BOARD of GOVERNORS in supersession

of Medical Council of India

National Faculty Development Program

Knows Knows how Shows Shows how Performs

Perform Learn Teach Interpret

Nodal Centres Knowledge

Communicate
Faculty Development
Initiatives: AETCOM

10 years’ experience - Status

Report
WORKSHOP
Demonstrate

Observe Skills Medical Colleges Regional Centres

Knowledge Skills Attitude Values Communication

 Faculty development initiatives for the
Undergraduate Medical Education
Program: ten years’ experience – status
report

2009-2018

Medical Council of India

Pocket-14, Sector-8, Dwarka,
New Delhi- 110077

2
All rights reserved. No part of this publication/document may be reproduced, distributed,
published or transmitted in any form or by any means, including photocopying, recording, or
other electronic or mechanical methods, without the prior written permission from Medical
Council of India, except for use in Curriculum Implementation Support Program by medical
teachers and institutions as well as in the case of brief quotations embodied in critical
reviews and certain other non-commercial uses permitted by copyright law 2019.

How to Cite: Medical Council of India. Faculty Development initiatives for the
Undergraduate Medical Education Program, ten years’ experience –status report, 2020:
pp 1-24.

3
Contributors:

1. Dr. M. Rajalakshmi
Chief Consultant, Academic Cell
Medical Council of India, Pocket-14, Phase-1, Sector - 8, Dwarka,
New Delhi

2. Dr. Praveen Singh

Professor and Head, Departments of Anatomy and Medical Education
Convener, MCI Nodal Centre for Faculty Development
Pramukhswami Medical College, Karamsad, Gujarat

3. Dr. P.V. Vijayaraghavan

Vice Chancellor and Professor of Orthopedics,
Convener, MCI Nodal Centre for Faculty Development,
Sri Ramachandra Medical College and Research Institute,
Porur, Chennai

4. Dr. P.V. Chalam

Convener, MCI Regional Centre for Faculty Development
Gandhi Medical College, Secunderabad, Telengana
Currently, Principal and Professor, Department of Surgery
Bhaskar Medical College, RR Dist., Telangana

5. Dr. R. Sajith Kumar

Convener, MCI Nodal Centre for Faculty Development
Professor and Head,
Departments of Infectious Disease and Medical Education
Government Medical College, Kottayam, Kerala

6. Dr. Tripti Shrivastava,

Convener, MCI Nodal Centre for Faculty Development,
Professor, Department of Physiology,
Jawaharlal Nehru Medical College,
Sawangi (Meghe).
Wardha, Maharashtra

7. Dr. Sanjiv Lewin

Convener, MCI Nodal Centre for Faculty Development,
Professor, Department of Pediatrics
St. John’s Medical College,
Bangalore

8. Dr. Nirmala Rege

Convener, MCI Nodal Centre for Faculty Development,
Professor & Head,
Department of Pharmacology & Therapeutics
Seth GS Medical College & KEM Hospital
Mumbai

9. Dr. Sukhwant Bose

Convener, MCI Regional Centre for Faculty Development,
Director Professor of Physiology
Sri Aurobindo Institute of Medical Sciences
Indore
6
10. Dr. Shally Awasthi
Convener, MCI Regional Centre for Faculty Development,
Professor of Pediatrics
King George’s Medical University
Lucknow.

11. Dr. Payal Bansal,

Convener, MCI Regional Centre for Faculty Development
Professor of Medical Education,
Institute of Medical Education Technology & Teachers’ Training,
Maharashtra University of Health Sciences (MUHS),
Maharashtra

12. Dr. Latha Ravichandran,

Co-Convener, MCI Nodal Centre for Faculty Development,
Professor, Department of Pediatrics
Sri Ramachandra Medical College and Research Institute,
Porur, Chennai – 600 116

13. Dr. Gagandeep Kwatra,

Co-Convener, MCI Nodal Centre for Faculty Development,
Professor of Pharmacology
Christian Medical College,
Ludhiana

14. Dr. S. Sitalakshmi

Co-Convener, MCI Nodal Centre for Faculty Development,
Professor of Clinical Pathology and Transfusion Medicine
St. John's Medical College
Bangalore

15. Dr. Padmaja Walvekar,

Co-Convener, MCI Nodal Centre for Faculty Development,
Professor of Community Medicine
J N Medical College, Belagavi

Acknowledgements

We are grateful to the successive Board of Governors and Secretary General, Medical
Council of India for supporting the Faculty Development Program. We are also grateful to
Prof. Kusum Verma and Prof. Ved Prakash Mishra, who chaired the Academic Committee
during this reporting period and guided the Academic Cell in the conduct of the Faculty
Development Program, from time to time.

