I personally feel all part-time teachers in colleges are excellent, committed and knowledgeable.

More practitioners should be encouraged to and allowed to teach.

It's an interesting topic in relation with many aspects. I 've had a private practice in endodontics for 10 years and during this period, i was a part time teacher at the university and hospital. I'm full time at the university since 2010 so i can give you my personal point of view by regarding the two sides.

From my point of view, it is crucial to have had a private practice before teaching in order to know the differents constraints that our students will have after their graduation. After all, it's not a problem of full time or part time but also a issue of teacher dedication. When you have a private practice in a dental office, you have to manage it and it's very tricky to teach at university and hospital and to make research simultaneously. Thus, i agree when you say that part-time teachers are often excellent. But you have also excellent full time clinicians and researchers and also poor part-time and full-time teachers. To summarize, it depends on...the human personnality.

I would strongly argue for doctors in private practice to teach as it would give students a balanced appraoach to medicine in different environments. At the same time teaching would drive private doctors to stay up to date.

In adition, private doctors who teach are ususally highly motivated to do so as opposed to some in the public sector or in academia for whom teaching is a requirement rather than a drive.

Regardless of their position, how good a teacher a doctor is depends on motivation as well as their teaching skill. Currently many teachers in medicine has not been taught formally how to teach. Training the trainers will greatly enhance student outcome for those who enjoy teaching.

Teaching is an art of communication with your students, needs training, and to prepare a lecture with updated information is not easy and takes time. However a dentist needs to practice in his privet clinic otherwise he will lose his skills. I am teaching part time and i do have a privet clinic. Every day in my clinic with the revolution of dental materials and equipment i learn something new. I AGREE WITH YOU that part time teacher is excellent.

Wow!!!what superb responses!!!

I am so glad that most of us feel the same way.

Frederic, of course it depends on the human personality.

But its also important to have commitment.

Anthony is abs correct when he says that doctors who are in practice are better teachers as they have clinical,practical experience with patients.

And balsams point of view needs to be thought over..how many teachers in medicine actually get teacher's training?

I havent, and i have been teaching for more than 10 years.

It's great to see private practitioners across the globe who has teaching interests. No doubt, some doctors are natural teachers and perhaps this is another plus point for private doctors. We tend to be more customer oriented and therefore may be more responsive to student needs.

Nonetheless, specific training would really bring out our potential. After years of teaching, through trial and error, I have only been recently been enlightened by formal training. Being a facilitator in learning over just a lecturer or a demonstrator is really amazing.

Keep up with the good work, guys.

Practitioners having inclination for teaching and can spare time for reading can be good teachers.

Hi anthony

im happy that you have received teacher's training.

Can you find out where i can do this training? And is it available on-line?

Thank you.

Hi, Arnavaz

Like most of us, I started with "on the job" training. Recently I have the fortune of being a member for the Educational Faculty of the Medical Protection Society. They gave a formal and very vigorous training.

Actually there are a lot of e-text available in many university libraries. An easy read would be "ABC of Learning & Teaching Medicine". Some self taught modules can also be found on http://learning.bmj.com/learning/home.html.

There are also some online courses such as the one here: http://www.imhse.hku.hk/v2/portal/. However, this example is a realtively new course that need some fine tuning. I'm sure you can search more examples on Google.

Regards

no it is not possible before long preparation i teached in the university since 20 years and i still learn and update everything. medical education is very braod subject concerning curriculum development, assessment methods , teaching and learning methods and research unites . it takes years to master one branch only.

Thank you anthony for the info.ill definitely check on it.

thanks for raising this question. I can see the responses of colleagues to this question is highly affected by their communities. most of the responders were FT academic staff . I am also FT university professor throughout my career i encountered many PT from private sector mainly in UK and they are doing wonderful job. I believe is the strength of the institutional organization is the key to the success of such staff to play their key roles. but in weaker institute like in 3rd world yes there may be justifiable fear expressed by colleagues. we should always remember that the vast majority of our students will eventually become a private dentists hence such teacher can be in an outstanding position to train the new generation of future private dentists

With the current scenario in India, specially in Maharasthra, Karnataka, doctors ready to join as full-time staff are not getting any jobs, so forget about part-time jobs. Yes, there are many private practitioners (graduates and postgraduates) who are willing to share their knowledge with the fraternity. But joining college as teachers is not the only way out. One can deliver lectures in association meetings or scientific conferences or more so many like minded doctors can come along and form a study group. Sharing knowledge has many ways out.

