- Email: [email protected]
Turn dental education around
CDC contractor assisting states with their oral health policies, and the program office for AAPD’s perinatal and infant oral health program and an active partner in the Multicultural Oral Health Alliance (MOHA) with the National Dental Association, Hispanic Dental Association, and Society of American Indian Dentists.
Burton Edelstein, DDS, MPH President and Founding Chair, Children’s Dental Health Project Professor of Dentistry and Health Policy and Management Columbia University New York, NY
Now that the Congress has created so much opportunity to improve children’s oral, CDHP will use all of its resources and relationships to ensure that these new laws meet their full potential on behalf of America’s children.
Meg Booth, MPH Deputy Executive Director Children’s Dental Health Project Washington, DC
Turn dental education around Background.—Dental faculty shortages are a recognized phenomenon, yet approaches to remedy the situation remain few. Conventionally, the dental curriculum is heavily loaded with biomedical science courses during the first 2 to 3 years. Criticism has been leveled at this curriculum whether the stomatology model (dentistry as a subspecialty of medicine) or odontology model (dentistry as an independent profession) is followed. The stomatology model is criticized for being too focused on biomedical science and clinical medicine rather than clinical dental training, and the odontology model is criticized for not integrating medicine and biomedical sciences into dentistry. In each case, students do not see the relevance of relationships between clinical performance and biomedical science. A proposed change would turn the dental curriculum on its head. The Plan.—It is proposed that biomedical science courses and research exposure be placed at the end of students’ training. Even today students begin learning fundamental mechanics and surgical procedures in preclinical laboratories at the beginning of dental school. Because they are also being expected to learn all the biomedical science involved, the learning curve in the first few years can be steep and discouraging. Focusing early training almost completely on preclinical and clinical experiences would help students learn the fundamentals of the surgical side of dentistry. Scientific knowledge is not critical to learning the rudimentary procedures taught in early clinical training classes. The areas most pertinent to clinical performance could be incorporated into the surgical education phase, so that there would be some exposure to biomedical principles.
Benefits.—Having biomedical science courses at the end of the curriculum would allow students to better appreciate the clinical relevance of these topics. The students would be more likely to see how their clinical experiences are based in scientific principles. This could lead to research projects that integrate clinical and biomedical science constructs. In addition, students would be involved in a research-intensive experience nearer graduation and may choose to continue their education in that direction, addressing the dental faculty shortfall.
Clinical Significance.—The proposed changes are designed to help students appreciate the relevance of biomedical sciences to their dental education as well as attract more students to academic dentistry pursuits as a career. Some US schools have already developed programs whereby students work and assist in clinics during their first semester. These schools use this fast-tracking as a marketing tool to attract dental students. The proposed approach would require a reworking of the dental curriculum, which is not an easy task, but it offers the potential to get more students interested in dental education and research as a profession.
Clarkson BH, Roge´r JM: Dental education turned upside down. J Dent Res 89:106-107, 2010 Reprints available from Sage Publications, http://www.sagepub.com/ journalsReprints.nav
Volume 55
Issue 4
2010
173
Burton Edelstein, DDS, MPH President and Founding Chair, Children’s Dental Health Project Professor of Dentistry and Health Policy and Management Columbia University New York, NY
Now that the Congress has created so much opportunity to improve children’s oral, CDHP will use all of its resources and relationships to ensure that these new laws meet their full potential on behalf of America’s children.
Meg Booth, MPH Deputy Executive Director Children’s Dental Health Project Washington, DC
Turn dental education around Background.—Dental faculty shortages are a recognized phenomenon, yet approaches to remedy the situation remain few. Conventionally, the dental curriculum is heavily loaded with biomedical science courses during the first 2 to 3 years. Criticism has been leveled at this curriculum whether the stomatology model (dentistry as a subspecialty of medicine) or odontology model (dentistry as an independent profession) is followed. The stomatology model is criticized for being too focused on biomedical science and clinical medicine rather than clinical dental training, and the odontology model is criticized for not integrating medicine and biomedical sciences into dentistry. In each case, students do not see the relevance of relationships between clinical performance and biomedical science. A proposed change would turn the dental curriculum on its head. The Plan.—It is proposed that biomedical science courses and research exposure be placed at the end of students’ training. Even today students begin learning fundamental mechanics and surgical procedures in preclinical laboratories at the beginning of dental school. Because they are also being expected to learn all the biomedical science involved, the learning curve in the first few years can be steep and discouraging. Focusing early training almost completely on preclinical and clinical experiences would help students learn the fundamentals of the surgical side of dentistry. Scientific knowledge is not critical to learning the rudimentary procedures taught in early clinical training classes. The areas most pertinent to clinical performance could be incorporated into the surgical education phase, so that there would be some exposure to biomedical principles.
Benefits.—Having biomedical science courses at the end of the curriculum would allow students to better appreciate the clinical relevance of these topics. The students would be more likely to see how their clinical experiences are based in scientific principles. This could lead to research projects that integrate clinical and biomedical science constructs. In addition, students would be involved in a research-intensive experience nearer graduation and may choose to continue their education in that direction, addressing the dental faculty shortfall.
Clinical Significance.—The proposed changes are designed to help students appreciate the relevance of biomedical sciences to their dental education as well as attract more students to academic dentistry pursuits as a career. Some US schools have already developed programs whereby students work and assist in clinics during their first semester. These schools use this fast-tracking as a marketing tool to attract dental students. The proposed approach would require a reworking of the dental curriculum, which is not an easy task, but it offers the potential to get more students interested in dental education and research as a profession.
Clarkson BH, Roge´r JM: Dental education turned upside down. J Dent Res 89:106-107, 2010 Reprints available from Sage Publications, http://www.sagepub.com/ journalsReprints.nav
Volume 55
Issue 4
2010
173