The Academic Cell is grateful to the members of the Expert group who provided guidance
and continuous intellectual inputs on the changes needed in the Faculty Development
program, curricular governance and preparation of modules for implementation of new UG
curriculum. Dr. Avinah Supe, Chairman of the Expert Group was a pillar of knowledge and
strength guiding all members through various intellectual activities and accompanying
difficulties with utmost patience and consideration; we are indeed fortunate to have his
advice and guidance through many difficult times. Dr. Krishna Seshadri, Member of the
Expert Group has been of immense support to me and to the Academic Cell with his
intellectual inputs in all areas particularly curriculum development and curriculum
7
governance and preparation of various modules, enriching the deliberations of the Expert
Group discussions and challenging the thought processes of all members. Dr. Tejinder
Singh with his profound knowledge in medical education was one of the first experts who
prepared the basic course workshop program framework for the first Faculty Development
Program; the current program owes much to his knowledge and uncompromising attention
to detail. Dr. Subir Maulick has been of great support in developing various protocols and
improving the quality of the modules. The contributors are thankful to the Conveners/Co-
conveners of the following Nodal/Regional Centres for their commitment and cooperation in
the conduct of FDP, which is responsible for it to have become, perhaps, the largest Faculty
Development Program of the country:

 Dr. Varsha Patel, Dr. Kirti Patel & Dr. Aparajitha Shukla, Nodal Centre, Smt. NHL Municipal
Medical College, Ahmedabad;
 Dr. Swaran Rekha & Dr. John Stephens, St. John’s Medical College, Bangalore;
 Dr. Lillykutty Pothan, Government Medical College, Kottayam;
 Dr. Himanshu Pandya & Dr. Suman Singh, Pramukhswami Medical College, Karamsad;
 Dr. rahmi Vyas, Dr. Dayakani Selvakumar & Dr. Minnie Faith, Christian Medical College,
Vellore;
 Dr. Sunita Patil, Dr. Roopa Bellad & Dr. Nayana Hashilkar, JLN Medical College, Belagavi;
 Dr. J.M. Kaul & Dr. Devender Kumar, Maulana Azad Medical College, Delhi;
 Dr. NVN Reddy, Gandhi Medical College, Secunderabad;
 Dr. Ravi Venketacahalam, Dr. KVV Vijayakumar, & Dr. B. Devi Madhavi, Andhra Medical
College, Vishakhapatnam;
 Dr. Kaushik Mishra & Dr. Srikanta Panda, SCB Medical College, Cuttack;
 Dr. Apul Goel, KGMU, Lucknow;
 Dr. Deepanjali Lomte, MUHS, Nashik;
 Dr. Asma Rahim, Dr. Geeta Govindraj & Dr. Priya Chandran, Government Medical College,
Kozhikode;
 Dr. Vinita Kalra, Dr. Juhi Kalra, & Dr. Deepa Singh, Himalayan Institute of Medical Sciences,
Dehradun;
 Dr. Kadambari & Dr. Z. Zayapragassarazan, JIPMER, Puducherry,
 and the current Conveners of the MCI Nodal and Regional Centres who have spent their
time, knowledge and intellectual resources in establishing, nurturing and developing their
respective Centres and conducting FDP at their institutions and in the colleges allocated to
them with great perseverance and devotion even under very difficult circumstances. The
success of the FDPs carried out under MCI umbrella would not have been possible
without the inputs of the faculty of the Department of Medical Education in these MCI
Centres.

 The Academic Cell is thankful to Mrs Savita Gulati of the Academic Cell for meticulous
documentation of the details of the FDP, and to Mr. Anupam Dhua and Mr. Kamlesh Kumar
of the Computer Centre, MCI for systematic recording of FDP activities on the MCI website.

8
Abstract

In the specialty of medical education, Faculty development (FD) is an important component

meant for expertise development and academic enrichment. India has the highest number
of medical colleges and consequently the highest number of medically qualified faculty.
Medical Council of India (MCI) initiated in 2009 the Faculty Development Program (FDP)
such as the Basic Course Workshop in Medical Education Technologies in conjunction with
Orientation Program for MEU coordinators at the national level. Today, the FDP is being
conducted by MCI at 10 Nodal and 12 Regional Centers across the country. Till December
2018, MCI has funded 904 pre-revised Basic Course Workshops, 520 revised Basic Course
Workshops and 273 workshops on Attitude, Ethics and Communication module. Totally,
44,932 faculty have been trained in these Workshops. This longitudinal program has already
created a network of trained faculty members who are now contributing to medical education
in the country in various capacities including implementation of curriculum reforms and on-
line training of medical college teachers in the nuances of the new competency based UG
curriculum, as mandated by MCI. This trained pool of faculty will cater to the ever-expanding
need for trainers to conduct curriculum design and implementation.

