Cyclical Evolution of the Global Right.

An understanding of the current right-wing national and transnational social movements can benefit from comparing them to the global and national conditions operating during their last appearance in the first half of the twentieth century and by carefully comparing twentieth-century fascism with the neofascist and right-wing populist movements that have been emerging in the twenty-first century. This allows us to assess the similarities and differences, and to gain insights about what could be the consequences of the reemergence of populist nationalism and fascist movements. Our study uses the comparative evolutionary world-systems perspective to study the Global Right from 1800 to the present. We see fascism as a form of capitalism that emerges when the capitalist project is in crisis. World historical waves of right-wing populism and fascism are caused by the cycles of globalization and deglobalization, the rise and fall of hegemonic core powers, long business cycles (the Kondratieff wave), and interactions with both Centrist Liberalism and the Global Left. We consider how crises of the global capitalist system have produced right-wing backlashes in the past, and how a future terminal crisis of capitalism could lead to a reemergence of a new form of authoritarian global governance or a reorganized global democracy in the future.

La compréhension des mouvements sociaux nationaux et transnationaux de droite actuels peut bénéficier de leur comparaison aux conditions mondiales et nationales qui avaient cours lors de leur dernière éclosion dans la première moitié du XXe  siècle et en comparant soigneusement le fascisme du XXe  siècle aux mouvements populistes néo-fascistes et de droite qui ont émergé au XXIe  siècle. Cela nous permet d'évaluer les similitudes et les différences, et d'acquérir des perspectives quant à quelles pourraient être les conséquences de la réémergence du nationalisme populiste et des mouvements fascistes. Notre étude fait appel à la perspective évolutive comparative des systèmes mondiaux pour examiner la Droite Mondiale depuis 1800 jusqu'à nos jours. Nous considérons le fascisme comme une forme de capitalisme qui émerge lorsque le projet capitaliste est en crise. Les vagues historiques mondiales de populisme et de fascisme de droite sont occasionnées par les cycles de mondialisation et de démondialisation, la montée et la chute des principales puissances hégémoniques, les longs cycles économiques (le cycle Kondratieff), ainsi que par les interactions avec le Libéralisme Centriste et la Gauche Mondiale. Nous examinons comment les crises du système capitaliste mondial ont donné lieu à des contrecoups de la droite par le passé, et comment un crise terminale future du capitalisme pourrait mener à l'avenir à la réémergence d'une nouvelle forme de gouvernance mondiale autoritarienne ou à une démocratie mondiale restructurée.

Anthropological contributions to historical ecology: 50 questions, infinite prospects.

This paper presents the results of a consensus-driven process identifying 50 priority research questions for historical ecology obtained through crowdsourcing, literature reviews, and in-person workshopping. A deliberative approach was designed to maximize discussion and debate with defined outcomes. Two in-person workshops (in Sweden and Canada) over the course of two years and online discussions were peer facilitated to define specific key questions for historical ecology from anthropological and archaeological perspectives. The aim of this research is to showcase the variety of questions that reflect the broad scope for historical-ecological research trajectories across scientific disciplines. Historical ecology encompasses research concerned with decadal, centennial, and millennial human-environmental interactions, and the consequences that those relationships have in the formation of contemporary landscapes. Six interrelated themes arose from our consensus-building workshop model: (1) climate and environmental change and variability; (2) multi-scalar, multi-disciplinary; (3) biodiversity and community ecology; (4) resource and environmental management and governance; (5) methods and applications; and (6) communication and policy. The 50 questions represented by these themes highlight meaningful trends in historical ecology that distill the field down to three explicit findings. First, historical ecology is fundamentally an applied research program. Second, this program seeks to understand long-term human-environment interactions with a focus on avoiding, mitigating, and reversing adverse ecological effects. Third, historical ecology is part of convergent trends toward transdisciplinary research science, which erodes scientific boundaries between the cultural and natural.

Dental School Vacant Budgeted Faculty Positions, Academic Years 2011-12 Through 2013-14.

The American Dental Education Association (ADEA) Survey of Dental School Faculty is conducted annually to provide an overview of the hiring and retention activity of U.S. dental school faculty. The survey collects data on the dental faculty workforce, including vacant budgeted positions by appointment and discipline, number of new and lost positions, sources of new hires, and reasons for faculty separations. This report highlights the results of three years of survey data, from the 2011-12 academic year through the 2013-14 academic year. After declining in previous years, the number of vacant faculty positions in U.S. dental schools has begun to increase, rising to 242 full-time and 55 part-time positions in 2013-14. Additionally, the number of schools having more than ten vacancies increased from five to 12. Although the number of vacancies has increased, the length of faculty searches that took more than one year declined from 25% to 16% in the same period. Retirements as a share of full-time faculty separations increased from 14% in 2008-09 to 31% in 2013-14. The current average retirement age of dental school faculty members is 69.7 years. The percentage of full-time faculty members leaving for the private sector remained constant over the last three years at approximately 16%. Full-time faculty members were more likely to be recruited from other dental schools, while part-time faculty members were more likely to come from the private sector.

