CVEA Call for Proposals

Join us in Sarasota!

Cornell bell tower

Improving Teaching and Learning in the Clinical Environment

January 13-15, 2023
Sarasota, Florida

Proposals due by November 1, 2022. Submit to: Katherine Edmondson

A conference hosted by:

The Cornell Veterinary Educators Academy
The Office of Outreach in Health Profession Education at the College of Veterinary Medicine



Call for Proposals

We welcome presentations on curriculum, teaching approaches, assessing student learning, and the development of professional skills. We are especially interested in proposals that are grounded in relevant educational scholarship, empirical research, and address multiple perspectives. Preference will be given to proposals that relate to the conference theme and address problems of significance to veterinary education, are clear and concise, and based upon principles of teaching and learning that have solid support in the educational literature.

Authors are asked to consider (but are not limited to) the following topics as they prepare proposals:

  • Standard setting, tracking, assessing and remediation of professional skills
  • Curriculum mapping, learning outcomes, and Entrustable Professional Attributes (EPAs)
  • Teaching and assessing professionalism in a competency-based educational framework
  • Partnering with students through peer-to-peer teaching and co-curricular programming to promote reflection and professional development
  • Innovative curriculum design
  • Giving and receiving feedback, mentoring
  • Professional identity development and wellbeing

Presentation Categories (details below):

Descriptive Sessions

Descriptive Sessions provide overviews or results of projects, programs, or strategies. The Program Committee will identify and group common topics among the selected proposals. A moderator will help facilitate discussion and exchange between the audience and presenters. Each Descriptive Session will include several 15-minute presentations with time allotted for audience discussion and exchange.

Submit a structured proposal of no more 800 words that includes the points described below. To ensure blind review, please do not include any identifying information (persons, institutions, etc.).

  • Introduction: Describe the background, literature review, and/or needs assessment
  • Program: Describe the methods of the study or the design of your program or project
  • Results: Display and discuss the results of your data analysis or the evaluation of your project or program
  • Closure: Conclude with a summary, conclusions, implications, and/or caveats
  • Reference List: List of relevant references used to place the proposed presentation in the context of current thought and practice. This does not count toward the proposal word limit.
  • Abstract: Provide an abstract of the session in 50 words or less. If accepted, this abstract will be included in the conference program.
  • Duration: 15-minute presentations in a 60-minute session

Panel Discussion

A Panel Discussion features several individuals presenting their ideas regarding a specific issue or topic and responding to questions. A moderator will facilitate panel comments and audience participation. Proposals for Panel Discussions should include identification of all panelists by role/title (not name or institution), and the method by which audience interaction will be facilitated.

Submit a structured proposal of no more than 800 words that addresses the points described below. To ensure blind review, please do not include any identifying information (persons, institutions, etc.).

  • Rationale/Background: What is the background for the panel discussion topic?
  • Panelists: List the participating panelists. Include their titles or professional roles. Explain how each panelist will contribute to the discussion.
  • Session Outline: In general terms, explain how you propose the panel discussion will proceed. Indicate how the audience will be involved.
  • Reference List: List of relevant references used to place the proposed presentation in the context of current thought and practice. This does not count toward the proposal word limit.
  • Abstract: Provide an abstract of the session in 50 words or less. If accepted, this abstract will be included in the conference program.
  • Duration: 60 minutes

Teaching Successes “Speed Dating”

This format provides participants with an opportunity to share an example of a personal teaching success and its enabling factors with colleagues in “bite-sized” conversations. Participants will rotate through a series of brief, timed interactions with peers to learn about their innovative approaches to teaching that have been successful, and the factors that contribute to it.

Submit a structured proposal in 250 words or less that includes the sections described below. To ensure blind review, please do not include any identifying information (persons, institutions, etc.).

  • Rationale: Sharing examples of personal teaching successes can inspire others, and highlight the conditions that support and sustain innovation
  • Introduction: Describe the background, educational context and goals of the teaching approach
  • Outcomes: Describe why and how the teaching approach has benefitted student learning
  • Discussion Triggers: Identify the enabling factors that have been central to achieving the desired outcomes.
  • Duration: 7-minute presentations in a 30-minute session

Common Interest Roundtable Discussion

Roundtable discussions are topic-specific discussion groups. They provide an informal environment to network and discuss best practices on a variety of prepared and spontaneous topics in relation to veterinary education.  The purpose is to provide an informal mechanism for participants to share experiences or challenges they are facing, successes they’ve had, “hot topics,” ideas, or reports of works in progress. Leaders will briefly present the topics for discussion and then facilitate discussion among table participants.

Submit a structured proposal in 800 words or less that addresses the points described below. To ensure blind review, please do not include any identifying information (persons, institutions, etc.).

  • Rationale: Identify the roundtable discussion topic(s) and explain why these topics are timely and important to veterinary education.
  • Introduction: Describe the background, literature review, and/or needs assessment of the roundtable discussion topic(s)
  • Outcomes: Identify the goals for addressing the discussion topics
  • Discussion Triggers: Identify the principle issues that are central to achieving the outcomes, and provide at least two questions to trigger discussion.
  • Reference List: List of relevant references, if any, used to place the proposed presentation in the context of current thought and practice. This does not count toward the proposal word limit.
  • Abstract: Provide an abstract of the session in 50 words or less. If accepted, this abstract will be included in the conference program.
  • Duration: 60 minutes

Firestorm!

To bridge the physical distance of a remote format, the program will include a fun, educational component that will allow participants an opportunity to get to know a little more about each other. In the Firestorm! session, participants will each be allotted 5 minutes to teach their peers a topic of their choice, which may or may not relate to veterinary medicine. Time limits will be strictly enforced; laughter encouraged. No formal proposal will be necessary; offers from volunteers are enthusiastically welcome!

Duration: 5-minute presentations in a 30-miniute session

Submit the title of the Firestorm! presentation you are proposing. The presentation must be compatible with a Zoom format, without any need for additional technical support.

Proposal Evaluation Criteria:

Proposals (blinded as to author and originating institution) will be evaluated using the following criteria:

1. Proposal Quality: The written proposal is clear, complete, and well-organized. Clear proposals concisely explain the topic, goals, objectives, and format and are understandable for someone not familiar with the content area (avoid jargon). The title matches description and abstract and is relevant, original, and intriguing.

2. Purpose: The proposal includes clear goals/purpose and describes the benefit to target audience. The session objectives and plan are provided.

3. Importance/Contribution to the Field: The proposal offers important results, creative or innovative practice or development, and/or an opportunity to enhance insights relevant to the conference theme. It is generalizable and portable; it includes strengths and weaknesses. Conclusions are well supported. Suggestions are offered for further study.

4. Preparation: The proposal is well-grounded in a theoretical/conceptual framework, relevant literature, and/or prior work. It demonstrates authors’ familiarity with the topic. The methods match intended purpose of the proposed presentation.

5. Presentation: The proposal describes methods/activities and a detailed plan for use of time that will engage participants, encourage reflection and critique, and achieve the goals/purpose of the proposed presentation. Format and content should fit session type.