About the LSN
The London Simulation Network2 is an amalgamation of three pre-existing simulation Networks (North West, North Central/North East and South London), following recognition of a need to allow access to a consistent level of coordination and development across London. The Network belongs to and is driven by its members who see it as a forum for sharing good practice, supporting the development of its members, receiving support from its members and innovating together.
Membership of the network is inclusive to all those involved in simulation, regardless of organisation, discipline, specialty or grade.
There is recognition that the heterogenous nature of the network means there may be a number of different priorities and approaches but there is a collective commitment towards service/workforce requirements aligned with HEE national strategic goals. The Framework aspires to ensure that this is applicable to and includes all diverse backgrounds of healthcare professionals.
Background
Simulation practitioners involved in the design and delivery of simulation-based education should have the necessary knowledge, skills and approaches to help develop and support learners.
This Faculty Development (FD) framework has been created with the agreement of, and input from, members of the London Simulation Network (LSN) via the LSN Faculty Development Working Group, and in consultation with HEE London faculty development team3 and reference to ASPiH standards.
It is based on work done previously in the North Central and North Eastern London region, funded by HEE London, to review and revise the FD opportunities available. Phase one included a literature review and data collection exercises looking at FD needs and preferences, views of simulation centre leads on FD, a peer observation of each commissioned FD programme. The report produced can be reviewed here:
Mapping-simulation-FD-UCLP-1.pdf (uclpartners.com)
The need for the framework as a resource for the development of simulation practices within the LSN has arisen for the following reasons:
- Many simulation centres have their own faculty development programmes (“train the trainers”).
- Simulation practitioners are often transient, training at different centres and developing their skills through diverse means.
- There is a regional shortage of accessible faculty and provision for faculty development.
Intended Use and Scope
The multi-professional nature of the working group has enabled a Framework built around a wide and representative community of practice. It is intended for use by any healthcare professionals involved in delivery of SBE from all professions and disciplines, in all areas of healthcare, and should be applicable to simulation faculty from all backgrounds and baseline levels of experience. SBE is not restricted to one modality, rather encompasses any simulation-based activity whether centre based, in situ, mannequin based, extended reality or other.
There is an awareness that national work is currently being undertaken to support faculty development, and that ASPiH standards may be updated in due course. Our aim is to align with current ASPiH standards and ongoing national work to support faculty development, and the framework may undergo minor iterations in response to this.
The Academy of Healthcare Science (AHCS), General Dental Council (GDC), General Medical Council (GMC), General Pharmaceutical Council (GPhC), Health and Care Professions Council (HCPC), and the Nursing and Midwifery Council (NMC) provide profession-specific requirements and standards for education and training, including in some cases reference to simulation-based education. This framework aims to compliment rather than replace individual healthcare regulatory standards for education and training.
The framework aims to:
- Provide overarching principles to support faculty in acquiring the knowledge, skills and behaviours required to deliver high quality simulation-based activities, whilst acknowledging that individual approaches and practice may differ.
- Help define and articulate simulation expertise and identify areas for development.
- Support engagement in continuous professional development at all levels of experience, in recognition that simulation practice is an evolving and continuous practice and faculty development is an iterative process.
The framework has the following potential wider benefits:
- Inform the learning aims of faculty development programmes, allowing for a common language and the comparison of courses delivered within and across institutions, whilst, acknowledging that local approaches may differ.
- Provide a clear focus on improving the quality of simulation-based education faculty development.
- Support better informed and more consistent commissioning practices.
- Strengthen opportunities and benefits of peer networking, collaboration and improvement.
The framework is intended to compliment and provide a foundation for a separate London Simulation Network faculty development portfolio which will allow educators to document their knowledge, skills and behaviours related to simulation-based education as they transition roles and organisations.
This FD framework recognises that within the simulation community, different educational theories and traditions prevail. We have sought to advocate for best practice in line with academic literature, an evidence base (where it exists) and best practice guidelines.
The learning outcomes incorporated into the Framework are not mandatory, rather presented as a tool to improve simulated practice and promote self-reflection and aspiration for those developing and delivering SBE. The document should not be seen as prescriptive in time or approach. There is intentional flexibility to allow faculty to adopt an individual approach to how they engage with the different pillars of the framework. The precise emphasis on individual areas will vary depending on the background and role of the individual. It is recognised that there will be overlap between domains, and that delivery of education will require faculty to draw on many areas from different domains – these have been separated for clarity of reference and in order to highlight the importance of each conceptual area.
“Levels” rather than terms have been used to identify experience and development, and highlight the emphasis on Continuous Professional Development (CPD) rather than assessment. Most pillars of the framework have 3 levels but for some that was not considered necessary and only 2 have been used. Dependent on faculty members role in simulation-based education, the nature of SBE being delivered, and the individual experience and prior training, different pillars of the framework will be more or less relevant. Regardless of entry level, the framework can be used to help build a portfolio of expertise and promote on-going professional development. The framework also maps to ASPiH standards and adoption of the framework in part or full may support progress towards ASPiH accreditation (appendix I).
Level 1 – it is suggested that this refers to a basic or novice level of Faculty Development Framework – demonstration of the learning outcomes at this level, and engaging in ongoing observation and reflective practice, should provide a basic level of competency as a simulation educator.
Level 2 – it is suggested that the learning outcomes in this level would be relevant to those involved in simulation lead roles.
Level 3 – it is suggested that this would be most relevant to those involved in simulation research or strategy.
For each domain there are suggested learning outcomes for each level and suggested examples of ways that these may be achieved or evidenced (noting that this is not an exhaustive list and other relevant approaches will exist). A glossary is provided for any terms that users may not be familiar with.