Key words: Faculty development, Basic Course Workshop, AETCOM, Advance Course,
Nodal Centres, Regional Centres

Background

Medical education program in India is one of the largest in the globe, producing high
quality physicians many of whom emigrate to the United States, the United Kingdom, and
several other countries in search of better career prospects. Therefore, the quality of medical
education in India has a broad global impact1. There was a marked increase in the number
of medical colleges in India offering undergraduate medical courses in the past 10 years,
increasing from 297 colleges in 2009 (146 in the Government sector and 151 in the private
sector) to the current total of 542 medical colleges in 2019 (280 in the Government sector
and 262 in the private sector)2. Due to the consequent increase in medical teachers in the
country, quality sustenance and quality enhancement of medical education has become a
matter of national and global concern3,4. The major issue is to ensure maintenance of quality
and standardization of medical education across a large, culturally diverse population,

9
separated by geographical boundaries, and compounded by the paucity of formal training
of medical teachers in the principles of higher education and technology5,6.
Medical Council of India (MCI), the central regulatory body in charge of medical
education since 1934, has set Minimum Standard Requirements in terms of infrastructure,
equipment and manpower as prerequisite for medical Institutes to be allowed to start
undergraduate and postgraduate medical courses. Recognising the need for better
equipping the medical teachers with core competencies in clinical training, laboratory
methodologies, interpretation skills, assessment strategies and communication abilities,
MCI, notified the Regulations on Graduate Medical Education (1997) which mandated the
establishment of Medical Education Units (MEUs) or departments in all medical colleges to
impart teaching skills and facilitate transition towards use of modern education
technologies7. But, the MEUs established by many medical colleges were non-functional
and prompted MCI to initiate urgent remedial measures like introduction of Faculty
Development Programs.

Faculty development in medical education involves activities “designed to improve an

individual’s knowledge and skills in areas considered essential to the performance of a
faculty member as a medical teacher”4. Realising the dire need for a systematic approach
to faculty development in consonance with the desired attributes of an Indian Medical
Graduate, MCI initiated a National Faculty Development Program in 2009 covering all
medical colleges in India which are under the ambit of MCI. Strategic planning for this was
done by the Academic Cell of MCI and experts in medical education. This was administered
through the Academic Cell of MCI with the mandate to ensure a uniform quality of faculty
training and resultant quality teaching in medical colleges across the country by adequately
trained faculty. This unique Faculty Development Program (FDP) in medical education, with
the goal of capacity building, undertaken for the first time by a regulatory body started in
2009 by launching Regional Centres (RCs) in Medical Education Technologies, coinciding
with the Platinum Jubilee celebrations of MCI. The Executive Committee of MCI in the
meeting held on March 9, 2009 decided that the Regional Centres identified by MCI would
implement the Faculty Development Program by conducting the first workshop from 1-3 July,
2009. Accordingly, five institutions viz., Christian Medical College, Ludhiana, Jawaharlal
Nehru Medical College, Wardha, Smt. NHL Municipal Medical College, Ahmedabad, Sri
Ramachandra Medical College & Research Institute, Chennai and St. John’s Medical
College, Bangalore launched Regional Centres in their respective institutions (Table 1) by
starting the first Basic Course Workshop in Medical Education Technologies (BCW) on July
10
1, 2009. The program for the course was prepared by a group of experts; quality of training
imparted was monitored by (a) deputing a Resource faculty from the Regional Centre as
observer to all MET training programs run by medical colleges, and (b) feedback from the
Observer was channeled back to the college for taking appropriate corrective measures.
Later, Regional Centres in MET were launched at Seth GS Medical College & KEM hospital,
Mumbai on September 8, 2009 and at Maulana Azad Medical College, New Delhi on
November 3, 2009. Additional Regional Centres in MET to reach a maximum of 20 Regional
Centres by 2018 were identified gradually, after rigorous monitoring of Faculty Development
Programs conducted by various medical institutions. The aim of this program was to
sensitize, equip and empower medical teachers in discharging their teaching responsibilities
in a cogent manner and to prepare institutions and faculty members execute various
significant roles and responsibilities entrusted to them towards improving medical education.

