canadian Heritage in 2017, helping to design digital commemorations for students across Canada.

Dr. Robert Engen, MA’08, PhD’14 (History) is an assistant professor of history at Royal Military College and an adjunct professor in the Department of History at Queen’s. He is the author of Canadians Under Fire: Infantry Effectiveness in the Second World War and Strangers in Arms: Combat Motivation in the Canadian Army, 1943–1945, both published by McGill-Queen’s University Press.

Matthew Barrett is an SSHRC-funded PhD candidate in the Department of History at Queen’s. His doctoral research examines the concepts of honour and dishonour within military culture. In particular, he studies the dismissal and cashiering of Canadian officers during both World Wars. Additional research focuses on Canadian public and institutional attitudes toward suicide in the military. His academic work has appeared in Canadian Military Journal, Canadian Military History, Journal of Canadian Studies and British Journal of Canadian Studies. He has also illustrated two First World War graphic novels with Robert Engen.


Trivia Night

Friday October 26th, 7:00-9:00pm

The Grad Club, 162 Barrie St.

 Impress your friends with your history know-how during a historically themed Trivia Night! Snacks will be provided!

 

 

 

Posted on

Poetry, journalism, and a Pepsi commercial… or, a meandering parable about balance

I started writing poetry again recently. I do this, then abandon it, then reclaim it at various intervals. I’m always better with it.

This may seem to have very little – if anything – to do with medical education. And, you’re right in one sense. Join me on a little self-indulgent meandering to get to my point.

As I write this, it’s Thanksgiving Day – a day when people traditionally reflect on their blessings and things they’re grateful for. And, I’m on the cusp of a milestone birthday, so perhaps that has made me more introspective than other weeks, when I write about course evaluations and how we value them (we do!), or team-based learning and how it contributes to long-term learning and understanding more than straight lectures (it does!), or ways service-learning contributes to both social accountability and professional development (yes!). So, I find myself thinking about poetry.

On the road to becoming any professional – and medicine is no exception – we ask people to shed a lot of things along the way.

We ask people to shed attitudes that aren’t aligned with their goals. To ditch beliefs that aren’t compatible with where they’re going. To replace erroneous information or practices with those that are proven to be more valid.

The profession of medicine itself demands other things – things I watch colleagues work through and cope with – long days, longer nights, emotional and physical demands they may never have imagined at the start of their careers.

Because, really, none of us truly ever know what we’re getting into.

All of this coalesces in a kaleidoscope of who we were and who we are and who we will be. The parts and colours shifting as the years turn.

My first career was in journalism. In the spring of Grade 12, I was accepted into the four-year Bachelor of Journalism program at the University of King’s College. They only accepted 35 students a year, out of nearly 1,000 applicants, so this was exciting! As parents are wont to do, my father, an English teacher, mentioned my acceptance to a colleague he saw at a conference. That colleague was the late Don Murray, then a professor of Journalism at the University of New Hampshire. Professor Murray later sent me a number of articles and a book on journalism (that I still have and use to this day), but he passed along advice through my father that was even more valuable.

“They’re going to teach her how to write a certain way,” he said. “And that’s important, and she needs to do that. But tell her not to give up her other stuff. She needs to keep doing that, too. It will make her a better writer.”

I haven’t always adhered to that advice, but over 32 years after first hearing it, I know its value. So I put pencil to paper to work out ideas, and thoughts, and metaphors. But, really, I’m claiming a part of myself I refuse to shed. It’s something I need to keep to be me. To be better.

Are there things you’ve accidentally shed along the way that you didn’t need to? Are there parts of you you’d like to reclaim, to give you that edge, that solace, that space to be you, preserved in the full person you want to be?

As I write this, I’m reminded of the 2004 diet Pepsi “old van” commercial… where a thirty-something dad is asked if there’s anything else youthful he’d like to experience and he says his old van. He then imagines his 1980s-era rocker painted van and what driving that in his current life (like dropping his kids off at school) would be like (not good!). Then he drinks his can of pop and is happy with that.

Some things can’t – and likely shouldn’t – be reclaimed. But if there’s something like poetry, or running, or music, or nosing around in antique shops, or reading trashy fiction (however you define that), or some other seemed-not-that-important-at-the-time thing that you miss about being you, consider ways to recapture that. And fit that “old” part amongst the newer parts.

Just maybe not that van.