Yes, Doctors in private practice can teach and teach well because teaching is an art endowed by medical practitioners as well those in other disciplines. Teaching is therefore an art of impacting knowledge acquired during ones carrier to others so it does not matter whether in public or private sector. We need to be quit our knowledge to our off-springs to take up the mantle from us when we are old or dead and gone.

Yes.we have to pass our knowledge

Those who can - do; those who can't - teach. This is a fact of life.

lecturers at university level should have a high degree M. Sc or M.D. or Ph.D. beside that they should be involved in research. However, doctors of private section usually are good with experience and some times have a talent to teach. My openion, they can be involved in training and practical work of the UG students more than in teaching and education of thoeritical part. University hospitals in this case are more useful and the output impact will be much better.

Yes they can share in teaching

Fantastic question, and some very interesting discussions. I think we do have to be careful here by what we mean by teach. Teaching is a very specific skill that includes understanding of pedagogic practice. That would usually mean that to teach in a structured and rigorous fashion does require some form of teaching qualification, understanding how to develop a set of practices, lesson plans and how to fit the various components of a course into a cohesive whole. Now I would not expect a practitioner in any subject to have this kind of knowledge or education, but I often include practitioners in my teaching practice. Why? Because they have the unrivalled ability to bring theory to life, and through the realities of their experience help students develop a much more nuanced/sophisticated appreciation of the relationship between theory and practice. Answering the question is therefore fraught with difficulties, 'can those in private practice teach?' for me is not necessarily the question. Of course we must mix practitioners into our teaching practice, but we may be failing our student body if their learning experience is developed by practitioners alone without the guidance of good pedagogy.

Hi simon

that is a very good contribution to my discussion.

I do feel strongly that a doctor in private practice brings a lot of actual experience into his teaching and shares practical knowledge with the students.

And yes, applied anatomy/pathology, i.e. How to apply your theoretical knowledge of a subject in everyday practice while treating a patient, is very important.for eventually, you are going to treat patients.

This is what i try to do whenever i take a lecture/practical.

But yes, i also agree with you that support from full-time teachers is necessary too.

Academic doctors who are in private but working in the field of their specialization will be good teachers. They can provide students with live and real examples and can demonstrate ideas in an understandably way. However, not every doctor from the private can do this, the employer should check. From the administrative point view at a university, it is good in terms of cost, but from the quality, sustainability, and academic perspective it is good to hire full timers and invite such experts from the private for some lectures.

I think Fahoum makes a very good point. Those working in private practice with some academic training would be perfect. But as he goes on to highlight, this is not the usual state of affairs. Using practitioners as part of a student's learning experience, for me, is a must, and to be able to do this to cost and in a sustainable manner is a constraining factor. The typical framework we as educators work in is that it is we, the teachers who develop the 'teaching', within which we fit learning experiences provided by specialists and experts in specific fields. Therefore, do the experts actually have to be good teachers? If the learning framework they are a part of has been well structured the students will be enabled to facilitate their own learning through through interaction with the expert. Hope I'm making sense here.

hi simon

im a little confused..you re saying.."The typical framework we as educators work in is that it is we, the teachers who develop the 'teaching', within which we fit learning experiences provided by specialists and experts in specific fields. Therefore, do the experts actually have to be good teachers? If the learning framework they are a part of has been well structured the students will be enabled to facilitate their own learning through through interaction with the expert. Hope I'm making sense here."

If you are fitting in learning experiences only, then what happens to actual teaching? should a private practitioner, who is also a post-graduate degree-holder in any dental speciality, not take regular classes?

i dont think so.

in fact, a doctor who is doing well in private practice would come to teach with a passion for teaching.and would put in ore than., say, a doctor who is teaching throughout the day, and finds it routine.

Arnavaz, great point, and I think gets to the nub of the debate, coming down to how we perceive what is occurring in HE, again that question I have raised before: What do we mean by teaching? If teaching is simply a broadcast phenomena, then what you say holds a great amount of truth, and that question 'what happens to actual teaching?' makes a whole lot of sense.

However, if teaching is more about the learner being the focus, and the teacher acting as a guide through that learning experience, the key question becomes the role of the learner, not necessarily the teacher. Are they a passive component in this process, a glass that must be filled with knowledge, or are they a much more active agent in their own learning experience?, an agent with who we can only partially intervene in the knowledge they are developing. If the later, as is my position, then we as teachers develop a framework of learning experiences from which the student develops their understanding, an understanding that is specific to the individual student, based upon past and current experiences. Not that they have different knowledge, but they understand that knowledge in subtly different ways. Have your colleagues explain a physical process, and each will describe it differently dependent upon their own specific understanding that allows them to act in the real world.

