DOCUMENT RESUME

ED 110 640 95 CE 004 424

TITLE Development and Evaluation of Educational Programs inBiomedical Equipment Technology. Final, Report.

INSTITUTION Technical Education Research Center, Cambridge,Mass.

SPONS AGENCY Office of Education (DREW), Washington, D.C.BUREAU NO V-257998PUB DATE Jan 75GRANT 0EG-0-8-000973-1873(085)NOTE 125p.

EDRS PRICE MF-$0.76 HC-$5.70 Plus PostageDESCRIPTORS Biomedical Equipment; *Curriculum Development;

Curriculum Guides; Educational Programs; FieldStudies; Instructional Materials;, *Medical-LaboratoryAssistants; Pilot Projects; Post Secondary Education;Program Coordination; Program Descriptions; *ProgramDesign; *Program Development; Program Evaluation;*Technical Education

ABSTRACTThe report describes the Biomedical Equipment

Technology project carried out by Technical Education ResearchCenters between 1967 and 1974. The project developed a curriculum anda program for training biomedical equipment technicians in two-yearschools. The report discusses the three phases of the project:development of pilot programs, coordinated program development, anddissemination and implementation. Details are provided on thedevelopment of a curriculum guide, the development and testing ofinstructional modules (17 modules in medical electronics andinstrumentation are described briefly in an appendix), thedevelopment and dissemination of the educational program, and theinternal and external evaluation of the project. Appendixes compriseapproximately half of the report and include: a summary of projectgoals and materials developed; a description of the field trials ofthe medical electronics and instrumentation modules; lists ofinstitutions, business, and industries involved in the project;figures on the dissemination of project products; and reprints ofthree relevant articles. (PR)

***********************************************************************Documents acquired by ERIC include many informal unpublished

* materials not available from other sources. ERIC makes every effort ** to obtain the best copy available. nevertheless, items of marginal *

* reproducibility are often encountered and this affects the quality *

* of the microfiche and hardcopy reproductions ERIC makes available *

* via the ERIC Document Reproduction Service (EDRS). EDRS is not* responsible for the quality of the original document. Reproductions ** supplied by EDRS are the best that can be made from the original. ************************************************************************

L

BIOMEDICAL EQUIPMENTTECHNOLOGY

SCOK 01 INT/ REST NOTICEToto t ,y it,a, II

to' frI 04.

I ju.10t Aietwot, ,r t , th ,0

Final Report tt. *

?, $ ' ,I de..

Project No. V257998Grant No.OEG-0 8.0009731873(A85)

Technical Education Research CentersNortheast Center44 Braille StreetCambridge, Massachusetts 02138

January,1975

U.S. Department of Health, Education & WelfareOffice of Education

Technical Education Research CenterslEIC7 1975

'7'INAL REPORT

Project No. V-257998Grant No. 0EG-0-8-000973-1873(085)

DEVELOPMENT AND EVALUATION OF EDUCATIONAL PROGRAMS INBIOMEDICAL EQUIPMENT TECHNOLOGY

Technical Education Research Centers, Inc.44 Brattle Street

Cambridge, Massachusetts 02138

January, 1975

The research reported herein was performed pursuant to agrant with the Office of Education, U. S. Department ofHealth, Education, and Welfare. Contractors undertakingsuch projects under Government sponsorship are encouragedto express freely their professional judgment in theconduct of the project. Points of view or opinions stateddo not, therefore, necessarily represent official Officeof Education position or policy.

U. S. DEPARTMENT OFHEALTH, EDUCATION, AND WELFARE

Office of Education

FOREWORD

Technological advances require new skills andknowledge which in turn create a demand for new kindsof technicians and specialists. Shifting socialpriorities can also cause the rapid emergence intoprominence of hitherto seldom-mentioned paraprofessions.In either case, the nation suddenly needs many newprograms for educating the support personnel who assistmanagers and professionals making the advances andresponding to the shifting priorities.

During the last decade, the United States hasexperienced a growing need for programs in many new andemerging technical occupations. These "emergingtechnologies", as they are often called, include suchoccupations as biomedical equipment technician,environmental health technician, recreational landmanagement specialist, electro-mechanical technician,marine technician, child care center specialist,nuclear technician, paralegal specialist, and laserelectro-optics technician.