Posted on

Fourth Annual Pap Party event set for October 15-18

By Lauren Wilson (MEDS 2019, Katherine Rabicki (MEDS 2019), Ariba Shah (MEDS 2020) and Hayley Manlove (MEDS 2021)

The fourth annual Pap Party event will take place October 15-18th, during Cervical Cancer Awareness week. This is an event which runs free pap smear clinics, specifically intending to reach women who may not have access to cervical cancer screening otherwise and to increase awareness of Human Papilloma Virus in the community.

In 2015, Cancer Care Ontario estimated that 26% of screen eligible women were overdue for their pap smear. Ensuring adequate access to all women and minimizing barriers to receiving screening are crucial; a Pap Party priority. In 2017, across all four clinic dates, 30 women received pap smears through the Pap Party campaign.

Women aged 21-70 who have not had a pap smear in the last three years are welcome. To increase accessibility to cervical cancer screening, women without primary care physicians, with or without a valid health card are also encouraged to attend the Pap Party Event.

The clinics are run by a team of medical students, residents and physicians under the guidance of Dr. Julie Francis and Dr. Hugh Langley and in collaboration with the Federation of Medical Women of Canada (FMWC). The first Pap Party in 2015 took place in Kingston and has since grown to offer clinics in Belleville, Napanee, and Tyendinaga as well.

The 2018 Pap Party schedule is :

Monday October 15 5:30pm – 7:30pm: HPE Public Health, Belleville

Tuesday October 16 5:30pm – 7:30pm: Community Well Being Centre, Tyendinaga, Mohawk Territory

Wednesday October 17 5:30pm – 7:30pm: Kingston Health Science Centre, Burr 1, Kingston

Thursday October 18 5:30pm – 7:30pm: Kingston Community Health Center, Napanee

To expand Pap Party further and combat declining cervical cancer screening rates, we have also reached out to all primary care clinics in the Kingston area encouraging them to host their own pap smear clinics during Cervical Cancer Awareness Week. They will also be encouraged to offer the HPV Vaccine. Clinics that register with the FMWC receive a kit that includes a tip sheet, colour poster, news release template, and patient education brochures. To register your clinic and contribute to reducing cervical cancer rates, please visit https://fmwc.ca/events/pap-campaign/.

The FMWC website also has more information for individuals and will help them find a registered clinic nearby.

Thank you taking the time to learn about the Pap Party initiative. Please feel free to contact us if you would like any additional information and please spread information about the Pap Party event to women in your life! We would be grateful and thrilled!

Posted on

Medical Student Research Showcase September 20

By Drs. Heather Murray & Melanie Walker

This year the School of Medicine is proud to invite you to the 7th annual Medical Student Research Showcase on Thursday September 20, 2018.

This event celebrates the research achievements of our undergraduate medical students, with both posters and an oral plenary session featuring research performed by students while they have been enrolled in medical school. All students who received summer studentship research funding through the School of Medicine in 2018 will be presenting their work, as well as many other research initiatives. The posters will be displayed in the David Walker Atrium of the School of Medicine building from 8 am until 5 pm, with the students standing at their posters answering questions between 10:30 and noon.

The oral plenary features the top research projects selected by a panel of faculty judges, and will run in room 132A from noon until 1:30 pm on September 20, immediately following the poster session Q&A.

This year’s faculty judges included:

Dr. Stephen Pang

Dr. Sheela Abraham

Dr. Nishardi Wijeratne

Dr. Faiza khurshid

Dr. Graeme Smith

Dr. Olga Bougie

Dr. Susan Crocker

Dr. Michael Rauh

Dr. Prameet Sheth

Dr. Yuka Asai

Dr. Thiwanka Wijeratne

Dr. Jennifer Flemming

Dr. Anne Ellis

Dr. Tim Phillips

We are very grateful to these faculty members for evaluating our oral plenary applicants this year.

The three students who have been selected for the oral plenary session, and the titles of their research presentations and faculty supervisor names are listed below. Each of these three students will receive The Albert Clark Award for Medical Student Research Excellence.

Harry Chandrakumaran – Inter-Laboratory Variability Of Parathyroid Hormone: impact on clinical decision-making
Sachin Pasricha – Clinical indications associated with opioid initiation for pain management in Ontario, Canada: A population-based cohort study
Rachel Oh – Evaluation of ARHGAP33 missense alleles in a zebrafish model of childhood glaucoma

Please set aside some time to attend the Medical Student Research Showcase on September 20th. The students will appreciate your interest and support, and you will be amazed at what they have been able to achieve.