In this case developing a framework of learning experiences that guides students to a more individual understanding requires the skill of teaching, not only subject knowledge. The practitioner who is passionate and comes in for a session of teaching about their speciality may or may not be a good communicator. We do know that students value passion and it helps them engage, and this is an important element of the learning process, but it is not everything. The Dr who teaches day in day out - if also a good teacher - better appreciates where his students are at, what they require to move on, how they individually learn, and how to help direct them to get the most out of the session. I never bring an practitioner in without providing the students with guidance notes, and letting the practitioner know what we are trying to do - not so they can act on that, simply so that they are aware, but often they will tailor the session to my input.

So essentially the practitioner and the teacher are providing very different, but equally important roles. The teacher is not simply an broadcaster of knowledge, but also a skilled practitioner in their own right providing a process of experiences that guide students to understanding. The practitioner is bringing in very specific knowledge as a component of that process.

Thats an incredible answer...thank you

im so glad someone shares a little bit of my opinions.

I teach oral anatomy & histology as well as oral & maxillofacial pathology.

These are very "dry" subjects and teaching my students why it is so important to know anatomy and pathology of head,face neck region and make it interesting by showing examples from my own private practice, is my goal.

Hello,

I tend to agree with Simon. It takes more than medical knowledge and practice to “teach”. While someone maybe a highly competent MD, he might not have a clue about teaching philosophy, learning process or pedagogy , thus he is ill equipped to transfer knowledge, facilitate learning or Inspire students. This is valid both for classroom and practice settings where he will have to apply critical thinking and “explain” his interventions

I agree with Patrick, it is a balance of all these elements, and there is also something bout the student, their expectations and ability to learn.

Medical doctors who can teach must have strong Medical theories and practices; keeping up with the latest technology in medicine. Doctors who are in private practices if still have time to keep up with their latest medical knowledge can well teach.

Academics and private practice is good choice. In Indian Conditions the power lies in the hands of the managements to retain or remove the faculty at any point of time. Private practice will offer not only better clinical experience for faculty but also decreases the dependability of teaching as the main source of income. Until the law in India takes a better turn to support the faculty it is best to vouch for both.

My opinion as a dean of med school in Malaysia for 7 years: Private practitioners teach practical skills quite well using real life experiences. They are usually not as effective as full time academics in teaching theoretical basis.

The major issue with many practitioners is that they do not stay in the college a minute more than needed ("time is money, dean; got to go"). Students have little access to them for one to one discussions.

Teaching means devotion, character, and knowledge.

Regarding devotion, there is some natural selection: some like academic carrier some prefer daily practice in an office, outpatient setting etc. Devotion also means, that you like to answer the questions of students, also after the official timetable.

Knowledge does not only mean lexical knowledge, and practical experience, but also that you are a member of a team, a department, where you are one of the colleges who is following the literature, discuss the interesting topic, and where there is a common effort to keep the level of knowledge on the top. This is more effective. I rather doubt if one single person would be able to filter out the most important points from the vast literature. Students need the latest, most up to date and controlled (accredited?) stuff. Nobody can afford this alone.

Teaching is by far about ones love for the subject and for teaching.. Essentially how good any one is as a teacher does not depend entirely on full time teaching or practice.. each bring an entirely different set of values to the table. Full time teachers can dedicate their time entirely to the students and updating themselves however we are teaching students to become doctors and not necessarily teachers so the real life experience of practitioners is also a valuable contribution.

Why not? Some of my best teachers in school and later in university were practitioners: lawyers, judges, journalists, airplane constructors... In Germany, universities of applied sciences explicitely hire people with minimum of 4 years job experience outside higher education...

Actually it's a personal choice but ofcourse if they want they can teach.

It is not uncommon for practitioners to teach here. Desire and knowledge are certainly part of the process of teaching, but it isn't the not only thing one needs to be a successful teacher. Teaching is a skill set that is somewhat separate from practicing - though in some sense much of a practice is teaching.

This individual attitude to keep your self abreast with latest advancement in technology

and share the knowledge and experience with your student and colleagues, its make any difference weather person is teacher or not.

Patrick ...thanks..i think both of us think along similar lines..i too, feel that doctors in private practice have a heightened awareness of patients' needs and can be better teachers.