In an emerging technical field, there typicallyexist rapidly growing employment opportunities for well-prepared support personnel. Because few, if any,schools have high-quality technical education programsfor preparing such personnel when an occupation emerges,50 to 100 community colleges, technical institutes,and other post-secondary institutions should establishprograms for each new occupation during a decade.These programs are needed to increase the productivityof employers and to provide students with paths toattractive careers.

Development and implementation of a program in anemerging technical occupation presents a very difficultproblem for individual schools or even for educationalplanners in a state system. The specifications of theoccupation? typically require that a school initiate afull-time, two-year program with several new technicalcourses, rather than improve a single existing course.Furthermore, because an emerging field usually isdiffuse and rapidly changing, employers do not offerschools a consensus on objectives for program develop-ment. New fields also frequently lack instructionalmaterials and experienced instructors and a school orcommunity seldom can afford to develop the materialsand train instructors. Consequently more than tenyears generally elapse between the time employers seeknew kinds of support personnel and the ti.ne educationalinstitutions first graduate a substantial number ofthese specialists. This lag is costly in a rapdilychanging technological society.

4.

The Biomedical Equipment Technology (BMET) project.is one of four projects carried out by TeChnicalEducation Research Centers (TERC) between 1967 and 1974whose overall purpose was to reduce this time lag andto catalyse development of needed technical educationprograms throughout the nation in four critical emergingtechnologies; Biomedical Equipment Technology, Electro-Mechanical Technology, Nuclear Medicine Technology, andLaser and Electro-Optical Technology. Each of theseprojects utilized a new kind of curriculum develOpmentprocess and was-a nationally coordinated- programdevelopment project. Each project has succeeded in itspurpose. The specific strategy and tactics and theresearch model employed in each of these projects hasvaried according to the technology of the emergingoccupation, its labor market and the specific coopera-ting educational institutions involved.

Taken together these four projects demonstrate thatcoordinated program development projects can effectivelycatalyse nationwide development of needed educationalprograms in emerging technologies. These projectsprovide guidelines for future program developmentprojects in other new and emerging occupations. Theexperience gained from these four projects can be thebasis for a systematic national approach to the growingchallenge of keeping our educational system responsiveto the constantly changing needs of new and emergingoccupational fields.

The BMET Project was addressed to the particulareudcational needs of the emerging field of BiomedicalEquipment Technology--a rapidly growing technologywhich is critical to the quality and efficiency of thenation's health care system. This report describes thismultiphase project which was carried out during theperiod 1967-74 in cooperation with more than 70community colleges, technical institutes, and otherinstitutions in 28 states and with the involvement of260 industrial employers, 510 hospital employers, 159health planners and educators, 71 societies, and manyother interested individuals and institutions.

iv

ACKNOWLEDGMENTS

The Biomedical Equipment Technology Project hasinvolved over two thousand individuals, institutionsand organizations over a seven year period. It wouldobviously be impossible and inappropriate to attempt torecite their contributions. Although credit is due toall of them, only a few of these contributors are listedin the appendix.

The BMET Project is particularly indebted to theadministration and staff of the original pilot schools- -Springfield Technical Community College and Texas StateTechnical Institute. The administration and staff ofthe seventy community colleges, technical institutes andother institutions who have implemented BMET programsalso deserve special mention for their participation inthe planning and development activities of the projectand in testing the BMET Project products.

In terms of continued support and encouragement forthe project, credit is due to Dr. Walter J. Brooking andothers of the U. S. Office of Education staff who providedvaluable guidance and assistance throughout. Key TERCproject personnel who provided research direction for theproject include Dr. P. John Cadle, Dr. Joseph L. Hozid,and Dr. John W. McWane. Many other TERC staff personnelhave provided vital inputs to the Project. Ms. MargaretB. Wilkins played a major role in TERC's assistance toinstitutions implementing BMET programs, and in thepreparation and editing of BMET Project products.