 

 

Posted on

Improving teaching, one slide at a time…

“How many slides can I have in my PowerPoint presentation?”

This is one question I get a lot as an educational developer, with a quick follow-up one about what’s the best way to put slides together.

Soon after it was first released in 1987, PowerPoint became both a boon and bane for teaching. (There are other software programs; PowerPoint just has well over 90% of the market). Computer program presentation software is certainly way more convenient than its predecessor overhead projector (and the accompanying slippery stack of slides), but it’s perpetuated some of the previous challenges with ill-conceived overhead transparencies while creating its own new issues.

Like how many slides is too many?

The standard advice is the 10/20/30 rule: 10 slides for a 20-minute presentation with 30-point font. This avoids the too-much issue: too many slides and too much information crowded on a single slide, but it’s simplistic advice that may not address your actual concerns.

I use four guiding questions to think about presentation slides:

  1. How are you going to use them?

  2. How are your learners going to use them?

  3. What else are you going to provide?

  4. Have you addressed the issues? (Accessibility, Copyright, Confidentiality, etc.)

 

How are you going to use them?

For example, are you using your slides as “attention getters” or information notes? Do you need an eye-catching image, or clear bullet points, or both? Are your images essential illustration, or distracting add-ons? If you’re showing a complicated image, is it to show “it’s complicated” or is it for detailed discussion and deeper learning?

How are your learners going to use them?

Take a step back and think about how your slides look projected on the three screens in the teaching theatres. Are your slides overwhelming or illuminating? Are your learners going to take notes on their electronic copy of your slides while you talk? Will these be their primary reference? Are your slides “must use” or “nice to have”?

What else are you going to provide?

Do you provide an electronic copy of your slides, before or after class? Are they complete or are there things omitted in your MEdTech published versions (either for pedagogical or other reasons, see next point!). If you’re using more visual versus text sides, are you providing accompanying notes? Do the students have other resources?

Have you addressed the issues? (Accessibility, Copyright, Confidentiality, etc.)

Issues about accessibility, copyright and confidentiality will vary based on particular circumstances. The best rule for layout is “keep it simple” – many of the built-in templates in programs don’t translate well to the screen and can be impossible to read for some people with particular vision problems. There can be issues of copyright for images – some things can be shown in class, but not saved to our learning management systems, for example. (And we have a copyright specialist here at Queen’s – Mark Swartz – who can help us navigate this). Also, regarding confidentiality, if screenshots of x-rays are used, for example, how is identifying information removed?

 

There are a vast number of resources online and multiple great reference books with tips and techniques for improving your use of presentation software. There is no single school of thought of best practices for teaching with this tool (although there are definitely pitfalls to avoid).

If you’re looking to improve your use of PowerPoint in the classroom, please feel free to get in touch. We can look at what you’re doing now, what your goals are, and talk strategies for changing things up as needed.

Meanwhile, if you have 14 slides for a 20-minute presentation, you’re likely ok. But if you’re planning 200 slides for a 50-minute lecture, chances are, that’s too many. Call me.

Reach me at theresa.suart@queensu.ca

Posted on

Diversity matters in undergraduate medical education. Not because it’s an accreditation standard (although it is, encompassing several aspects of the very broad concept of diversity), but because our students, classrooms, and faculty should reflect the populations of our communities and country.

As part of this, we believe students should see people like themselves reflected in who is at the front of the classroom and in clinics and other settings: As educators, as role models, as future colleagues.

One key aspect of diversity is gender and gender roles. Recently, Dr. Stephen Archer, head of Queen’s Department of Medicine, shared a post on his monthly blog on the role of women in medicine, and in his department here at Queen’s. We’re reposting it here because of its important message.

Women in Medicine: Where are we 150 years after Dr. Emily Howard Stowe, Canada’s First Female Physician?

By Dr. Stephen Archer

In 2016 I commissioned the creation of a Women in Medicine (WIM) Program in the Department of Medicine at Queen’s University. I was inspired to do so by a variety of factors including a diversity and equity course I had taken, some personal reflection on the subject of feminism, conversation with female colleagues, and my observations that the state of WIM would best be evaluated and advanced by women themselves. Launching this program felt like a positive step to enhance diversity and equity, promote professional development and perhaps even contribute to physician wellness.