In 2014, the Academic Council and Executive Committee of MCI made an important
recommendation with significant future implications to the Faculty Development Program,
that “training in Basic Course Workshop in MET would be compulsory for faculty of all the
medical colleges at all levels including Professors and teacher administrators”. Recently this
decision has been notified by MCI and gave a much required encouragement and thrust to
the FDP. Simultaneously in January 2014, nine of the 20 Regional Centres were upgraded
as Nodal Centres in Medical Education with the mandate to start the Advance Course in
Medical Education (Table 1) in addition to the Basic Course in MET. One more Regional
Centre at Jawaharlal Nehru Medical College, Belagavi was upgraded later as a Nodal
Centre in medical education. The program of BCW was revised by the Expert Group to make
it more contemporary and was named revised Basic Course Workshop.

Table 1: List of MCI Regional/Nodal Centres in India and date of launching

S. No. Regional Centre Date of launching

1. Christian Medical College, Ludhiana* July 1, 2009

2. Jawaharlal Nehru Medical College, Wardha* July 1, 2009
3. Smt. NHL Municipal Medical College, Ahmedabad* July 1, 2009
4. Sri Ramachandra Medical College & Research Institute,
Chennai* July 1, 2009
5. St. John’s Medical college, Bangalore* July 1, 2009
6. Seth GS medical College & KEM hospital, Mumbai* September 8, 2009
7. Maulana Azad Medical College, New Delhi November 3, 2009
8. Gandhi Medical College, Secunderabad, Telengana May 19, 2010
9. Government Medical College, Kottayam* September 6, 2010
11
10. SCB Medical College, Cuttack November 26, 2010
11. Pramukhswami Medical College, Karamsad* December 10, 2010
12. Christian Medical College, Vellore* February 15, 2011
13. Maharashtra University of Health Sciences, Nashik March 23, 2011
14. Jawaharlal Nehru Medical College, Belagavi* May 14, 2011
15. Sri Aurobindo Institute of Medical Sciences, Indore May 26, 2011
16. Government Medical College, Kozhikode September 1, 2011
17. King George’s Medical University, Lucknow April 2, 2012
18. Andhra Medical College, Visakhapatnam February 6, 2013
19. Himalayan Institute of Medical Sciences, Dehradun August 2, 2014
20. JIPMER, Puducherry July 6, 2015

* updated as Nodal Centre in Medical Education in 2014

Details of the Faculty Development Program (FDP) of MCI:

The details of FDP conducted by MCI are given below:

1. Basic course workshop (BCW) in Medical Education Technologies (2009-2014):

The Basic Course Workshop in Medical Education Technologies was started in the
year 2009 and continued until 2014. It was envisaged then that all faculty members in
medical colleges should undergo training in this Course during early part of his/her career,
preferably during the joining year. The course was of three days duration and covered all
three curricular components viz. educational objectives, teaching-learning methods and
assessment. A key component of the course design was the insights into principles of adult
learning and their role in shifting the teaching-learning process from teacher-centred to
being student-centred. Emphasis was given to interactive teaching as well as promotion
of self-directed learning as detailed in various sessions and their objectives (Table 2).
Additionally, leadership skills were introduced through sessions on systems approach,
group dynamics and educational networking. The concepts of competency based
education with special reference to the Indian Medical Graduate brought a unique national
perspective to the Faculty Development Program. Sessions on giving feedback on written
and performance assessment were introduced to enhance the quality of formative
assessments. Experts who developed the curriculum wrote faculty guides and specific
modules (available on MCI website) and identified resources that the Regional and Nodal
Centres could refer to for preparing the sessions. This played a critical role in ensuring
uniformity and quality across all the RC’s and NC’s across the country. Training was
imparted at MCI to the RC and NC faculty for the implementation of the competency based
UG curriculum. When courses were conducted in medical colleges, an Observer from the
12
 respective Nodal/Regional Centre monitored the conduct of the program. The Council also
provided financial support to the MCI Centres to conduct various FDPs like Basic Course
workshops (pre-revised & revised), AETCOM program and Advance Course in Medical
Education. The uniqueness of the MCI FDP program lies in the fact that a regulator of
medical education of a country took up the important task of capacity building of faculty
with rigorous implementation of the quality control of the programs. We could not find any
reference where a regulator is involved in capacity building in the field of Medical
education.