Despite many individual contributions, the BMETProject was in essence a unique collaborative ventureby researchers, developers, disseminators, implementors,educators, employers, and many others concerned with theemerging field of Biomedical Equipment Technology. Onlyby the combined efforts of all of them has the Projectbeen able to contribute so significantly to improvingthe quality and availability of BMET education throughoutthe nation.

v

G

TABLE OF CONTENTS

Foreword

Acknowledgments

Table of Contents

SUMMARY

INTRODUCTION

CURRICULUM DEVELOPMENT

INSTRUCTIONAL SYSTEMS DEVELOPMENT

PROGRAM PLANNING MATERIAL3

Page

1

9

17

25

27

THE INTERACTIVE NETWORK--A MECHANISM FORPROGRAM DEVELOPMENT AND DISSEMINATION 37

DISSEMINATION AND IMPLEMENTATION ACTIVITIESAND ACCOMPLISHMENTS

EVALUATION ACTIVITIES

SUGGESTIONS FOR FUTURE COORDINATED PROGRAMDEVELOPMENT PROJECTS

APPENDICES

Summary of Project Goals and MaterialsDeveloped

Description of MEI Learning Modules

43

47

49

Description of MEI Module Field Trials

List of Schools Actively Involved in BMET Project

Dissemination of Project Products

Universities, Colleges, Hospitals, Businesses andOthers Involved in BMET Project

Project Conferences and Workshops

Articles and Presentations

Reprints of Published Articles

"Program Development for New and Mmerging Occupations""Development of an Emerging Field""Better Health Through Hospital Equipment"

SUMMARY

National and regional surveys during the late 1960'sand early 1970's showed an urgent national need for developmentof new educational programs in the field of Biomedical Equip-ment Technology. Biomedical Equipment Technicians (BMET's)are employed by hospitals to repair, operate, and maintainthe complex instrumentation used in hospitals and othermedical settings for diagnosis and treatment of patients.They may also be employed by biomedical equipment manufac-turers, and by medical research laboratories. The BMET isincreasingly considered an integral member of the health careteam and human life often depends on his knowledge and skill.This new'ield offers a wide range of excellent career'opportunities for young people who are able to obtain thenecessary BMET technical education--typically two years atthe college level. Despite the urgent and growing need forBMET's, individual schools and states are of',:en unfamiliarwith the employment opportunities and lack the expertise todevelop quality programs in this new field. As a result whenthe BMET Project began in 1967 there were only two civilianBMET educational programs in the United States graduatingfifteen students, despite documented needs for 50-100 programsgraduating 2000 BMET's per year.

The BMET project was developed in response to thisserikous imbalance between the needs of employers andavailable school programs in this critical emerging field.The project was initiated in July 1967 as a nationallycoordinated program development project whose purpose was tocatalyze the development of needed BMET programs in schoolsthroughout the United States

Since coordinated program development of this sort isnew the original research model of the BMET project wasnecessarily rather general. The detailed project design wasdeveloped year by year in close cooperation with more than70 community colleges, technical institutes, and othereducational institutions in 28 states and with the assistanceof professional associations and a broad spectrum of employersin the BMET field.

The overall strategy of the project was to carry outthose research and development activities and to developthose products which would most effectively assist interestedschools in going through the six steps leading to theimplementation of BMET programs. The types of research anddevelopment activities, resulting products, end product useby schools is outlined in Figure 1.

1

fcl

FIGURE 1

Facilitating The Establishment Of New BMET Programs

COORDINATED RESEARCH AND RESULTING koductiDEVELOPMENT ACTIVITIES

Survey Needsand

Resources

Formulate andIntroduce ProgramPlanning Guides

Develop ModularizedInstructional

Materiels

FosterStudent Personnel

Services

MaintainProgram

Relevance

.Report on :106 Character.

.istics;`Manpower Needs:,Training flesoreet,*Dines tory:ofP#!citOn!!.Collected Deis rIptioniof Educational Programs

Min to facilitate !roarer:1-llevelopment:..

Program PlinninoiGuide

Case Studies inProgramImplementation

Facilities and EquipmentGuidelines

Warkshops for ProgramPlanners

Task Anilysie and Perform-ance Objectives

Performance AileismentInstruments

Oieldeited ModularizedInstructional Materials

Workshops

Techniques and Materialsfor Recruiting Students

Student Assessments ofPrograms

Graduate Followup StudyReports

Counseling Guidelines andWorkshops

Coordinating Clearinghouse

Periodic Updating Surveys

Looseleaf Sourcebook onProblems and Possibilities

New Program DevelopmentProjects

1111110

PRODUCT USE a?SCHOOLS INPROGRAM DEVELOPMENT

BMP 1:

Become aware of and develop eninterest In the emerging occupation

-Identify the training componentsfor the occupation and assessfeasibility

Step 3

Appoint a program director orcoordinator and design the program

Step 4

Hire and train instructional staff,implement curriculum, and recruitstudents

1Step 5

Solve ongoing problems, monitorstudent achievement, and run place.meld service

Step 6

Evaluate with follow-up surveys,watch new developments, and reviseprogram accordingly

During the first two years the project focused primarilyon developing and testing BMET programs at two pilot schools -Springfield (Massachusetts) Technical Community College andTexas State Technical Institute. Since 1969 the BMET projecthas worked cooperatively with all community colleges, technicalinstitutes and other institutions known to be interested inBMET education together with a broad spectrum of employers,professional associations and others involved in the field ofBiomedical Equipment Technology. Virtually all of the morethan forty BMET educational programs now operating in theUnited States have been established and carried on inassociation with this project. At least thirty additionalschools are currently planning or considering BMET educationalprograms utilizing BMET project materials and services. Theproject has resulted in a broad body of tested programplanning materials, instructional materials, and expertisewhich are now available for use by schools desiring to establishnew BMET programs.

In addition to developing new programs for BiomedicalEquipment Technicians the BMET project has tested new pro-cedures and products for coordinated program developmentwhich are applicable throughout technical education and alsoin other kinds of education. The BMET project has pioneerednew techniques of involving local innovational "champions"throughout the country in the development process through theBM= Interactive Network. It has also developed new kinds oflaboratory based instructional modules which should haveinfluence far beyond the BMET field.

A major thrust of the BMET project since its inceptionhas been to develop techniques for "transplanting" BMETprograms throughout the country. During the last two years,the project staff have conducted extensive experimentationto determine the most effective strategies and techniques fordisseminating and implementing BMET programs. ,Techniquesutilized have included:

1. BMET program displays at OVA Conventions and ATEA-USOE National Clinics on Technical Education;

2. BMET program need surveys of approximately 2,000community colleges, technical institutes and otheragencies;

3. Providing consulting services and technicalassistance services to schools for planning,implementation and evaluation of new BMET programs;

4. Mailings of information on BMET publications andapparatus;

3

5. Publication of an issue of the TECHNICAL EDUCATIONREPORTER focused on emerging technologies andfeaturing descriptions of exemplary BMET programs;

6. Experimental workshops and short courses particularlyon BMET Instructional Modules;

7. Development of a comprehensive Program DevelopmentCatalog including a broad range of BMET materialsand services;

8. BMET Interactive Network operations;

9. An experimental program for BMET State Coordinatorsin ten states.

Figure 2 shows highlights of the BMET project from itsinception in 1967 through its completion in December 1974.This Figure shows for each year the major project activities,Federal project funds expended, the number of operating BMETprograms in schools, and the approximate funding of theseprograms from state and local sources. Figure 3 shows theyearly geographical growth of BMET programs in schoolsthroughout the country.

A measure of the effectiveness of the BMET disseminationand implementation strategies can be seen from Figure 2 bycomparing the annual BMET Project Funds (Federal) with rapidlyincreasing annual State and local investment in BMET programsstimulated by the BMET Project.

Percentage of BMET EducationalExpenditures Provided By:

BMET Project State and LocalFunds (Federal) BMET Program Funds

1968 42% 58%1969 64% 36%1970 36% 64%1971 40% 60%1972 18% 82%1973 14% 86%1974 6% 94%

As these figures indicate the BMET project funds servedas "seed money" to stimulate major state and local investmentsin BMET education and as such proved to be a highly costeffective use of Federal funds. By 1974 state and localsources were providing more than $15 in support for BMETeducation for every Federal dollar expended by the BMETproject. These results confirmed by similar results of theother three emerging technology projects provide strongevidence of the effectiveness of Federally sponsored coordin-ated program development products in emerging technologies.