Dr. Emily Howard Stowe (née Jennings)

There were those at the time, including some female physicians I consulted, who felt we did not need a WIM program. In our Alternate Funding Plan (AFP – which is our payment structure) we have pay equity, many women in leadership positions, and half of our Divisional Chairs are female (as just a few examples). Additionally, more than half the medical student class at Queen’s University is female. Therefore, some may ask, why do we need a WIM program?  Having continued to hear stories of discrimination and challenges to advancement that were perceived to be based on gender, and in discussion with my fellow Heads of Medicine at CAPM (Canadian Association of Professors of Medicine), it was ascertained that many gender differences remain and these should be addressed head on. Most obvious is the unique female role in reproduction and child rearing during early years in a woman’s career, in particular. However, there are other less intuitive differences I encountered. For example, while every female physician seems to know what “imposter syndrome” is, few male physicians were aware of this condition (a psychological pattern in which an individual doubts their accomplishments, and has a persistent internalized fear of being exposed as a “fraud”- despite being fully competent!). While imposter syndrome occurs in both women and men it seems more on the minds of female physicians in my nonscientific survey….and that’s but one of many differences.

Next, I considered how best to proceed with the idea that we should create a WIM program. I knew just enough to know that this was something I should not attempt to lead or direct! Rather, I turned for guidance to my friend and colleague (and Associate Head of Equity and Diversity in the Department), Dr. Mala Joneja. After discussion she agreed to help start a WIM program (but more on that later).

A proper discussion of WIM programs should start at the beginning. There is a very relevant biography in the archives of Canadian Medical history that is worth a quick review. Let’s go back 150 years and meet Canada’s first female physician, Dr. Emily Howard Stowe (née Jennings). Her story of overcoming adversity and of her interactions with male detractors and supporters remains relevant today.  She was born in Norwich, Ontario on May 1, 1831. By 1854 she graduated from Normal School and became Principal at Brantford Public School. Believe it or not this was a first in Canada!

Dr. Clemence Sophia Lozier and the New York Medical College for Women

Emily married John Stowe who unfortunately contracted tuberculosis. Reportedly inspired by this adversity she decided to change careers and become a physician. Just one problem: this had never occurred in Canada and was apparently impossible!  In 1865, her application to the Toronto School of Medicine was denied (more on that later). So, off she went to New York Medical College for Women, a homeopathic institution that had just opened in New York City in 1863. This College was led by a remarkable woman, Dr. Clemence Sophia Lozier. The College initially had seven students including Ms. Stowe. The school interestingly had gender balance in its faculty complement from day one – 4 male and 4 female. Dr. Lozier served as the Chair of Diseases of Women and Children and as President of the College.

In 1867, Canada’s birthday, Dr. Stowe became the school’s first graduate. During a 25-year period this school graduated 219 students. They originated from states across America and included the first African American female MD in New York, Dr. Susan McKinney.

http://www.biographi.ca/en/bio/jennings_emily_howard_13E.html

The newly minted Dr. Stowe returned to Ontario at a propitious time, with Upper Canada (Ontario) having joined the Confederation of Canada in 1867. She began her practice (see advertisement, right) on Richmond Street in Toronto. Perhaps reflecting her view of the establishment, she began practice without a medical license!

Dr. Stowe encountered several types of men in her career, as I suspect do modern female practitioners. There were men she loved and men she loathed. There were men who actively opposed her and others who helped in key times in very instrumental ways. For example, she reported that John McCaul, president of University College in Toronto, was not content to merely reject her application to medical school. When she responded to her rejection notice by “… expressing my regret & at the same time remarking that these university doors will open some day to women”, Dr. McCaul reportedly replied “Never in my day Madam”.

In contrast some men she met were advocates and allies, helping open doors. For example, a few years later in 1870 it was a man, Dr. William Thomas Aikins, an Irish immigrant and president of the Toronto School of Medicine, who allowed Ms. Stowe and another woman, Jenny Kidd Trout, to attend medical school classes. For whatever reason Ms. Trout sat and passed the exams whilst Ms. Stowe did not. Thus, Jenny Trout became the first licensed female physician in Canada.

Why did Emily not sit the exams after taking the courses? According to the Canadian Dictionary of Biography the male professors’ and students’ behaviour “had so angered her that she would not sit the exams”. Perhaps she also had concerns about her background as a homeopath and having practiced medicine without a license!

