A Descriptive Summary of Field Placements in Undergraduate Art Therapy Education

This article focuses on a series of related issues that appear to be of (sometimes passionate) interest to college and university science faculty who educate undergraduates: requirements and policies for admission to medical school and their possible influences on undergraduate science education. The Center for Education of the National Research Council (NRC) and the Institute of Medicine (IOM) are considering undertaking one or more activities that would help elucidate the relationship and interdependence of undergraduate and medical education. In the Winter 2004 issue of Cell Biology Education, we asked readers to provide their perspectives and input on issues related to introductory science courses; here, in similar fashion, we seek your input about issues you have encountered when teaching courses that are part of the premedical curriculum. To begin a discussion thread or to respond to comments that other readers have submitted, simply click on the ‘‘article discussion forum’’ box in the top left corner of the screen, or go to http://cellbioed.org/ discussion/public/main.cfm.

The executive summary provides an overview of some of V&C's key recommendations regarding next steps in the effort to mobilize the biology community. It is, in essence, a call for national service. A publication discussing these recommendations and action items in more depth will be available later this year. Meanwhile, we highly recommend reading the Executive Summary of V&C, the NAS report (NAS, 2010), and a seminal article by Labov et al. (2010) summarizing the synergy created by these several reports on the changing nature of studies in biology and concomitant need to change biology education. Then, take action! Our hope is to see the formation of a community of biologists, similar to that forming in geology (Manduca et al., 2010): one that will advance biology undergraduate education so it truly reflects the discipline it serves.

This report presents the results of the 2013-14 Center for the Study of Applied Legal Education (CSALE) “Survey of Applied Legal Education.” The survey was composed of four parts – a Master Survey that was directed to each ABA fully-accredited U.S. law school; Law Clinic and Field Placement Course Sub-Surveys that were distributed by the schools to the persons responsible for each distinct law clinic or field placement course at the school; and a Faculty Sub-Survey that was distributed by the schools to each person teaching in a law clinic or field placement course. Eighty-eight percent of accredited law schools participated in the survey.The results provide valuable insight into clinical programs and law clinic and field placement courses in areas such as design, capacity, administration, funding, and pedagogy and into the role and status of clinical legal education and educators in the legal academy. This is the third triennial survey, following up on surveys in 2007-08 and 2010-11.

This report presents the results of the 2016-17 Center for the Study of Applied Legal Education (CSALE) Survey of Applied Legal Education. The survey was composed of four parts – a Master Survey directed to each ABA accredited U.S. law school; Law Clinics and Field Placement Course Sub-Surveys distributed by the schools to the persons responsible for each distinct law clinic or field placement course at the school; and a Faculty Sub-Survey distributed by the schools to each person teaching in a law clinic or field placement course. Ninety-four percent of law schools and over 1,100 clinical teachers participated in the survey. The results provide valuable insight into clinical programs and law clinic and field placement courses in areas such as design, capacity, administration, funding, and pedagogy, and into the role and status of clinical legal education and educators in the legal academy. This is the fourth triennial survey, following up on surveys in 2007-08, 2010-11, and 2013-14.

Chapter 15 - Vanderbilt's ASPIRE program: Building on a strong career development foundation to change the Ph.D.-training culture