4

Major Project-Activities

*ET ProjeCt:Oegini

Pilot PrOgram,,Springfield Technical

community College (STCC)

Pilot Prograi,Expanded, Texas State

Technical Institute

AIMET'Film Completed

-, First Interactive Network Conference

First Experimental Texts

16 Experimental Units Developed

National Survey-8NET Needs/Resources

Second Interactive Network Conference

First National Project Evaluation

Pilot Program Expanded

Case Study-STCC Program

:Compendium of Educational Programs

'Hospital Administrators Workshop

Second National Project Evaluation

'Task Analysis by Selected Criteria

,Materials and Guidance Workshops

ln 6 Educational Modules Developed/rested

MET Sourcebook Disseminated

Bibliography of Instructional Materials

'Case Studies of 3 Programs

NWT Recruitment Brochures Developed

Curriculum Guide Drafted

Educational Nodcles Developed/Tested

Teacher Training Workshops Held

Planning, Conferences Held

Curriculum Guide Printed

Program Implementation Workshop

flannin, Conference Held

Instructional Materials Published

Final Project, Report

After Termination of DSOE Funding

,,Projected Operation and Continued

Expansion of BMET Educational

Programs in Schools

FY '70

FY '71

1';',12.12992°°

10 schools

FY '72

$1574D00

18 schools

FY '13

$200

,000

I

,Hismarporpgrk

Oeviioppioutimer 000oitiattiet-iOr

sio-410icat Equipment Tichnicians

28 schools

FY '74 $100,000

40 schools

FY '75

71 schools projected

AWOL INET PROJECT FUNDS - USOE

ANNUAL FUNDS FOR OPERATING

MET PROGNAWPROVIDED BY

'STATE AMILOCAL AGENCIES

(BASED ON AVERAGES REPORTED

8Y,SCNOOLS)

scmootwoimoot,ssomm CO NOT

INCLUDE-CANADIAN OR NON-

CIVILIAN PROGRAMS

I

-7.7

.77-

",<

7'"

$

t.....

....J

'*3

006C

0sae

'120

156o,

loop. .

2100

2400

.Alnual4xpenditUrea,by'Fiscal'Years,,fmr-IMEt*rojeet,:emd,NMET,EducntimnaT,Pmegrela-,

1!urtiLsOf'Slutho,

c;

2700

FIGURE

GROWTH OF SCHOOL PROGRAMS

TERC 810 MEDICAL EQUIPMENT TECHNOLOGY PROJECT

A 3*Does not inclgde Canadian or noncivilian programs.

YEAR STATES SCHOOLSIN

1969 2 3

1970 5 8

1971 7 10

1972 11 18

1973 17 28

.

1974 22

Technical Education Research Centers44 (kettle Street, Cambridge, Mass. 02138

6:

40

The BMET project has succeeded in establishing a soundbase for BMET education in the United States. More thanforty community colleges, technical institutes or otherinstitutions have now implemented BMET educational programsin cooperation with the Project. This is a good beginningbut does not yet fully meet the needs of this rapidlyexpanding field. Although the research and development phasehas now been completed there is a continuing need forsystematic BMET dissemination and implementation activitiesuntil operating BMET programs hove been established in nearly

every state so as to provide convenient models for theestablishment of new BMET programs by schools anywhere in theUnited'. States.

To meet this need it is recommended that a BMETdissemination/implementation project should be carried on ata relatively low level of funding for a period of three years.This might be done as a part of a broader dissemination/implementation project for emerging occupations or careereducation programs. The objectives of the dissidination/implementation project would be to facilitate the implementa-tion of additional BMET programs throughout the country; toassure that existing BMET programs remain relevant to thechanging needs of employers and students; and to work withleaders in the field for the further development of the BMEToccupations. Project activities should include:

1. Disseminating BMET planning and instructionalmaterials;

2. Maintaining an active communications network amongeducational institutes, hospitals, employers,professionals and all others concerned with BMETeducation and employement needs in order tomaintain the relevance of the BMET program;

3. Providing consultative service and technicalassistance to states and schools wishing toimplement new BMET programs or wishing to improveexisting programs;

4. Conducting conferences, short courses, and stafftraining workshops for teachers and administratorsin the BMET field.

Such a dissemination/implementation project wouldfurther increase the impact of the BMET program developmentproject and would be a model for effective dissemination/implementation of other programs developed under USOEsponsorship.

14

1-7

- _

INTRODUCTION

Background

The rapid application during the past several years ofelectronics and other instrumentation to the field of medicalresearch, diagnosis, care and treatment has resulted in thedevelopment of hundreds of new specialized bio-medicalinstruments and systems for use in hospitals and medical

research centers. This equipment is becoming increasinglyspecialized and complex as bio-medical equipment technologybecomes more sophisticated. Bio-medical equipment technologyis rapidly becoming a major factor in achieving the nationalobjective of increasing the overall efficiency and quality ofhealth services in the United States. This new technology,properly used, has the capability of both reducing the costand improving the quality of the nation's health services andof making possible more effective medical research.