The theme of resilience is strong in Dr. Stowe’s life. She continued her practice but once again met adversity. In 1879 she was charged with performing an abortion. At this point she seemed to have acquired the respect of many colleagues and the leadership of the medical community in Toronto (men) came to her defense, testifying to her skills.  She was vindicated. Out of this adversity came a surprising result in July, 1880: her acceptance with formal licensure by the College of Physicians and Surgeons. Once again, her advocate, Dr. Aikins, was among those who testified in her support.

In 1883 her daughter, Augusta Stowe-Gullen graduated from Medical school, continuing her legacy. Also, in 1883 the Toronto Women’s Suffrage Association, led by Dr. Stowe senior created the Ontario Medical College for Women.

Dr. Stowe was not simply a medical pioneer. She recognized the need to improve the life for all women, not just those who aspired to a career in Medicine. She became an ardent and effective feminist and advocate for woman’s rights.  In 1888, Dr. Stowe, after participating in an international suffragettes’ conference in Washington, D.C., brought the movement back to Canada, founding the Dominion Women’s Enfranchisement Association in 1889.

The messages that I take from the life of Dr. Stowe include:

  • Ambition accompanied by resilience is often able to overcome staggering odds.
  • Even the most resilient and ambitious person needs allies, and in the case of WIM some allies will likely be male.
  • Activism is required to advance causes and this involves personal engagement and sacrifice.
  • Medicine is just part of the broader play of life and for females to be accepted as physicians society must embrace feminism and address the related issue of equity.
  • If you want to effect social change surround yourself with like-minded colleagues (e.g. a WIM program), whether that cause is obtaining the vote for women, securing access to admission of women to medical school or equity in the modern work place.

So how is society doing with the issues of feminism and women in Medicine?  Certainly, better than in 1867!  However, inequities and bias persist. Since women vote, constitute the majority of the medical school class, are often leaders in academic health science centres and have (to variable extents) access to childcare and maternity leave, do we even need WIM programs? We took on this sensitive subject in the 2017 Travill Debate in which the proposition was “Be it resolved that a Women in Medicine Program is Not Needed in 2017”.

This debate series, like its namesake (Dr. Tony Travill), is provocative and candid. As one can imagine the Pro, assigned to Dr. Romy Nitsch and medical student Roya Abdmoulaie, argued WIM programs was tokenism – we don’t need special treatment. We are already equal! The Con, assigned to Dr. Joneja and medical student Daniel Huang, argued that women are still misidentified as nurses or support staff, treated with less respect than their junior male physician colleagues and on occasion subject to sexual harassment.

So how is our WIM program structured and what are its goals? The WIM program began with meetings attended solely by female faculty. The theme of meetings is simple: women supporting women in medicine.

The goals of our Women in Medicine program are to:

  • Promote the advancement and success of women in academic and leadership positions
  • Create a community of women in medicine to provide support and mentorship for one another
  • Provide a forum for the expression of appreciation of the women in the DOM who have made significant contributions
  • Achieve 50% female faculty in next 5 years
  • Achieve 50% female faculty in DOM Leadership positions in the next 7 years

WIM holds quarterly meetings and has an accredited journal club. Meetings are funded by the DOM’s professional development fund. There are 9 members of the WIM Planning Committee and meeting attendance averages ~21 members (~43% of the DOM’s female cadre). One can get a feel for the meetings by reviewing some of the Guest Presenters and Topics.

Click image above to view a video about the Women in Medicine Committee at the Department of Medicine

1st Annual Event:

  • Dr. Elizabeth Eisenhauer, Head of Oncology, Queen’s University – The first woman in Medicine’s perspective on leadership and career growth
  • Ms. Jennifer Valberg, Senior Communications Officer, Queen’s University– How networking at Queen’s and building a community can help Women in Medicine thrive.
  • Dr. Robyn Houlden, Chair of Endocrinology – The History of Women in Medicine at the DOM – a timeline
  • Dr. Jacalyn Duffin –Hannah Professor of the History of Medicine- History of the first female surgeon Dr. James Barry – Born Margaret Ann Bulkley)

2nd Annual Event:

  • Dr. Sue Moffat, Associate Professor of Medicine, Respirology –Lesson’s learned as one of the first Women in Medicine in the Department of Medicine.

