Educational Innovation Submissions

Innovations have historically been scored using the same system as research abstracts. We have developed a separate scoring system. We believe that this modification of the SAEM research abstract scoring template, with criteria based on those used by the AAMC MedEdPortal review system, will more accurately and more fairly identify excellence among innovations when methods and outcome measurements may differ from research projects. You may still submit education pieces as research abstracts if you feel that this is the appropriate category (i.e., group comparisons with performance and/or outcome data).

In addition to the above, innovations will be scored on originality and applicability outside the individual institution

Innovations should include the following sections:

Introduction/Background (this should include a statement of educational need):The purpose of this section is to explain why the education innovation is important to the educational community. This may include prior research, gaps in knowledge, new or updated requirements that need to meet, etc.

Example:  The ability to effectively perform nerve blocks to provide regional anesthesia for facial procedures is an important skill in Emergency Medicine (EM). Having the ability to practice these techniques on realistic models builds confidence and proficiency prior to performing these procedures in a clinical setting. An improved example would include prior efforts, research, or evidence of gaps in skill or knowledge.

Educational Objectives: This section should contain a clear description or list of what objectives the innovation is designed to meet.

Curricular Design: The curricular design section should contain a detailed description of the curricular innovation. This should include a discussion of why the educational method was chosen, a concise but thorough description of the module itself (including resources needed and tips for successful implementation), and methods of assessment used. In addition, reflect on any reflective initial difficulties encountered or lessons learned and modifications made.

Example: A consensus group of medical student educators from several specialties met over 18 months to address curricular “holes” in acute care education.  Under EM direction, Critical Concepts was developed with these objectives:  provide all senior students exposure to critical care concepts; strengthen acute diagnostic and management skills; prepare for residency with direct patient care and team responsibilities. The course begins with one week of eight 3-hour modules provided by each specialty on management of emergencies unique to their field.  Brief lectures introduce topics reinforced in breakout groups via simulators, video, case discussion, and skills practice. Modules are presented in a stepwise fashion, where possible, so each builds upon the previous one.  Students then have two weeks of clinical duties in the ED and one week in an ICU.  Additional didactic material is provided by social media, online modules, texts, and journal articles.

Impact/Effectiveness: This section should contain a discussion of how this innovation contributes on a broad scale to GME/UME, and if possible should provide objective evidence of curricular effectiveness. At minimum, this should include a reflection on the initial implementation of the innovation, and what, if any, changed are planned.

*Note that innovations that have not been implemented, but are presented in concept only will NOT be accepted.