The rapid development of bio-medical equipment technologycoupled with the introduction of increasingly complex andcritical bio-medical equipment has created an increasinglyserious need within hospitals-and medical research centers forwell prepared technicians who understand this new technologyand who are capable of operating, maintaining, calibrating,and in some cases, modifying or adapting this equipment.Human life may frequently depend upon the ability and train-ing of such technicians. Similarly trained technicians areneeded in great numbers by bio-medical equipment manufacturersto assist in the development, manufacturing, testing,technical sales, and servicing of bio-medical equipment.

Educational research in the field of Bio-medicalequipment technology began in May 1966 with a fourteen monthstudy of the national needs for Bio-Medical Equipment Tech-nicians (BMET). This occupational research study was carried

out by Technical Education Research Centers under the sponsor-ship of the U. S. Office of Education (Grant No. OEG-1-6-000366-0658) between May 1966 and June 1967 and assessed thedeveloping needs of hospitals, medical research laboratories,bio-medical equipment manufacturers and other employers for

trained BMET's. This field study found that based on existingand developing employment opportunities there was an immediateand continuing need for training at least 2,000 BMET's peryear in the United States in postsecondary associate degreetype programs and that this annual need was growing every

year. By contrast at the time of the field study only twoU. S. civilian schools were preparing BMET's and togetherwere graduating a total of approximately 15 BMET's per year.To rectify this serious imbalance between the needs of employersfor trained BMET's and available BMET graduates it was necessarythat BMET programs should be initiated as quickly as possible infifty to one hundred technical institutes, community colleges,

or other postsecondary institutions.

9

Unfortunately, despite the urgent needs for BMETeducation virtually no new BMET programs were being plannedand few were likely to be planned since virtually none of thenormally available planning and instructional materials wereavailable to assist schools in implementing new BMET programs.The technical occupations within the technology had not beenstructured, defined or publicized, the knowledge and skillrequirements had not been identified; curricula had not beendeveloped; and there was a serious lack of appropriateinstructional materials such as textbooks, laboratory guides,classroom demonstration equipment and laboratory equipment.Finally, there was a paucity of trained teachers andspecialized laboratory facilities. It was quite clear thatunless systematic steps were taken to facilitate the develop-ment of BMET programs throughout the United States, theshortage of adequately educated Biomedical Equipment Technicianswould become critical within a few years. It would adverselyaffect many national health programs and would impair thequality and efficiency of our nation's health services.

The overall objective of the BMET project was tocatalyze the development of a broad spectrum of postsecondaryeducation programs in Biomedical Equipment Technology. Theproject was conceived of as falling into three phases:

First Phase--Development of Pilot Programs in two schools

Second Phase--Coordinated Program Development

Third Phase--Dissemination and Implementation

These three phases overlapped somewhat but the primaryfocus was on the First Phase in 1968-69; on the Second Phasein 1970-72; and on the Third Phase in 1973-74.

The objectives for the First Phase of the BMET projectencompassed two major areas:

1. Develop, test, and evaluate a curriculum for a twoyear associate degree program in biomedical equipmenttechnology.

2. Develop, test, and evaluate instructional materialswhich could be used by institutions desiring to usethe curriculum.

Springfield Technical Institute, Springfield, Massachusetts(later renamed Springfield Technical 'ommunity College (STCC)and referred to by this name in the report] was selected asthe first site. The BMET program at STCC began September1967. The plan was to transfer the curriculum to James

10

Connelly Technical Institute, Waco, Texas [later renamedTexas State Technical Institute (TSTI) and referred to bythis name in the report]. The TSTI program began September,1969.

The goals of this phase of the project were achievedbut not as well as TERC had expected. Funding was delayedso that there was insufficient planning for the first classat STCC. The Springfield Technical Community Collegecurriculum did not readily transplant to Texas State TechnicalInstitute since the two institutions had different internalconstraints and goals. Therefore, in planning the Second Phaseof the BMET project, TERC approached the problem of developingBMET educational programs a different way. The project beganto look at all the interlocking forces and interest groupsthat comprise the BMET field and not just at the two piloteducational programs. This wider view of a constituency forthe BMET project was the basis on which the Second Phase wasdeveloped.

