1. Sarah B. Zahl, Ph.D. and Sherry A. Jimenez, Ed.D. Using iPads Exclusively at a Start Up Medical School: Accomplishments and Challenges

2. Overview iPads in Medical Education MUCOM Background Exclusive Use of iPads  Student & Faculty Feedback Faculty Development Recommendations Discussion

3. iPads in Medical Education UME: students find value in the use of iPads in their education 1  Mixed attitudes toward the integration of iPads in the curriculum  Majority: cannot replace printed handouts Current generation of medical students technologically advanced 2  Prefer the use of multiple technologies in their learning  Want blended approach: traditional classroom mixed with online learning tools (blogs, wikis, resources) 1. George, Dumenco, Doyle, & Dollase (2013) 2. Sandars & Morrison (2007)

4. iPads in Medical Education Recent estimates: 25% of US medical schools require use of iPads 1 Exclusive use of iPads is relatively new 2 Reported benefits: increased student satisfaction, cost savings, innovative course materials, higher exam scores 1 1. Omori, Wong, & Nishimura (2013) 2. George, Dumenco, Doyle, & Dollase (2013) Burns School of Medicine, University of Hawaii at Manoa

6. Marian COM Inaugural Class: Admitted Fall 2013 Traditional students Courses focus on systems Competency Based Curriculum and Assessments All students receive iPads at orientation

7. Exclusive Use of iPads All Assessments: Written Exams, Quizzes, Practicals, Sims, OSCEs Students and faculty Course Evaluations Course Resources  Library materials, articles, slides, databases, Tegrity recordings, podcasts Textbooks Faculty Development

8. Assessments Online Exam Administration: ExamSoft  Tracking student performance data in real time  Competencies: National Board of Osteopathic Medical Examiners (NBOME)

9. Assessments Rubrics: Practical Exams, Simulations, OSCEs

10. Assessments Course Evaluations: evaluation of guest clinicians via link in LMS  Open for full course to allow students to evaluate on iPad in real time  Increased response rate

11. Assessments: Feedback  Student and faculty feedback generally positive Convenience Results and reports in real time  Challenges Security policies Practical aspects: battery power, technical issues, compatibility Student Expectations: want to see all questions and correct answers Student expectation of instant results Combining data from two systems

12. Course Resources Students connect to resources during learning activities  Articles, lecture slides, Digital Slidebox, Tegrity recordings  Vital Source, Access Medicine, Clinical Key Findings from Post Course Focus groups:  Students are printing hundreds of pages of material  Issues with access off campus  Purchasing different apps or modified versions in addition to paid materials  Students not attending class unless materials posted in advance

13. Course Resources Textbooks: Survey (91% response rate)  If given the choice, would you pay to use Vital Source again? Yes – 54%No - 46%  Would you prefer to purchase your own books? Yes – 55%No – 45%  Inconvenient to use multiple sources at the same time  No access after 4 years; can highlight and keep paper textbooks  Want the option to choose Survey Credit: Marian COM SGA

14. Faculty Development Are you using mobile devices to support faculty development?

15. Faculty Development Full time faculty: training modules in LMS  Assessment via iPad rather than paper  Must be accessible via mobile devices Guest clinicians and lecturers  Targeted training on systems and exam item submission Osteopathic principles  Video training

16. Recommendations Tech Support Ongoing Faculty development  Coupling LMS site with summer workshops  New technologies Applications for library resources, updates, etc. Ease of Use  Embedded Assessment  Compatibility  Security

17. Discussion Questions?

18. References George, P., Dumenco, L., Doyle, R., & Dollase, R. (2013). Incorporating iPads into a preclinical curriculum: A pilot study. Medical Teacher, 35 (3), 226-230. Sandars, J., & Morrison, C. (2007). What is the net generation? The challenge for future medical education. Medical Teacher, 29, 85-88.