While I have not attended the meetings so far, they are well received. Each annual event has seen approximately 25 female faculty members in attendance. Feedback on these events has yielded a 100% satisfactory rating from attendees. The WIM have indicated that they plan to make changes in their medical practice including, but not limited to:

  • An improved focus on work-life balance
  • A renewed approach to professionalism in medicine
  • Increased utilization and provision of mentorship for other women in medicine
  • Improved focus on creation of a network of supportive colleagues in which to rely on

We have made progress toward the goals of the WIM program. For example, all our search committees are reminded to consider equity in the search process. The Department of Medicine is committed to employment equity and diversity in the workplace and welcomes applications from women, visible minorities, indigenous people, persons with disabilities and persons of any sexual orientation or gender identity. Moreover, the hiring committee membership is broad, diverse, and extends beyond the division in which the new position resides. Quite importantly half of our leaders, Division Chairs, are female.

The following table shows how the Department of Medicine is faring in our march toward gender equity:

An example of the #whatadoctorlookslike campaign on leadership roles for women in medicine.

The Department of Medicine has recently launched a Twitter and Instagram campaign (@queensudom) for female faculty members using the #whatadoctorlookslike hashtag.  You can follow that hashtag to find out more about the leadership roles of women in the Department of Medicine.

 

So how are we doing nationally with the goal of having the number of women in Medicine reflect broader society? As of Jan 2018, the Canada Physician Data Centre reported Canada has 84,260 physicians (that is 2.30 physicians per 1,000 population). Women account for 42% of all physicians. However, the inclusion of women varies widely by the type of physician, being lower in specialty disciplines (true for of all types of specialties) than in general practice (37.8% female versus 45.9%) and lowest in surgical specialties (~29%). https://www.cma.ca/En/Pages/canadian-physician-statistics.aspx

https://www.cma.ca/Assets/assets-library/document/en/advocacy/06-spec-sex.pdf 

As past president of CAPM, the Professors of Medicine of Canada (the leaders of our Academic Department of Medicine) I can attest there is diversity in terms of the progress toward equity of the genders in our academic Departments of Medicine across the country. I performed a brief survey of our 13 Academic DOMs and received several responses listed below in graph format:

The above graph shows the percentage distribution of Female Faculty based on their role description as of March 2017 from participating Universities. As you can see, University one has 37% full time faculty an 36% part time faculty that were identified in the survey.

The above chart shows the allocation of female faculty members in leadership roles in Department, Faculty and Hospital levels.  As you can see, University 1 has 21% of female faculty members in Departmental Leadership positions but no faculty members in hospital or faculty level leadership positions.

 

The above graphs show a comparison between male and female faculty regarding associate and assistant faculty promotion within the first 7 years.  You will see that associate faculty promotion in University 1 saw a rate of 62% male faculty promotion while females saw 46%.  Data set for two entries were suppressed due to incorrect entry of data.

 

In the above graph you will see that 50% of faculties provide on-site daycare to their members.

 

In this graph you can see the distribution of female faculty members throughout divisions. For allergy, University number 5 (Orange) has 100% female faculty in that specialty.

Additionally, the survey revealed the rationale for declining leadership roles for female faculty across universities:

  • Family commitments
  • Work-life balance
  • Uncertainty of being successful in the role

 

In conclusion: In the era of Me Too we still need WIM programs. There are many issues we have yet to resolve such as:

  • How to provide 24-7 on-site daycare
  • How to support job sharing
  • How to deal with equity associated with providing flexible hours
  • How to cover maternity and parental leaves and more

We need safe spaces to have these conversations in a respectful manner. WIM programs constitute one such safe space. Indeed, I believe because conversations have become more “high stakes” in the current environment, we need WIM programs more now than pre-Me Too. WIM programs provide a forum for female physicians to shape policy, provide mentorship, and support one another, a collegium in which diverse opinions can be shared and pathways forward illuminated. As a Department Head, our WIM program provides me with advice on proposed policies, gaps and inequities informing my decisions with a perspective that I may lack. Rather than being confrontational I find having a vibrant WIM program empowers women, informs men and projects a sense of fairness that makes the DOM a better place to practice.


Thank you to Dr. Mala Joneja and my colleagues in CAPM for their contributions to this blog post.


Resources: 


Link to original post: http://deptmed.queensu.ca/blog/?p=1783


 

Posted on