- Email: [email protected]
Recognizing Dental Schools
RECOGNIZING DENTAL SCHOOLS
CORRECTIONS AND CLARIFICATIONS
This is in response to Dr. Meskin’s editorial, “The Nation’s Top Schools are . . . ” in the December 1992 issue of JADA. Your desire to find a mechanism to describe dental schools with superior qualities is exemplary. The student, the dentist and the public should have ways of determining excellence. However, your effort to identify accreditation as the suitable mechanism is misguided. By establishing accreditation standards, and monitoring educational programs according to these standards, the Com mission on Dental Accreditation publicly recognizes educational programs for a level of perform ance, integrity and quality th a t entitles them to the confidence of the educational community and the public. In the accreditation process, the commission commends those programs th a t exceed the standards, but it is not the responsibility of the commission to make this known to the public. You list examples of dental schools that publicize their high ideals and the commendable m anner in which they attain their objectives. Once again, you are on target. The accredited dental schools, themselves, provide the best mechanism by which the public will be sufficiently wellinformed to identify programs with the superior qualities the public deems important.
In the article, “Alternative Gingival Retraction Techniques and Isolation of the Cervical Lesion,” by William H. Liebenberg, (October JADA), the following should have been
added to case 4 on page 98: “The modified gingival retractor is fabricated by removing the lingual beak of a No. 212 clamp using a fissure bur. The remaining buccal beak is then applied and stabilized with a caulking compound.”
er
3 ooo \ 000 A 000
_. -»ve® sWee' 1a
N ew ell H. Yaple, D.D.S. Chairman ADA C om m ission on D ental A ccreditation
JADA, Vol. 124, December 1993
19
CORRECTIONS AND CLARIFICATIONS
This is in response to Dr. Meskin’s editorial, “The Nation’s Top Schools are . . . ” in the December 1992 issue of JADA. Your desire to find a mechanism to describe dental schools with superior qualities is exemplary. The student, the dentist and the public should have ways of determining excellence. However, your effort to identify accreditation as the suitable mechanism is misguided. By establishing accreditation standards, and monitoring educational programs according to these standards, the Com mission on Dental Accreditation publicly recognizes educational programs for a level of perform ance, integrity and quality th a t entitles them to the confidence of the educational community and the public. In the accreditation process, the commission commends those programs th a t exceed the standards, but it is not the responsibility of the commission to make this known to the public. You list examples of dental schools that publicize their high ideals and the commendable m anner in which they attain their objectives. Once again, you are on target. The accredited dental schools, themselves, provide the best mechanism by which the public will be sufficiently wellinformed to identify programs with the superior qualities the public deems important.
In the article, “Alternative Gingival Retraction Techniques and Isolation of the Cervical Lesion,” by William H. Liebenberg, (October JADA), the following should have been
added to case 4 on page 98: “The modified gingival retractor is fabricated by removing the lingual beak of a No. 212 clamp using a fissure bur. The remaining buccal beak is then applied and stabilized with a caulking compound.”
er
3 ooo \ 000 A 000
_. -»ve® sWee' 1a
N ew ell H. Yaple, D.D.S. Chairman ADA C om m ission on D ental A ccreditation
JADA, Vol. 124, December 1993
19