And sethuraman is right..private practitioners leave the campus as soon as they finish their lecture/practical ( i do that too).

And suzanne..i like this..that german universities prefer teachers who are also in private practice.

Will they hire me?

No, i am serious, can i teach, if only for sometime, or as an exchange faculty, in your university?

Do let me know.my email id is [email protected]

And dr. Mandana is so right...i quote-"we are teaching students to become doctors and not necessarily teachers so the real life experience of practitioners is also a valuable contribution."

thank you mandana, you have just re-affirmed my belief.

to --Dale Pietrzak

you have given me a very important aspect..that "teaching is a skill set that is somewhat separate from practicing - though in some sense much of a practice is teaching".

teaching needs some special skills, and, as ive said before, i wish we were given some training in teaching processes, or aids, or anything that would make us more efficient teachers.

we just work out our own systems, usually by trial and error.

Many of them can teach. And often they are very good teachers.

In Germany, in Dentistry it is very rare that colleagues from a private practice teach undergraduates. This is different to the applied sciences Susanne mentioned.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Applied_sciences

Applied Sciences are mainly taught at so-called Fachhochschulen http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fachhochschule

which are primarily "practically oriented" - to apply sciences. In contrast the universities (Hochschule) are more/also "theoretically oriented". Thus it is no contradiction that Susanne and I give this different information.

Well, Dentistry is very practically oriented, but also needs fundamental research, and like medicine its home is the university. (Not so easy to explain in short words, use link).

In postgraduate education in Dentistry a lot of colleagues from private practices teach. In a course in implantology which we offer, a colleague from a private practice gives the lecture which is most appreciated... (however, he was fulltime at the university for several years.)

Personally, I would like to see some lecturers from the private practice. In the end a good teacher has to have enthusiasm for his work. It is definitely better to be taught by an enthusiastic practitioner than by a frustrated member of the university staff. On the other hand there are some colleagues who are just keen on the title "Professor", which is reserved for (some) teachers (mainly also the head of a department) at the universities/fachhochschulen, therefore rare and acknowledged by nearly everyone.

Thus the (external) lecturers would have to be somehow rated and classified.

External lecturers would mean that the heads of the departments would lose some control, as it is more likely that a different doctrine is presented by an external lecturer than by someone who is employed in a certain department and the head has directive power and uses it to have his co-workers follow (and teach) his doctrine... This is valid also for internal lecturers working part-time at the university - their practical competence (as well their external income) makes them much more independent...

Okay yango..i see your point.

But unfortunately, in india, there is an acute shortage of teachers in oral pathology..esp at professor level.

I may not be the best of researchers, or may not be very much into academics, but i am a good teacher for undergraduates.

And maybe, that is why, i have not taken up any post-graduate students.

Dear Arnavaz,

sorry, if you feel misjudged or offended, that was not my purpose.

I just wanted to add some new aspects, which also might be considered. I did not just criticize external lecturers for being only/also interested in the title, but also the professors who don't like to lose control. I explicitly supported the idea of external lecturers, and I related the quality of a lecture primarily to the enthusiasm, not the provenience. But as there are frustrated professors, there are also external lecturers who are interested in the title primarily.

Being rated is not unusual. My lecture was rated when I applied for my "Privatdozent" - now I may give lectures independent from any directive. Every professor in Germany is rated this way, and sometimes repeatedly. Thus, rating is just normal for me, I had no ulterior motive.

However, I actually don't know if external lecturers are rated and how, I simply don't know any. Therefore, this sentence is written in a conjunctive form, or as a hypothesis. Indeed, I expected some information on this topic, experiences from you or others.

Not being rated does of course not mean "bad lecturer", I would never dare judging someone whom I don't know, and basically I'm very positive.

I hope I could convince you that I think that practitioners can give excellent lectures, and I'm sure that your lectures are outstanding - I can read this from your enthusiasm with which you fight for your conviction.

I wish you all the best, nice ideas for your lectures and always most interested students.

Yours Yango

Sure,I agreed that some devoted part time teachers can deliver more effectively by using their real daily life experience.Things are not happens in same manner as written in books,unforeseen incidents happens in real life particularly in science,medical and engineering.These part time teacher can provide very smart solution.

Mabe they have great experience, so their opinions should be taken under concideration.

Tomasz

Yes they can and they can also do it well, depending on their training, experience and speciality. It is a way to keep themselves current on the subject to be taught. In fact some private hospitals can be accredited to train house officers (Interns), Residents in General Medical Practice