Table 2. Program of the revised Basic Course Workshop

Sessions and Objectives

 Concept of group dynamics and team based functioning

 System’s approach, Principles of adult learning, Learning process
 Competency based medical education: Indian Medical Graduate – Goals, roles
 Learning domains and progression of learning
 Interactive and Innovative teaching methods including Large Group (Demo),
Small Group (with demo) and appropriate use of media
 Writing a lesson plan appropriate to the objectives and teaching learning methods
 Effective clinical and practical skill teaching
 Relationship between objectives, learning and assessment; utility of assessment
 Writing the correct essay question, short answer question and MCQ
 Internal assessment and Formative assessment
 Feedback: giving feedback to students
 Improving self-directed learning (SDL) through technology
 Discussion on Attitude, Ethics and Communication (AETCOM Module):
Reflections and Narratives
 Educational networking - creating a network of educators

Results of BCW training (no. of faculty trained & workshops conducted):

From 2009-2014, 23,591 teachers were trained in 904 pre-revised Basic Course
Workshops by the 20 Regional Centres and medical colleges (Table 3); of this, 9,235
teachers were trained by Regional Centres in 342 pre-revised Basic Course workshops

13
 while medical colleges trained 14,356 teachers in 562 workshops under supervision of
observer from Regional Centres (Table 3).

Table 3: Details of teachers trained by Regional Centres and medical colleges in pre-
revised Basic Course Workshop (BCW)

Sr. No. Number of teachers Number of teachers trained

trained in BCWs in BCWs conducted at
conducted at RCs medical colleges
Name of the Nodal/Regional Centre Teachers Workshops Teachers Workshops
trained conducted trained conducted
1. Christian Medical College, Ludhiana 515 15 755 28
2. Jawaharlal Nehru Medical College, Wardha 455 17 1009 38
3. Smt. NHL Municipal Medical College, 678 23 940 35
Ahmedabad
4. Sri Ramachandra Medical College & Research 743 29 1603 70
Institute, Chennai
5. St. John’s Medical College, Bangalore 526 19 1,137 42

6. Maulana Azad Medical College, New Delhi 458 19 380 16

7. Seth GS Medical College & KEM Hospital, 632 20 683 25
Mumbai
8. Gandhi Medical College, Secunderabad 550 20 388 14
9. Government Medical College, Kottayam 564 21 734 28
10. SCB Medical College, Cuttack 389 15 410 15
11. Pramukhswami Medical College, Karamsad 540 23 1,920 76
12. Christian Medical College, Vellore 597 22 746 30
13. Maharashtra University of Health Sciences, 414 19 1,068 38
Nashik

14. Jawarharlal Nehru Medical College, Belagavi 486 16 645 22

15. Sri Aurobindo Institute of Medical Sciences, 507 20 531 24
Indore
16. Government Medical College, Calicut 366 15 421 18

17. King George’s Medical University, Lucknow 373 12 555 25

18. Andhra Medical College, Visahkapatnam 286 10 351 14

19. Himalayan Institute of Medical Sciences, 126 06 80 04

Dehradun
20. JIPMER, Puducherry 30 01 - -
No. of pre-revised BCW workshops 9,235 342 14,356 562
conducted & teachers trained

Total number of teachers trained: 9,235 + 14,356 = 23,591

Total No. of workshops conducted: 342 + 562 = 904
14
2. Revised Basic course workshop (rBCW) in Medical Education Technologies

After the Basic Course Workshop in MET in its initial format was operational up to
2014, and based on the experience gained at Regional/Nodal Centers and feedback from
faculty as well as participants, the Expert Group meeting in December 2014 revised the
course contents to make it more contemporary and to be in tune with the broader
objectives of the proposed revised Regulations on Graduate Medical Education, 2019 part
II and the competency based UG curriculum under preparation. The program of the
revised Basic Course Workshop was meant to provide basic knowledge, skills, attitude
and communication skills to faculty in medical colleges which they can apply in day to day
practice in different areas of teaching and assessment (classroom, laboratory, clinical, field
work).

Results of revised BCW training (no. of faculty trained & workshops conducted):

Until December 2018, Nodal & Regional Centres together had trained 6,170 faculty
in the revised Basic Course Workshop, by organizing 222 revised Basic Course workshops
at the Nodal and Regional Centres (Table 4). Once the MEU faculty of the medical colleges
were trained at these centres, colleges were allowed to conduct training in revised Basic
Course Workshop (rBCW) to their faculty under supervision of observer from
Regional/Nodal Centres. Until December 2018, 7,819 medical college faculty have been
trained in 298 revised Basic Course workshops in the colleges (Table 4). Thus, total of
13,989 faculty have been trained in 520 revised Basic Course workshops until
December, 2018.