20 Years Beyond the Crossroads: The Path to Interprofessional Education at U.S. Dental Schools.

In 2003, the Institute of Medicine (IOM) called for interprofessional education (IPE) to be adopted by the health professions education community as the pedagogical approach to educating future practitioners for practice in multidisciplinary teams. In dentistry, this call built on points made in the key 1995 IOM report Dental Education at the Crossroads. Currently, IPE and collaborative practice are among the most significant changes to health care education and delivery in the 21st century. This report describes the path that dental education has taken regarding IPE since the first national report on the subject was released in 1995. It also reports the results of a 2014 survey of U.S. dental schools to ascertain their progress in adopting and implementing IPE, as well as perceived obstacles that persist. Of the 63 dental schools, 62 participated, for a response rate of 98%. While over 90% of the respondents reported that their schools offer IPE experiences, only 58.1% had formal university-led and -promoted IPE programs. Formal IPE experiences were more prevalent at public institutions (67.6%, compared with 44% of private institutions). In 2012, a previous study reported that 66% of the IPE experiences offered to dental students were voluntary; today, 69.1% of these activities are required. Interprofessional core competencies occupy four of the top five content areas of IPE programming, providing a framework for schools to implement IPE activities. However, finding the bandwidth within the dental curriculum to accommodate IPE competencies, identifying adequate time in the schedule, providing faculty training, and assessing IPE activities were the most frequently reported challenges. The results of this survey lead to recommendations for academic dental institutions moving through this transitional phase in adopting IPE.

U.S. Dental School Deans' Perceptions of the Rising Cost of Dental Education and Borrowing Pressures on Dental Students: Report of Survey Results.

This report presents findings from a survey of U.S. dental school deans designed to capture their perceptions regarding the rising cost of dental education and its impact on borrowing by dental students to finance their education. The survey included questions about factors influencing the cost of dental education, concerns about dental student borrowing, and financial awareness resources for students. The survey was distributed to the deans of all 63 U.S. dental schools in January 2013; 42 deans responded, for a 67% response rate. The results indicate that, according to the responding deans, new clinical technologies, technology costs, and central university taxes are the main factors that contribute to the increasing cost of dental education. Coupled with reduced state appropriations at public dental schools and declines in private giving at all dental schools, dental school deans face a perplexing set of financial management challenges. Tuition and fees are a primary source of revenue for all dental schools; however, many deans do not have total control over the cost of attending their schools since tuition and fees are often tied to mandates and policies from the parent university and the state legislature. The findings of this study indicate that U.S. dental school deans are aware of and concerned about the impact of increases in tuition and fees on dental student debt and that they are using a variety of strategies to address the growth in dental student borrowing.

U.S. Dental School Applicants and Enrollees, 2014 Entering Class.

This report analyzes data collected annually by the American Dental Education Association (ADEA) on the characteristics of applicants to and first-year enrollees in dental schools. Among the key findings this year are that, since 2010, there has been a gradual decline in the number of individuals taking the Dental Admission Test (DAT), while the number applying to dental schools has remained relatively flat. During the same five-year time period, the number of first-year dental students has continuously increased. The result is an increasing rate of enrollment among applicants. While the overwhelming majority of dental schools utilize some aspect of a holistic admissions process, the DAT scores and grade point averages of applicants and enrollees continue to rise. Unlike a decade ago, women now account for nearly half of all applicants and enrollees. At least part of the gain has come from a decline in the number of men applicants, rather than a change in the enrollment rate. Among underrepresented minorities, there remains a relatively low number of applicants and a lower than average enrollment rate. Overall, by analyzing data about individuals applying to and matriculating in dental schools, this report provides a window into the future dental workforce.

Dental school vacant budgeted faculty positions, academic years 2008-09 to 2010-11.

The annual turnover of dental school faculty creates a varying number of vacant budgeted positions from year to year. The American Dental Education Association (ADEA) conducts an annual survey to determine the status and characteristics of these vacant faculty positions. The number of vacant budgeted faculty positions in U.S. dental schools increased throughout the 1990s, with a peak of 417 positions in 2005-06. Since that time, there has been a decrease in the number of estimated vacancies, falling to 227 in 2010-11. The 2008-09 to 2010-11 faculty vacancy surveys explored these decreases, along with information relevant to the number and characteristics of dental faculty vacancies, including data on the distribution of full-time, part-time, and volunteer faculty, reasons for faculty separations, and sources of new faculty.

U.S. dental school applicants and enrollees, 2011 and 2012 entering classes.