“Good luck on your first day as an assistant professor, Dr. Tanner! Have a great class!” On the wall above my desk, these words scream out from an otherwise encouraging note that is adorned with many exclamation points. This note has hung on my wall since my very first day as an Assistant Professor of Biology. As I was charging off to teach my first class, a senior faculty member who had been on my hiring committee slipped this note under my office door. In moments of pause years later, I still stare up at that note and breathe a sigh of relief that I had much more than luck to guide me on my first day as a college-level teacher. Although I continue to have much to learn—as all of us do no matter the number of years of teaching experience—I did arrive at the university with both formal and informal training in science education. I had had plenty of exposure to innovative pedagogical approaches, questioning strategies, and techniques for engaging diverse audiences in learning science. As a scientist educator, I had had the privilege of many years of collaboration with outstanding K–12 educators as well as a postdoctoral fellowship in science education. However, my training has been, to say the least, unconventional compared with that of my fellow junior faculty and unique in its preparation in regard to the teaching and learning of my discipline. It will not be news to anyone reading this article that university and college teaching is to a large extent a profession with no formal training. It’s startling but true that the majority of faculty members—and lecturers who often teach large numbers of students—have no formal training in the teaching and learning of their discipline. In fact, the hiring process in university science departments is structured primarily to evaluate a faculty candidate’s ability to be a productive researcher, with success measured in number of publications and magnitude of grant funds raised. Depending on the type of institution, for example, research university, state-level university, or liberal arts college, there may be a component of the faculty interview process that probes a candidate’s teaching ability, for example, requesting a statement of teaching philosophy and requiring the candidate to teach a sample lecture class. However, this sample lecture often screens for gross inadequacies, rather than looking for stellar innovations or pedagogical skills. This lack of formal, accredited training for university and college instructors stands in stark contrast to the requirements for a high school teacher who is charged with the education of students only a year junior to college freshmen. High school teachers in the United States must be credentialed as a secondary science teacher, demonstrate subject matter competency in every subject that they will be teaching, and must continually engage in professional development in the teaching and learning of their discipline throughout their career as a science teacher. With the 2002 federal No Child Left Behind legislation, the onus is upon each precollege science teacher to become “highly qualified” in terms of formal university-level training in science education. However, no such required professional training or measurable standards for teaching are required in institutions of higher education. Many policy documents have suggested standards of teaching practice in postsecondary science education (National Research Council, 1996, 1997; Siebert and McIntosh, 2001), but the extent of implementation of these ideals is unclear and has gone relatively unstudied, although national and regional accreditation boards do look at outcomes, asking colleges and universities to assess what their students have gained from four years of study at their institutions. Nonetheless, there is a striking reversal of accountability that happens when one crosses the precollege teaching to college-level teaching boundary (Table 1). During the K–12 school years, society expects K–12 teachers to be responsible for student learning. Salaries of teachers in many states are tied to student test scores, and poor student performance can potentially invoke penalties. At a college or university, several variables in the educational universe shift. Students are the ones responsible for learning. The evaluation and compensation of college-level teachers is not DOI: 10.1187/cbe.05–12–0132 Address correspondence to: Kimberly Tanner (kdtanner@sfsu.edu). CBE—Life Sciences Education Vol. 5, 1–6, Spring 2006

We work in one of the few offices in the country dedicated to helping students (health professional, life sciences, population and social sciences) and postdocs navigate the job market. Our team designs career & professional development programs and resources, and offers 1:1 counseling support to graduate-level biomedical trainees. Feel free to ask us anything about how biomedical scientists can prepare and position themselves for the job market, how institutions can provide career development support to their PhD-level trainees, or strategies to improve the career prospects of the nation’s STEM PhD’s. More about our work: • The UCSF Office of Career & Professional Development • Motivating INformed Decisions Program • Graduate Student Internships for Career Exploration Answering your questions here today are: Laurence, Clement, PhD. Program Director, Academic Career Development Anna Correa, MS. Program Director, Clinical Careers Bill Lindstaedt, MS. Executive Director, Career Advancement, International and Postdoctoral Services Thi Nguyen, PhD. Program Director, Non-Academic Career Development Naledi Saul, MPM. Director, Office of Career and Professional Development Liz Silva, PhD. Program Director, Motivating INformed Decisions (MIND) Program Alexandra Schnoes, PhD. Program Manager, Graduate Student Internships for Career Exploration(GSICE) Program Claire Will, PhD. Program Director, Professional Skills Development We will be back at 1 pm ET (10 am PT, 5 pm UTC) to answer your questions, ask us anything! EDIT: Hello everyone! We’re all here and are reading your great questions. We’ll begin answering now! 2nd EDIT: Thanks everyone - these were amazing questions, and we had a lot of fun. Thanks for participating!