15
Table 4: Details of teachers trained by Nodal & Regional Centres and medical colleges in
revised Basic Course Workshop (rBCW) (from January 2015 to December 2018)

Sr. Details of training in Revised Basic Course

No. rBCW at NCs & Workshops in medical
RCs colleges
Name of the Nodal/Regional Centre No. of No. of No. of No. of
teachers rBCW teachers Workshops
trained done trained held
in rBCW
1. Christian Medical College, Ludhiana 206 7 226 08
2. Jawaharlal Nehru Medical College, Wardha 188 7 421 16
3. Smt. NHL Municipal Medical College, 240 9 447 18
Ahmedabad
4. Sri Ramachandra Medical College & Research 312 11 578 21
Institute, Chennai
5. St. John’s Medical College, Bangalore 339 12 634 24

6. Maulana Azad Medical College, New Delhi 508 18 358 14

7. Seth GS Medical College & KEM Hospital, 321 11 680 24
Mumbai
8. Gandhi Medical College, Secunderabad 405 14 323 11
9. Government Medical College, Kottayam 335 11 544 23
10. SCB Medical College, Cuttack 394 14 215 08
11. Pramukhswami Medical College, Karamsad 231 9 510 21
12. Christian Medical College, Vellore 323 11 375 14
13. Maharashtra University of Health Sciences, 222 8 366 13
Nashik
14. Jawarharlal Nehru Medical College, Belagavi 307 11 312 11
15. Sri Aurobindo Institute of Medical Sciences, 263 11 136 06
Indore
16. Government Medical College, Calicut 349 12 254 09
17. King George’s Medical University, Lucknow 445 16 686 29

18. Andhra Medical College, Visahkapatnam 228 8 286 10

19. Himalayan Institute of Medical Sciences, 335 14 110 05
Dehradun
20. JIPMER, Puducherry 219 8 358 13

No. of teachers trained 6170 222 7819 298

Number of teachers trained in rBCW in RCs & NCs & colleges: 6,170 + 7819 = 13,989
Total No. of workshops conducted: 222 + 298 = 520
16
3. Training in Attitude, Ethics Communication (AETCOM) module

The Medical Council of India introduced a one-day training course in Attitude, Ethics
and Communication (AETCOM) competencies from July, 20158. The module was
published by MCI in 2018.

The AETCOM module endeavors to strike a balance between the five identified roles
of an ‘Indian Medical Graduate (IMG)’ viz; Clinician, Leader and Member of health care
team, Communicator, Life-long learner and Professional, right from the first professional
year of training. This module is based on the premise that changing a person's attitude
can change his/her behavior. This module consists of various competency-based case
scenarios to be conducted in small groups in class rooms. The proposed teaching-learning
and assessment methods for implementation of this module across the three professional
years are also given. It was envisaged that the successful implementation of the AETCOM
module will be the forerunner of the transition to competency based undergraduate
medical education program proposed by Medical Council of India.

In 2015, teaching of the AETCOM module was mandatorily introduced in the FDP
after conduct of each 3-day revised Basic Course Workshop, with competency based
instruction as a component, initially at the Regional and Nodal Centres and since 2018, in
all Faculty Development Programs held in colleges, Regional and Nodal Centres.

Results of AETCOM training (no. of faculty trained & workshops conducted):

Until December 2018, Nodal & Regional Centres together have trained 6020 faculty
in AETCOM module in 224 workshops at the Regional and Nodal Centres (Table 5). In
medical colleges, 1332 teachers were trained in 49 AETCOM workshops conducted under
observership from Centres (Table 5). Thus, total of 7,352 faculty have been trained in
273 AETCOM workshops until December, 2018.

17
Table 5: Details of teachers trained by Nodal & Regional Centres and medical colleges in
AETCOM module (from January 2015 to December 2018)

Sr. Details of training in AETCOM Workshops

No. AETCOM at NCs & in medical colleges
RCs
Name of the Nodal/Regional Centre
No. of No. of No. of No. of
teachers AETCOM teachers Workshops
trained Workshops trained held
done
1. Christian Medical College, Ludhiana 242 9 111 04
2. Jawaharlal Nehru Medical College, Wardha 238 9 59 02
3. Smt. NHL Municipal Medical College, 220 8 75 03
Ahmedabad
4. Sri Ramachandra Medical College & 251 10 50 02
Research Institute, Chennai
5. St. John’s Medical College, Bangalore 378 14 nil nil

