CDA Sub-Committee
Allied Dental Educators of BC (Articulation)
October 19th – 20th, 2006
8:30 - 4:00
BCIT Downtown Campus,
Room 711-555 Seymour Street, Vancouver.
604-412-7700 (for directions)
Parking available under the building
CHAIR: Janet Reagan RECORDER: Margaret Dennett
DRAFT AGENDA
Thursday, October 19th and Friday, October 20th, 2006 –
8:30 Meet and greet
9:00 Start
4:00 Close (subject to change)
Call to order 9:00 am
Attendance:
Janet Reagan - Camosun College
Linda Olm - College of the Rockies
Debbie McCloy - Douglas College
Rosemary Parsons - Malispina College
Margaret Dennett - Vancouver Community College
Rosie Friesen - University College of the Fraser Valley
Kathy Rodell - College of New Caledonia
Catherine Baranow - Okanagan College
Janet Reagan Chair delayed by fog
Chair assumed by Margaret Dennett, Recorder
Articulation Orientation:
Finola Finlay, Associate Director BCCAT
Introductions around the table and an orientation of articulation, roles and responsibilities.
- produce and deliver minutes of all meetings to BCCAT
- attend or representatives of the institution attend to discuss issues pertinent to transfer of credit between colleges
- fiscally responsible for the funding which is delivered as part of the block transfer.
- meet once a year and have representative attend BCCAT meeting and report back to articulation group.
Discussion around the participation of private institutions in articulation.
Private institutions – increasing numbers throughout the province
- some committees have embraced private institutions others are conflicted
- mandate at BCCAT to articulate between public and private
- Confusion and conflict often due to lack of information and knowledge about the private colleges and much of the information is based on anecdotal scenarios. Many participants around the table have had information relayed that is contrary to their own philosophy and principles. After further discussion the question was asked: Does the CDA Sub- committee want the participation of private colleges in the articulation group? Concern expressed re: the use of this participation used in program marketing and question what representative would be sent.?
Discussion around mandatory NDAEB examination.
Main concern as discussed and documented from previous meetings around the method of regulatory change. No consultation with educational bodies. CDSBC made change without considering timelines of colleges for implementation of change. Students in some cases not informed prior to starting the CDA program. Concerns expressed about lack of information available at present regarding process.
Finola Finlay left the meeting at this point
1. Approval of Minutes: October 20th and 21st, 2005
Noted error page 5 item 5.10 change numbers to 2-4 sealants 2-16 polishing
Motion to adopt as amended Rosie Friesen
Seconded Rosemary Parsons
Carried
2. Report on Action Items: Refer to October, 2005 Minutes
Rosemary Parsons action item – Investigation continues into the awarding of continuing education points for mentors in practicum offices. Initial investigation does not sound probable. Suggested that if this did become possible then articulation would help in the development of guidelines. Rosemary will continue to look into this and report back to the committee.
3. Draft Agenda: Additions/Deletions/Approval
Additions to the agenda were added to Item 6 New Business and the agenda was approved as amended
4. Bring Forward Items:
4.1 2001 CDA Program Curriculum Guide: All
Question brought forward from last meeting about how frequently the 2001 guide being utilized in various programs?
· Useful used as a reference
· Difficult to link to accreditation.
· Learning outcome wording useful.
· Minimal use as a reference
· Perhaps should be reviewed to keep current as this is a provincial document that may be accessed by any institution.
Action: Continue to monitor – bring forward next year
5. Old Business:
5.1 Invitation to Private Dental Assisting Programs – update Discussion reflected in notes above.
Motion: Rosemary Parsons Seconded Margaret Dennett
That a representative from an accredited (by CDAC) private dental assisting programs who has dental education be invited to attend a portion of the next CDA Sub-Committee Articulation meeting as a guest. Portion to be determined by chair. (Second: Margaret Dennett)
MOTION CARRIED
ACTION – send motion to BCCAT re: private college (sent Oct 20 2006)
5.2 Incorporating Sealant Reduction as a skill – update: All
ACTION: - Letter for Clarification to the CDSBC Chair
- When will graduates be allowed to perform sealant reduction?
- When can programs officially start teaching it?
