TEMPLATE DESIGN © Faculty Response to Development of an Innovative Consultation-Liaison Psychiatry Curriculum J Hunter, S Ali, S Bhalareo, C Desouza, R Hawa, R Maunder, S Sockalingam, G Tennen, M Halman, R Jankalns, M Elliott. Background Results (2) Academic impact: Conclusion Discussion Methods What it was The University of Toronto CL Psychiatry Core Curriculum was previously weekly ‘canned’ lectures, repeated every 6 months for 8-12 PGY-4 residents. Why it changed  Poor attendance resulted in ineffective teaching that was frustrating for both students and teachers.  There was a need to standardize residents’ experience across several teaching sites and increase the effective use of technology in teaching.  A new Program Head decided to re-invigorate programmatic cohesion by identifying education as the common, shared activity in a large and distributed department. What it is now  A monthly 7-hour ‘mini-conference’ with interactive team teaching by 2-3 faculty per day, course director and program head.  Faculty members from 6 hospitals participate. Junior faculty were especially encouraged.  Content focuses on basic clinical competency organized around key clinical topics: Getting Started, Low Mood, The Agitated Patient, the Difficult Patient, Food, Sex & Sleep, Death & Dying.  A developmental perspective and specific disease foci are integrated via case examples.  Throughout there is an emphasis on collaboration, integration, and affiliation.  The last day includes an OSCE on course material with formative feedback. Purpose Little is known about how curriculum development affects faculty. We examined benefits and costs to faculty associated with the creation of a new CL Psychiatry Core Curriculum.  Qualitative data was collected from participating faculty during curriculum meetings.  A focus group of some participating faculty occurred after 2 iterations of the new curriculum.  A subsequent anonymous survey of all participating faculty evaluated the focus group feedback, and invited further input. Faculty experienced curricular redevelopment as overwhelmingly positive with:  increased personal recognition and cohesion within the group  a re-energizing of their own teaching goals  frequently a change in clinical practice.  Curriculum renewal can be a powerful opportunity for faculty development.  Curriculum renewal can benefit faculty as academicians, clinicians and colleagues.  Curriculum development included approximately 60 person-hours of planning meetings and a final curriculum involving over 151 person-hours of shared teaching. Programmatic faculty involvement in the core curriculum increased from 18% to 48%.  The survey was performed as a QA exercise, with a response rate of 78% (18/23). Survey results are shown graphically, with focus group themes added beneath: (1) Increased exposure to colleagues:  Expansion of referral networks  Awareness of other practitioners’ scope of practice  Increased sense of affiliation, especially for previously isolated individuals (ex. a paediatric CL doctor who has only a small hospital-based group) (3) Impact on practice: (4) Costs:  Validation of one’s own practice values-e.g. the confirmation that the developmental perspective or neuropsychiatric evaluation is valuable enough to be assigned time within a constrained educational envelope  It is an opportunity to practice strategies learned in educational scholars program  Capacity to use involvement to justify increased support via Academic Trust Funds  Sense of renewed personal expertise and confidence  Look for opportunities for team teaching  Improved ability to do group teaching  I'm doing more interactive teaching, learning from senior colleagues and getting ideas from them on improving teaching  The seminars have served as continuing education opportunities and I'm now using some of the tools discussed that I wasn't before (ie. MOCA)  Increased confidence in managing infrequently seen clinical presentations Number of responses Not at allA lot Not at all A lot