6. Maulana Azad Medical College, New Delhi 315 11 30 01

7. Seth GS Medical College & KEM Hospital, 341 12 291 10
Mumbai
8. Gandhi Medical College, Secunderabad 305 11 57 02
9. Government Medical College, Kottayam 316 11 36 02
10. SCB Medical College, Cuttack 354 13 NIL NIL
11. Pramukhswami Medical College, Karamsad 278 11 123 05
12. Christian Medical College, Vellore 279 10 29 01
13. Maharashtra University of Health Sciences, 230 9 NIL NIL
Nashik
14. Jawarharlal Nehru Medical College, Belagavi 269 10 30 01
15. Sri Aurobindo Institute of Medical Sciences, 300 11 22 01
Indore
16. Government Medical College, Calicut 362 13 117 04
17. King George’s Medical University, Lucknow 491 18 127 05

18. Andhra Medical College, Visahkapatnam 268 10 85 03

19. Himalayan Institute of Medical Sciences, 353 15 30 01

Dehradun
20. JIPMER, Puducherry 230 9 60 02

No. of teachers trained in AETCOM module 6020 224 1332 49

Number of teachers trained in AETCOM in RCs & NCs & colleges: 6,020 + 1332 = 7,352
No. of workshops conducted: 224 + 49 = 273
18
 Thus, under the Faculty Development Program of MCI, 44,932 faculty have updated
their basic knowledge in medical education in 1697 workshops conducted by Regional and
Nodal Centres and medical colleges combined, from 2009 until December 2018, as given
below.

Summary of training of teachers in Faculty Development Program

Name of the Workshop No. of teachers No. of workshops

Trained conducted

Pre-revised Basic Course Workshop 23,591 904

Revised Basic Course Workshop 13,989 520
AETCOM 7,352 273

Total no. of teachers trained in NCs/RCs/MCs in BCW (pre & post revision) +
AETCOM=23591+13,989 + 7,352 = 44,932.

Provisional outcome:

Provisional outcome over the last 10 years’ efforts has been that nearly 50% of the
medical teachers in the country were sensitized to medical education principles and ~ nearly
2000 faculty mentors have voluntarily registered for the more intense Advance Course in
Medical education.

4. Feedback from participants on Basic Course Workshops

As the faculty development program being implemented by MCI has completed a

decade, it was felt prudent to analyze and reflect upon the feedback and suggestions from
participants and resource persons. Structured feedback and evaluation (formative and
summative) of every revised Basic Course Workshop and AETCOM was incorporated within
the activity as a mandatory component. The concept of appropriate feedback was
emphasized in sessions and implemented.

Many centres (eg.,MUHS, Pune; Seth GS MC, Mumbai; JLMC, Wardha etc.) carried
out evaluation of Basic Course Workshop using well known methods; one such example
from MUHS, Pune is given below:

19
  Pre-test- post-test design: The pre- and post-test had 20 Multiple Choice
Questions. The same questions in pre-test were administered for post-test.
The mean score of post-test marks (15 + 3) was found to be significantly more
(p <0.000) using ‘paired t test’ than the mean score of pretest marks (11 + 4).
A sample analysis is given in Fig. 1.

Comparison of Pre-test Post- test Marks

Pre-Test
20 P<0.00 Post-Test
Pre-Test and Post-Test Scores

15

10

0
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29

Participants

 Program Evaluation Part 1: Daily Session Evaluation

Daily session evaluation feedback forms were administered to the participants at the
end of each day’s session. Participants scored about “What was good about the
session” and how this session could have been made better.

 Program Evaluation Part 2: Program Evaluation Questionnaire

20
 This was given at the end of the program with the purpose of finding out the
effectiveness of the program in the given MCI format. This included a) participants’
rating of the overall workshop, b) participants’ rating of the organization of the
workshop, c) content analysis of the participants’ response to the open-ended
questions: “ How it could be made better?”
,

 Program Evaluation Part 3: Retro-pre-evaluation Questionnaire which included: 1.

Importance of sessions before and after the workshop, and 2. Skills learned before
and after the workshop.

5. Feedback from participants on Attitude, Ethics and Communication (AETCOM)

Module

The workshop on AETCOM was received well by participants and faculty8 who
appreciated the concept and the contents of the document. But there was concern that the
shortage of faculty in some colleges may cause difficulties in its smooth implementation
since this requires collaboration among faculty members. The comments of the
participants included that: (1) the cases are authentic and interesting with good case
scenarios, (2) the longitudinal approach of attitude, communication development and
hierarchy of competency is rational and effective, (3) but, limited time is available for
implementation, (4) there is need for intense faculty training in this area, (5)
Principals/Deans/Heads of Departments/senior faculty members to be trained first for
assured implementation, and (6) need for inclusion of AETCOM training in the revised
Graduate Medical Education Regulations, for assured success. It was suggested that
every college must create a special team of at least 30-35 trained faculty members (from
all disciplines), for delivering the AETCOM module.