- Define appropriately educated for the instructor?
- Can licensed CDA educators currently perform this on patients?
Please reply by the end of November
Item 6:14 discussed in conjunction with item 5.2
Attention was brought to the possibility of a licensing candidate being granted licensure without having placed sealants on a live patient. Refresher programs in Alberta have been attended by candidates to upgrade their sealant skills and these programs use only extracted teeth and manikins. Not considered the BC level of competencies.
Rosie Friesen mentioned that CDSBC Qualification Review Committee uses a grid for candicate assessment.
Action: As Rosie Friesen will research.
Action: Rosie will distribute a comparison chart to see how various competencies are taught throughout the province to be updated by the institutions. (pre-clinical, manikin or patient)
5.3 Number of client contacts required for polishing –update: Linda Olm
Many institutions are having increasing difficulties finding patients for student experience. This varies from area but suggestions of collaboration with health units, schools, community centres were suggested. Additionally depending on student numbers the actual time allotment for patient clinics increases dramatically fi the number of patients is mandated across all institutions. Most programs are competency based and not requirement based resulting in a wide various depending on situation and participants.
Action: Above chart will reflect institution requirements. Averages listed below for polishing and sealants. Rosie will add to chart numbers of patients Table will be circulated and discussed at next articulation meeting.
Minimum for prophy 6 - 12
Minimum for Sealants 4 - 6
5.4 BCCAT February, 2006 Meeting – update: Chair Janet
Representatives from this committee have not attended for the past two years. A designate will attend this year.
5.5 Change to the Rules: The use, care, and maintenance of coronal whitening by bleaching trays- update: All
Discussion around location of this in curriculum. Consensus was that it falls under Patient Care. Interpretation of this rule is that a CDA is delegated to provide information for the patient on the whitening system that the dentist prescribes. Use of material, tray, care of the tray, monitoring of the process. Patients have the tray fit assessed by the dentist and from that point on the returning patients sees the CDA for shade checks and documentation. CDA must be aware of indications/contraindications adverse reactions etc.
6. New Business:
6.1 Re-visit of the CDA Sub-committee's Terms of Reference: Chair Janet
Currently includes: succession planning for Chair (rotation by institution to share workload and responsibilities equally); length of term (2 years for continuity); location (most recently in the lower Mainland for accessibility and cost efficiency); catering for beverages, light breakfasts and lunches (most recently lower mainland institutions have paid catering in rotation as travel costs are not incurred by these institutions).
Do we want to keep this meeting pattern or make changes. (Location, date)
Question surfaced on why we do not meet with the Dental Hygiene articulation group and have joint meetings. Historically used to meet together. Then hygiene asked for separation with the resulting two meetings and have exchange of minutes and appointment of liason. Update: BCCAT will be making a decision about officially making these two groups separate. All other dental groups have independent except DA and DH.
Discussion:
o Two votes on issues as separate entities.
o Similar issues so the liaison most useful. Communication the between the two groups very necessary.
o Perhaps coordinate dates for joint lunches Have two separate meetings at the same time and meet for breakfast and then work towards our own objectives. Find means to network during the time. With more colleges have both CDA and DH this might be an positive opportunity.
o Consider April 19th and 20th 2007 for our next meeting.
Location of meetings discussed and suggestion for other institutions to host the meeting. This would provide an opportunity to see other institutions. Open up discussion on clinical environments and perhaps increase exchange of ideas.
Action: Wendy King chair of DH articulation. Prepare letter of interest to provide revised terms of reference. Involved in being in the network. Include thoughts on change of venue.
Janet will be responding to the report
Expectations of Articulation representatives will also be reviewed with a focus on group and decision making process, and establishing group norms.
Group norms
Decision making process decision. Previous majority rules.
Discussion that topic, or situation may change decision making process. Outcomes will be discussed with individual issues. BBCAT handbook states that a democratic voting process is in place with transparent communication on yes/no and abstention.
- consensus or vote with majority rules
- voting members refer to page 15
- table abstains until further clarification from
Communication
· E-mail most useful – messages should be as concise as possible
· Teleconferences may be used for specific issues or when committee members cannot meet face to face.
