Working Groups
Working Groups connect peers to explore education topics and improve teaching quality at the CVM.
Working Groups are a way to engage with peers around a specific education related topic to pursue greater understanding of educational practices and strategies in order to advance educational quality at the CVM.
Key aspects of Working Groups are that they:
- have 3 – 8 participants from faculty & staff, only faculty, or only staff as appropriate
- meet meet once per month (10-12 primary meets) over the course of one academic year
- conclude with presentations at the following AoE Education Day of findings and products.
2025 – 2026 Working Groups
The following is a list of sample topics along with “pain points” that may reflect how one feels about a given topic. You may find yourself drawn to participate in a particular topic, depending on how each point resonates with you:
Teaching Models & Interactive Learning Materials Development (Round 2)
Pain Point: “It is becoming more difficult to maintain the availability and quality of teaching models, simulations, and interactive learning materials. Other schools may have a solution that is adaptable for implementation at NCSU-CVM.”
Potential Output: Development of inter-communication tools to catalog what is used and on what replacement schedule. Work to secure alternative sources and materials should traditional supply lines fall out.
Memory Training
- Pain Point: “First year veterinary students are presented with a considerable amount of information, however, most have never been trained on methods to efficiently assimilate information.”
- Potential Output: Develop curriculum specific memory training program to facilitate learning and enhance retention in veterinary students.
Spectrum of Care (Round 2)
- Pain Point: “I’m not sure everyone truly understands what spectrum of care actually is, how it’s being taught, or where it’s being reinforced.”
- Potential Output: Institutionalize practices around spectrum of care for the sake of promoting the provision of care by reducing barriers due to preconceptions and misconceptions (i.e. spectrum of care is not a reduction of quality of care).
Teaching Practice Inventory
- Pain Point: “I want to try a new teaching method (i.e. flipped classroom). However, I do not know where to go to see the method in practice and ask advice on how to get started.”
- Potential Output: Inventory of non-traditional teaching methods being utilized by CVM instructors to use both as a reference and point of contact for questions.
2024 – 2025 Working Groups
Teaching Models
- Pain Point: “It is becoming more difficult to maintain the availability and quality of teaching models, simulations, and interactive learning materials. Other schools may have a solution that is adaptable for implementation at NCSU-CVM.”
- Potential Output: Development of inter-communication tools to catalog what is used and on what replacement schedule. Work to secure alternative sources and materials should traditional supply lines fall out.
Spectrum of Care
- Pain Point: “We feel we don’t know how to best support this important content across different curricular areas. Worse, we may be undermining Spectrum of Care initiatives without realizing it (i.e. heavy reliance on “single best answer” assessments).
- Potential Output: Guidelines on how to best support Spectrum of Care instruction across years, threads, electives, and selectives. Develop supports to emphasize moving away from a “gold standard” mindset and further increase awareness in this area.
Humanities in Vet Ed
- Pain Point: “Doctors trained without humanities typically focus on medical problems at the expense of the human element. This leads to compassion fatigue, burnout, and increased turnover in the field among other consequences.”
- Potential Output: Recommendations for practical implementation of humanities content within a vet med curriculum, including both the what and how components of a solution.
Clinical Feedback for Students (Round 2)
- Pain Point: The clinical feedback process as-is precludes us giving timely and effective feedback.
- Output/Product: An evidence-based set of protocols for clinical feedback that fits our specific needs.
FARPET for Peer Evaluation of Teaching
- Pain Point: A lack of formal and informal peer observation and evaluation practices leave us without the benefits of such.
- Potential Output: Development of process regarding how we structure more robust peer observation practices and garner institution-wide buy in for evaluation tools.
Working Group photos from Education Day 2025!
2023 – 2024 Working Groups
Student Remediation/Study Skills
- Pain Point: “Right now, student remediation takes too long and too much work for not enough gain. We can’t effectively teach if they can’t effectively learn.”
- Output/Product: Evidence-based strategies for effectively and efficiently intervening when students fall behind academically.
Clinical Feedback for Students
- Pain Point: “The clinical feedback process as-is precludes us giving timely and effective feedback.”
- Output/Product: An evidence-based set of protocols for clinical feedback that fits our specific needs.
Technician Educators
- Pain Point: “Technicians training students and/or new-hire tech/staff are not fully supported in their roles as educators.”
- Output/Product: An evidenced-based curriculum for preparing technicians to take on instructional roles.
Working Group photos from Education Day 2024!
Questions?
Any questions about working groups or requests to join one? Reach out to Jesse Watson at jwatson3@ncsu.edu.