Discussion
This paper provides information on the efforts put in by India’s medical education
regulator, the Medical Council of India, from 2009 to 2018, to improve the knowledge,
attitude and teaching skills of the faculty in its constituent colleges thereby improving the
execution of the undergraduate teaching curriculum. This has come to be of major
importance in view of the revamping of the undergraduate teaching curriculum which is
now competency based and expects the teaching faculty to acquire a variety of skills. The

21
Faculty Development Program thus provides a mechanism to medical schools in designing
professional growth opportunities for their faculty. Bligh noted that faculty development
programs are tangible indicators of the institutions’ inner faith in their academic workforce9.

Way forward

The success of this program depends on its uniform implementation in all the medical
colleges; however, it is essential to monitor and record its long-term impact and identify
the lacunae. Since the new Regulations on Graduate Medical Education (Amendment)
2019 has been notified, the curricular reforms required to implement the Competency
based Undergraduate Curriculum will help in producing more skilled Indian Medical
Graduates. It is hoped that the ongoing Faculty Development Program of MCI will facilitate
smooth implementation of the new curriculum across the country and the Curriculum
Committee of a college will be the nodal agency in implementing these curricular reforms.
The introduction of the Curriculum Implementation Support Program (CISP) will go a long
way in implementing the competency based UG curriculum.

It might be premature to add, but this may be an appropriate time to create a

Resource Centre for Faculty Development which might function as focal center for
educational innovations and reforms. It is envisaged that finally, all FDP activities initiated
by Medical Council of India would result in better implementation of revised curriculum
leading to a competent “Indian Medical Graduate” who would impact health care service
delivery in the country for better.

Conclusions

While training is an important input for changing medical practices, it is equally

important to have an educational environment, wherein trained people can apply the newly
acquired knowledge and skills. Without this, we may not be able to have the desired
effects. The responsibility for developing such a climate and mentoring and supporting
trained faculty to apply the newly acquired knowledge and skills in their teaching practices
is the responsibility of the Medical Education Units/Medical Education Departments and
the colleges.

22
 Faculty development the world over has been a difficult issue to implement
successfully for multiple reasons. Our experience shows that it requires plenty of time,
patience, effort and resources to develop, deliver and sustain a program covering more
than 500 medical colleges. Since the effects are not immediately visible, buy-in for this
program is initially slow. However, Medical Council of India, as the regulator of medical
education in India, has taken this unique step to add science to the art of teaching. Initial
results are encouraging and so we must continue our efforts, particularly for the colleges
that are newly established. To keep the faculty motivated, the FDP curriculum must be
regularly updated including new global developments in educational methodology.
Perhaps, a longer waiting period may be needed to see if the program has actually resulted
in improving medical education and thereby better health status of the population.

References

1. Supe A, Burdick WP. Challenges and issues in medical education in India. Acad Med.
2006; 81(12):1076-80.
2. Medical Council of India. College and Course search. Available at
https://www.mciindia.org/CMS/information-desk/college-and-course-search
Accessed Apr 15, 2018.
3. Zodpey S, Sharma A, Zahiruddin QS, Gaidhane A, Shrikhande S. Faculty
development programs for medical teachers in India. J Adv Med Educ Prof.
2016;4(2):97-101.
4. Mahajan R, Badyal DK, Singh T. Online Faculty-Development Programme for
Medical Teachers in Resource Poor Settings: Behind the Scene. J Res Med Edu
Ethics 2017;7:163-168.
5. Bansal P and Supe A. (2007). Training of medical teachers in India: need for change.
Indian J Med Sci. 61(8):478-84.
6. Singh T, Bansal P, Sharma M. A need and necessity for faculty development: the role
of medical education units in the Indian context. South East Asian J Med Edu 2008;
2:2-6.
7. Medical Council of India. National Faculty Development Programme. Available at
Medical Council of India. College and Course search. Available at
https://www.mciindia.org/CMS/information-desk/for-colleges/national-faculty-
development-programme Accessed Apr 15, 2018.

23
8. Attitude, Ethics and Communication (AETCOM) competencies for the Indian Medical
Graduate (2018). Medical Council of India, pp.1-84.
9. Bligh J. Faculty development. Med Educ. 2005;39:120–2. [PubMed] [Google
Scholar]

24