· Discussion around possible hosting of chat room by BCCAT
Action: Will ask if BCCAT has secure chat room capabilities Chair
- email as concise as possible
- teleconference -specific issues to be addressed
6.2 Role of CDA Programs and Regulatory Change: Chair Janet
CDSBC regulatory changes related to the NDAEB examination to occur January, 2007. Discussion of draft recommendations geared toward defining roles and responsibilities.
Health deans also concerned about lack of consultation with regards to the NDAEB decision. Letter was sent to CDSBC.
Concerns regarding span of time between graduation and eligibility with regards to the connection and support. Due to changes is there anything else that can be done to expedite the process. Based on history forms and formats sent to college
Internal changes for colleges, calendar needs to reflect changes, cost of exam.
Direction of students to ask CDSBC questions. Concern that students may be given incorrect communication so institutions should be made aware of the process.
Action:
Independently respond to report. Questions regarding interim licensing coming from the Dean.
6.3 NDAEB Exam preparation: Rosie Friesen
How do others “prepare” students for the exam?
Availability of textbooks utilized for the NDAEB exam preparation?
Mock questions composed by the students based on the domain descriptions. The results in a practice exam.
MDA CD rom is useful to have students become familiar with vignette and case study format
Ontario based course – 24 hour course that provides at home practice exams and onsite practice sessions.
Exam preparation session as part of curriculum. Allaying students fears most important. Reinforcing reading the questions carefully, not anticipating what the question is asking.
Students with recorded exam writing challenges may be given extra time, a quiet room, an exam reader by the NDAEB. Questions regarding this should be forwarded to the NDAEB
6.4 New Dental Accreditation of Canada Guidelines: Rosie Friesen
Which programs have recently been accredited using the new POA process?
Douglas College and Okanagan College
What was the experience like?
· POA – final document requirements were late and changed from the original document so preparation was started and then had to be changed somewhat/
· Some of the requirements and questions appear unrelated and were therefore difficult to complete.
· Accreditation team was great and overall process positive. Students and faculty were treated with respect and non interference with the educational process.
· Face-bow requirement should be included as well as dietary analysis for oral health
· New educational standards for faculty was a topic for discussion
· Don’t be afraid to ask for info from other resources throughout the college
6.5 Interpersonal Communications Courses: Rosie Friesen
How is this topic area incorporated in each Program?
Use of specific textbook?
Professionalism Communications
taught by communications department
- professional communications course Langara
Looking out looking in by Adler
Messages – Linda Olm will send
Janet – Human relations – Dubrin and Geerinck Prentice hall 0 13 127576 3 2006
Action – Rosemary will send list of textbooks for circulation – change textbook list from last year
Please send electronic course outlines for communication courses if appropriate
6.6 Infection Control: Rosie Friesen
Product(s) used?
Procedural guidelines?
Action: Infection control – survey – will send electronic copy for collation
6.7 Client recruitment for public clinics: Linda Olm
As discussed in 5.3
6.8 Charting and Tooth Identification Ideas: Linda Olm
Exchange if ideas for student learning for identification of teeth.
- boot exercises /identify with cotton tip applicator /
- Students purchasing dentaforms for practice at home.
This item then fostered discussion around students paying supply fees or lab fees. Majority of colleges charge an additional fee from $50.00 to $500 per year with students making purchases or refundable deposits for equipment
6.9 Lab Curriculum Experience: Margaret Dennett
All institutions are teaching the fabrication of mouthguards or bleaching trays or both. Transfer of knowledge between these skills. Surveys have shown that many office send these cases to labs for fabrication.
6.10Needle stick injury Rosie
Action: Rosie will send a letter NDAEB inquiring as to questions around the discrepancy between CDC and MDA with regard to needle stick protocols
6.11 Make up of advisory boards PAC Rosemary
· People involved – how do you pick people
· Practicum dentists
· Graduates
· licensing body,
· professional association,
· people at large
· students,
· public health rep,
· hygienist,
· grads from other colleges,
· specialty practice.
· Dental CE representative.
6.12 CE responsibilities within colleges Linda
All colleges have Continuing studies departments who are responsible for the Dental CE courses.
6.13 18 years of age and high school grad Debbie