Many students enroll in higher education with little exposure to entrepreneurial and career development skills. This gap points out the need to equip undergraduates with professional and entrepreneurial competencies to enhance career readiness in this 21st century. This study aimed to assess the effect of career and professional development courses on undergraduate students' professional and entrepreneurial skills. The study employed a quantitative approach and a descriptive design, guided by the Experiential Learning Theory. A census technique was used to consider 108 undergraduate students who had already been taken through career and professional development courses both in their first and second years of study. A closed-ended questionnaire developed via Google Form was used to collect data, with a response rate of 86.11%. The data collection instrument was piloted and validated, with Cronbach's alpha coefficients ranging from 0.88 to 0.98. The results revealed a positive perception among the respondents that the career and professional development courses they have undertaken have a positive effect on their entrepreneurial and professional skills. The study concluded that career and professional development courses implemented by the university college aligned well with industry trends and students’ needs and were effective in enhancing their entrepreneurial and professional skills. The study recommended that higher educational institutions should consider introducing their undergraduates to similar career and professional development courses to help develop their entrepreneurial and professional skills.

The organization Faculty for Undergraduate Neuroscience (FUN; www.funfaculty.org) was established in 1991 by a group of neuroscientists dedicated to innovation and excellence in undergraduate neuroscience education and research (Ramirez and Normansell, 2003 ). The founders experienced a need for a community of neuroscience educators because no formal division existed within the Society for Neuroscience (SfN; www.sfn.org) to support undergraduates or the faculty who focus on undergraduate neuroscience education. An educator's ability to incorporate current research and techniques in crowded undergraduate curricula becomes even more critical as our understanding of how nervous systems develop, function, adapt, and malfunction continues to expand. Teaching faculty must meet the significant challenges of communicating a broad and fast-paced discipline to a growing undergraduate audience. Moreover, as research experiences for undergraduates are increasingly encouraged and expected, providing undergraduates with meaningful research experiences is an additional, ongoing challenge for educators in the face of smaller budgets for research and education. To help undergraduate neuroscience faculty meet these challenges, FUN has emerged as a professional organization dedicated to the support and development of undergraduate neuroscience educators. The need for an organization that specifically supports excellence in undergraduate neuroscience has grown as an increasing number of interdisciplinary undergraduate neuroscience programs are formalized at colleges and universities. As evidence of the growing interest, FUN's membership has been increasing steadily and currently includes more than 500 individuals at more than 300 colleges and universities. FUN's members represent a broad range of scientific disciplines, including biology, psychology, chemistry, computer science, and philosophy; they work and teach at a variety of institutions, ranging from private, small liberal arts colleges to regional, state, and research universities.