This report examines the characteristics of dental school applicants and enrollees using data from the 2010-11 and 2011-12 application cycles of the American Dental Education Association's Associated American Dental Schools Application Service (ADEA AADSAS). The report presents data on the demographic composition and academic preparation of applicants, first-time enrollees, and total first-year enrollees during these two application cycles. The data indicate that the number of applicants has decreased modestly during this time, yet the number of first-time, first-year enrollees continues to rise mainly reflecting the opening of new dental schools and expansion of existing class sizes at some schools. Findings also indicate reduced gaps by gender in dental school applicants and enrollees. By contrast, the percentage of underrepresented minority applicants and enrollees increased only slightly. The results highlighted in this study have important implications for health professions education advisors, dental educators, and members of the broader dental education community.

U.S. dental school applicants and enrollees, 2009 entering class.

Over the past two decades, interest in dentistry in the United States has shown a steady period of growth. There were 12,210 individuals who applied to the 2009 entering class of U.S. dental schools. The number of first-time enrollees was 4,871, the highest figure since 1990. Men continue to comprise the majority of applicants and enrollees; however, the percentages of women continue to increase. While the 2009 underrepresented minority applicants comprised 12 percent of both the applicant and first-time enrollee pools, the percentage of underrepresented minority enrollees of underrepresented minority applicants decreased from 2008. Seventy-one percent of enrollees earned a baccalaureate degree in biological science or chemistry/physical science. Regardless of major fields of study, the percent rates of enrollment generally exceeded 32 percent.

Sustaininq an educational environment for change and innovation.

Sustainability refers to the capacity to continue. For the most part, United States dental schools have shown an amazing ability to endure over the past century. Dental schools have continued through fluctuations in application cycles and through persistent faculty shortages. Today, dental schools, particularly public institutions, find themselves faced with draconian budget cuts as states slash funding to higher education. While dental schools face threats, they also enjoy unprecedented opportunities. Scientific advances, particularly in genetics and molecular biology, presage the emergence of new modalities of patient care. The desirability of the dental profession as evidenced by the demand for dental services and the rising income of dentists is at an all time high. Public awareness about the importance of oral health care continues to grow.

Guidinq change one school at a time.

Liaison teams have been developed in order to ensure that national initiatives identified in the American Dental Education Association's Commission on Change and Innovation (ADEA CCI) are implemented at the level of individual schools. Teams of four faculty members each have been identified at 43 United States and Canadian schools. These teams receive training at ADEA annual meeting and at summer institutes. Representative projects from three schools are described.

Chanqes in dental school curricula, 2003-2009.

This 2009 study of dental school curricula follows a similar one conducted in 2002-2003. Through a Web-based survey, the authors gathered information from dental schools about: (a) trends in curricular change over seven years; (b) changes underway in dental school curricula; (c) significant challenges to curricular innovation; and (d) projected trends in curricular change and innovation. In a significant change from the 2002-2003 study, a high proportion (91%) of the responding schools require community-based patient care by all students, with just over one-half ot them requiring five or more weeks of such experience. Respondents reported that priorities for future curriculum modification included: creating interdisciplinary curricula that are organized around themes, blending the basic and clinical sciences, provision of some elements of core curriculum in an online format, developing new techniques for assessing competency, and increasing collaborations with other health professions schools. Respondents identified training for new faculty members in teaching skills, curriculum design, and assessment methods as the most critical need to support future innovation.

Curriculum change in dental education, 2003-09.

This 2009 study of dental school curricula follows a similar one conducted in 2002-03. Through a web-based survey, the authors gathered information from dental schools about 1) past trends in curricular change over seven years; 2) current changes under way in dental school curricula; 3) significant challenges to curricular innovation; and 4) projected future trends in curricular change and innovation. Fifty-five schools (fifty U.S. and five Canadian) responded to the survey for a response rate of 86 percent. In addition to background information, the survey requested information in four broad areas: curriculum format, curriculum assessment, curriculum innovation, and resources needed for curriculum enhancement. Forty-nine percent of the respondents defined their curriculum format as primarily organized by disciplines. Half of the respondents reported the use of problem-based and case-reinforced learning for a section or specific component of some courses. In a significant change from the 2002-03 study, a high proportion (91 percent) of the responding schools require community-based patient care by all students, with just over half requiring five or more weeks of such experience. Competency-based education to prepare an entry-level general dentist seems well established as the norm in responding dental schools. Forty-three percent or less of the responding schools indicated that their students participate with other health professions education programs for various portions of their educational experience. Since the 2002-03 survey, dental schools have been active in conducting comprehensive curriculum reviews; 65 percent indicated that their most recent comprehensive curriculum review is currently under way or was conducted within the past two years. Respondents indicated that the primary reasons for the configuration of the current curriculum were "perceived success" (it works), "compatibility with faculty preferences," "faculty comfort," and "capacity/feasibility." Key catalysts for curricular change were "findings of a curriculum review we conducted ourselves," students' feedback about curriculum, and administration and faculty dissatisfaction. There was an increase in the percentage of schools with interdisciplinary courses, especially in the basic sciences since 2002-03, but no change in the use of problem-based and case-reinforced learning in dental curricula. Respondents reported that priorities for future curriculum modification included creating interdisciplinary curricula that are organized around themes, blending the basic and clinical sciences, provision of some elements of core curricula in an online format, developing new techniques for assessing competency, and increasing collaborations with other health professions schools. Respondents identified training for new faculty members in teaching skills, curriculum design, and assessment methods as the most critical need to support future innovation.

