From leadership research to district action: Fostering Interprofessional Education and Practice: Organizational Outcomes of a Faculty Development Program for Educators Across Health Professions

AI-assisted editorial implementation guide. Proposed district actions are separate from the original authors’ findings and recommendations. Independent peer review of this guide is not asserted.

Read source Search paper agent CC BY 4.0

Evidence and transfer

Education-related source: verify which participants, institutions and outcomes were actually studied before district adoption. Source publication type: research-article. License and identity checks do not establish study quality or causality.

Original authors’ abstract, reproduced under the source license:

Background The role of clinician educators has expanded to encompass diverse responsibilities alongside providing competent care and engaging in scholarly activities. Faculty development (FD) programs have emerged as vital tools for equipping educators with teaching skills and career advancement opportunities. However, assessing faculty development programs’ impact on organizational culture remains challenging due to their multifaceted nature. This study explores this gap to understand how faculty development influences organizational culture. Methods This qualitative study used a constructivist approach to explore faculty perspectives on the Uniformed Services University of the Health Sciences (USU) Faculty Development Program’s influence on organizational culture. Forty-three faculty members participated in nine semi-structured focus groups, selected for diversity across roles and locations. Interviews were recorded, transcribed, and anonymized to ensure accuracy and participant confidentiality. Data analysis Transcripts were analyzed using thematic analysis. A multidisciplinary team independently reviewed transcripts, identified preliminary codes, and refined themes through iterative consensus building. Coding was organized using memos and grouped into themes. Using information power principles, the team determined that nine focus groups provided sufficient data richness to meet the study’s aims. Results The research team identified and refined four central themes: professionalization, legitimization, the value of community, and leadership impact. The participants reported a greater sense of professionalization through enhanced teaching skills, increased awareness of educational literature, and heightened confidence in their educator roles. The faculty development program fostered a strong community, promoting collaboration, knowledge sharing, and mutual support across specialties and locations. Leadership impact was evident at individual and institutional levels, increasing confidence, mentorship, and organizational support. Conclusions This study provides valuable insights into the organizational impact of faculty development programs, shedding light on how such initiatives influence faculty experiences and organizational culture. Future research should explore leadership values, faculty retention, burnout prevention, and the broader value of education within academic institutions.

Study methods

A constructivist approach was well-suited for this study, allowing for the in-depth exploration of faculty perspectives on how the USU Faculty Development Program influences organizational culture within the Military Health System (MHS). The study aimed to understand not only the perceived value of the program but also the factors that strengthen or undermine organizational culture.

Limitations

One limitation is that this was only one organization. However, we have a complex organization with several suborganizations, and the themes were consistent. Next, our participants may have conflated the organization of the military with the organization of academics. This conflation is difficult to minimize in our organization’s context; however, we attempted to mitigate this by repeatedly emphasizing the distinction during the focus groups and in the invitation. Lastly, we could have selection bias where faculty most invested in the FD program were participating. However, we had some participants with more negatively phrased comments and critiques of the program, and despite this, the overall themes remained consistent.

A 90-day district inquiry

Days 1–15 · Appraise. Read the source methods, recruitment, comparator, outcomes and limitations. Record how the study setting differs from your district and which claim the design can support.
Days 16–30 · Design. Choose one school improvement question with teachers. Protect a short shared planning cycle, agree an instructional change and use a common rubric for examining student work. Agree participation, privacy protections, baseline and stopping rules before starting.
Days 31–60 · Observe. Collect the pre-agreed measures, keep a log of implementation changes and invite confidential voluntary feedback. Preserve existing support for staff and learners.
Days 61–90 · Decide. Review implementation fidelity, teacher time and independently scored student work against a recorded baseline. Examine access differences and competing explanations before attributing changes to leadership. Make a dated decision to stop, revise or extend the inquiry.

Board decision brief

Present the local problem, source setting, evidence limits, intervention, responsible owner, total cost, measured changes and uncertainty. Separate staff perceptions, implementation measures and student learning outcomes.

Attribution and reuse

Gayle Haischer-Rollo; Diane Hale; James D Honeycutt; Rhiana Saunders; William Bowers; Ryan Sanborn; Reece Tuckerman; John Nowell; Thomas McFate; Jessica Servey. Fostering Interprofessional Education and Practice: Organizational Outcomes of a Faculty Development Program for Educators Across Health Professions. Cureus (2025-05-29). https://doi.org/10.7759/cureus.85022

Prepared 2026-11-07. Source authorship and DOI are preserved. The abstract and source passages are attributed extracts; this editorial guide is offered under the same CC BY 4.0 license.