Since the later part of the twentieth century, educational focus has shifted from acquisition of literacy skills only (simple reading, writing, and calculating skills) to inclusion of critical reading and thinking, clear and persuasive communication, and problem-solving skills [1]. In 1996, the Advisory Committee to the National Science Foundation Directorate for Education and Human Resources released a report of the review of undergraduate education in science, mathematics, and engineering titled Shaping the future: new expectations for undergraduate education in science, mathematics, engineering, and technology [2]. The overarching recommendation of this report is that “All students have access to supportive, excellent undergraduate education in science, mathematics engineering and technology, and all students learn these subjects by direct experience with the methods and process of inquiry” [2]. As such, an area of undergraduate science education that has received much attention lately is the type of instructional approach employed. In most academic settings, the typical instructional approach (a.k.a. the traditional approach) comprises lectures where faculty presents facts to students. These lectures are generally accompanied by a number of pretested laboratory experiments with predetermined outcomes. Also, the laboratory experiments are selected to survey a particular set of topics in 3–4-h time periods. A more modern approach, commonly referred to as inquiry-based, includes many variants such as cooperative learning, problem-based learning, discovery-based learning, and others. The commonalities of these approaches lie in their philosophy of active student participation in the entire educational process of teaching and learning [3]. There has been much debate on the strengths and the flaws of these two pedagogical approaches. For example, a strength of the traditional approach is its focus on content coverage and grounding in the fundamentals. However, in the process it inadvertently overlooks the development of the thought process (critical thinking) and professional skills, which are both important for the student’s future endeavors in the chemical industry or academia [3, 4]. On the other hand, the inquiry-based model emphasizes critical thinking and professional skills development. It also offers the opportunity for depth of coverage. However, being faced with the limitations of time and resources, one sacrifice breadth of coverage [5–11]. Finding a balance between this traditional pedagogy and more modern teaching pedagogies is necessary to ensure the complete development of an analytical chemist who is equipped to face the challenges of a twenty-first century global economy [12–14]. At Butler University, we are exploring a pedagogical model that purports to exploit the strengths and serves as a bridge between the traditional and inquiry-based models. In this new approach, we utilize the strengths of the lecture to deliver content while still involving students in active participation in their learning through in-class collaborative group problem-solving. Critical thinking and professional skills development are then strongly addressed within the framework of theme-based modular laboratory courses. In this article we present (1) how quantitative analytical chemistry fits into the new approach, (2) detail of the central framework, (3) two examples of its pilot implementation to demonstrate its flexibility, and (4) our thoughts for future directions. Anal Bioanal Chem (2008) 392:1–8 DOI 10.1007/s00216-008-2240-4

The role of internships in building professional skills of physical education students in training has led to many reflections. The data from this study, which are part of the field of professional didactics, reflect the development of professionalism of student trainees. The descriptive and interpretive study included 74 physical education trainee students engaged in field placements. The data collection used a professional skills assessment grid and interviews to capture the meaning they attribute to their personal and subjective experience during the internships. The results obtained show that internships have repercussions on the professional skills acquired by trainee students, in relation to the level of communication between trainee and student teachers, the design of teaching situations, the assessment of the progress of learning and learning, and the degree of skill acquisition. In conclusion, the results of this work call for the improvement of conditions for monitoring and developing the experience of trainee students in terms of didactic, psychopedagogical and environmental knowledge.

This paper illustrates how a coded recording system used in conjunction with student research and field placement courses can contribute to ending the long-standing estrangement of research from practice in undergraduate social work education. When modified and individualized, it can accommodate a diversity of agency settings, client populations, and practice orientations. It can aid students in sharpening their skills, and becoming more at ease with research. Moreover, this system can contribute to making research relevant to practice, and enabling social work to account more concisely for the interventions of its practitioners.

P.332 Vortioxetine for emotional blunting in patients with major depression and insufficient response to previous antidepressant treatment: the COMPLETE study

Purpose – The purpose of this study is to identify factors that influence vocational students' development of professional skills during workplace learning and to examine the effects and relationships of these factors. Design/methodology/approach – The results were based on the responses of 285 graduating Finnish vocational students. The confirmatory factor analysis and structural equations were conducted using Lisrel. Findings – Motivational factors, including performance orientation and self-efficacy, and organizational factors, including guidance, psychological climate and knowledge acquisition, had a direct and positive impact on the students' development of professional skills. The attitudinal factor measured through work alienation had a partial mediating effect on the relationship between the organizational factors and the development of professional skills. The cognitive factor consisting of prior work experience in the studied field, however, had no effect on skill development Research limitations/implications – The study was based on students' self-appraisal of the studied factors. Future research should consider workplace instructors' and vocational teachers' viewpoints regarding students' development of professional skills. Practical implications – Managers are encouraged to plan a structured orientation period for students and to help workplace instructors design their work in order to facilitate a successful workplace learning period. Originality/value – This study highlights the importance of organizational factors and workplace instructors to students' development of professional skills through work. Furthermore, it provides empirical evidence on the special characteristics of these factors.

The Impact of Primary Mentors and Career Development Committees on Junior Faculty Productivity in a Pediatric Academic Health Center