The case for faculty development: a realist evaluation.

Context It seems logical to suggest that investing in educators will lead to improved educational outcomes. However, in the case of faculty development, it is unclear how these benefits arise and decisions about investment typically have little basis in evidence. The aim of this realist evaluation was to understand the mechanisms by which investment in faculty development may lead to improved educational outcomes for staff and students. Methods This realist evaluation involved three phases: the development of an initial programme theory based on existing peer-reviewed literature (Phase 1), which was used within 32 realist interviews with key stakeholders at 17 UK medical schools (Phase 2), to underpin the creation of a series of recommendations for faculty development programme designers (Phase 3). Results The findings highlighted the complex and heterogeneous nature of faculty development programmes. Programme developers must consider a range of contexts (accreditation, meeting educational needs, learning culture, accessibility and interactivity) that can impact faculty members in variable ways (engagement, sense of value and belonging, motivation, reassurance and building relationships), potentially resulting in a range of staff outcomes (improved competence, satisfaction, confidence, faculty member collaboration and curriculum changes) that may ultimately benefit students. The improved understanding resulting from Phases 1 and 2, and the recommendations from Phase 3, will enable the design and tailoring of new and existing faculty development initiatives. Conclusions This study deepens our understanding of the role of context in faculty development through the realist methodology employed and extends pre-existing knowledge to provide insights into evidence-based interventional strategies that may be effective. In particular, faculty development leads need to develop a clear implementation strategy, improve transparency of cashflow, establish effective formal or informal communication systems and evaluate the efficacy of their faculty development initiatives.