A survey of dental hygiene program directors: summary findings and conclusions.

To assist the ADEA Council of Allied Dental Program Directors in focusing future goals and actions, an online survey was developed and administered to the directors of the 300 Commission on Dental Accreditation (CODA)-accredited U.S. dental hygiene programs in November 2008. The survey solicited directors' opinions about certain contemporary dental hygiene issues such as entry-level education, the use of articulation agreements, the advanced dental hygiene practitioner (ADHP) model proposed by the American Dental Hygienists' Association, and accreditation. Over three-quarters of survey respondents indicated it is "important" or "somewhat important" to advance the entry-level educational requirements for dental hygiene practice to the baccalaureate level. Educational setting (four-year versus two-year) was a significant determinant in whether a respondent thought a baccalaureate degree should result from a dental hygiene educational program. Fifty-six percent of respondents' programs either have or are in the process of developing articulation agreements with other institutions. Seventy percent of all respondents felt it was important to support advancing the ADHP model. Over 60 percent of respondents noted the importance of developing competencies for degree completion and graduate programs, and 42 percent of respondents indicated that it was important to have a separate accreditation process for graduate-level programs. Conclusions suggest advancing entry-level education for dental hygiene is desired if it can maintain a role for both four-year and two-year institutions.

U.S. dental school applicants and enrollees, 2006 and 2007 entering classes.

The number of applicants to dental schools in the United States continues to rise at a double-digit rate, 12 percent from 2005 to 2006 and 14 percent from 2006 to 2007. The number of applicants to the 2006 and 2007 years' entering classes of U.S. dental schools was 12,500 and 13,700, respectively. The number of first-time enrollees (4,600) in 2007 was the highest recorded since 1989. Men continue to comprise the majority of all applicants, 55 percent in 2006 and 53 percent in 2007. However, the percentage of women applicants to each school ranged from a third to more than half. Underrepresented minority (URM) applicants comprised 12 percent of the applicant pools in both 2006 and 2007. For the 2007 entering class, URM enrollees comprised 13 percent of enrollees. As in previous years, in 2007, the largest number of applicants and enrollees came from states that are among the largest in population in the United States: California, Texas, New York, and Florida. Grade point average and Dental Admission Test scores were the highest in more than a decade. More than three out of four of the 2007 first-time, first-year enrollees earned a baccalaureate degree either in biological/life or physical sciences or in health. Regardless of major field of study, the percent rates of enrollment generally exceeded 30 percent, though there were exceptions (e.g., engineering and education). The majority of enrollees to the 2007 entering classes were twenty-two or twenty-three years of age.

Does faculty development enhance teaching effectiveness?

Academic dentists and members of the practice community have been hearing, for more than a decade, that our educational system is in trouble and that the profession has lost its vision and may be wavering in the achievement of its goals. A core of consistently recommended reforms has framed the discussion of future directions for dental education, but as yet, most schools report little movement toward implementation of these reforms in spite of persistent advocacy. Provision of faculty development related to teaching and assessment strategies is widely perceived to be the essential ingredient in efforts to introduce new curricular approaches and modify the educational environment in academic dentistry. Analyses of the outcomes of efforts to revise health professions curricula have identified the availability and effectiveness of faculty development as a predictor of the success or failure of reform initiatives. This article will address faculty development for purposes of enhancing teaching effectiveness and preparing instructors for potential new roles associated with curriculum changes. Its overall purpose is to provide information and insights about faculty development that may be useful to dental schools in designing professional growth opportunities for their faculty. Seven questions are addressed: 1) What is faculty development? 2) How is faculty development accomplished? 3) Why is faculty development particularly important in dental education? 4) What happens when faculty development does not accompany educational reform? 5) Why are teaching attitudes and behaviors so difficult to change? 6) What outcomes can be expected from faculty development? and 7) What does the available evidence tell us about the design of faculty development programs? Evidence from systematic reviews pertaining to the teaching of evidence-based dentistry, strategies for continuing professional education, and the Best Evidence in Medical Education review of faculty development outcomes are presented to answer this question: does faculty development enhance teaching effectiveness? Characteristics consistently associated with effective faculty development are described.