Rationale for Second Phase

The related interest, groups in the BMET field aresummarized in Figure 4 below along with the objective of eachgroup.

Employers* requireprepared BMET's

FIGURE 4

Professional kSocieties help

define the <technology

Educational Institutionprepare BMET's for Students enroll

employment in educational

4r institutions

/` Textbook publishers

provide educationalmaterials for BMETprograms.111.

* The word "employer" includes the various kinds of employers who hire a

technician called the BMET. BMET's work for hospitals, for equipment

manufacturers, for research and development organizations, or for

profit or non-profit organizations that repair equipment in several

hospitals

11 7

All five of these areas of interest are composed of manyindividuals acting either singly or in concert. For BMET'sto be adequately prepared for employment, communications amongmembers of each group (e.g. educators to educators) and amongthe various interest groups (e.g. employers and educators)must flow smoothly.

In 1969, when the Second Phase was planned there wereseveral problems within the BMET field. Some of theseproblems were faulty communications. Other problems, such asgaps in knowledge and materials, needed effective communica-tions to help solve them. These problems were as follows:

1. Because few BMET's were available, the job functionsof the BMET were performed by various individuals,and the need for a trained technician was not alwaysrecognized. In hospitals especially, thoseresponsible for job structuring were slow to set upjob categories for BMET's.

2. Few employers who had BMET jobs available were awarethat educational programs existed. Thereforeemployers recruited only from the ranks of electronicstechnicians, not recent graduates of programs.

3. Because employers did not know about BMET educationalprograms they had little say in shaping curriculum.

4. Since BMET program directors did not know one another,they could not share information especially oninstructional material that could be adapted forbiomedical equipment technology courses.

5. Since college administrators did not know about BMETprograms, they could not find out how to avoidproblems in establishing such programs.

6. Educators had few instructional materials, and text-book publishers were uninterested in developingmaterials. Since there were only a few programs touse them, the market did not justify any investmentin developing materials.

7. Professional societies required some job definitionfor the technician before establishing a certificationexamination to increase recognition for the BMET.

8. Educators needed recruitment materials to alertpotential students about this little advertisedspecialty.

9. Students needed to know location and stature of theBMET programs.

12

is

All these problems required that various kindt ofinformation--recruitment materials, instructional materials,job definitions, and lists of BMET programs--be available anddisseminated. In addition, some of the problems could bestbe solved by sharing information and experiences among BMETprogram directors, college administrators, and employers. Forexample, the first phase of the project had indicated that apilot tested curriculum could not be transplanted withoutextensive revision. However, curriculum planners did need toknow how other educational programs had evolved their curricula.They needed to know problems others have encountered and howthese problems had been solved.

Such a sharing of information between and among thoseinvolved in the BMET field is not automatic. In planning thesecond phase of the project, the BMET project sought to actas a facilitator of these needed communications. TERC was toinitiate accumulation of information and materials that wouldhelp the five interest groups summarized in Figure 4. Asplanning continued for this interactive network, it becameclear that the network had a great deal of potential. It wasplanned that in the first year, the BMET project would playthe most important role in the network. But in future years,the project could assume a less central role as communicationsmodes became established. Thus the interactive network couldbe a vehicle for project continuity. The BMET field itselfwould continue the goals of the project when funding ceased.

Second Phase Goals and Activities (1970-72)

During the Second and Third phases detailed project goalsand activities were planned each year in response to theexpressed needs of participating schools which were implementingBMET programs in cooperation with the project. The followinggoals were developed and carried out in 1970:

1. Survey BMET field to determine job performancetasks, types of BMET's, and to better understandtheir functioning within the hospital environment.

2. Plan, organize, and administer a developmentconference to promote a greater understanding of theobjectives of existing and planned programs throughthe participation by two or three teachers from eachinstitution. The development conference eventuallybecame the Denver Conference, a key in the establish-ment of the interactive network. This conference,while including BMET program directors, includedemployers and professional society representativesas well. The conference itself was designed to giveTERC feedback, based on the findings of the nationalsurvey on BMET job performance as to problems andpreferred solutions to them. Several individualsimportant to the network were identified.

13

The following three goals were established in 1970 andwere key activities throughout the Second and Third Phasesbeing completed in 1974:

1. The organization and administration of an Inter-active Network that would provide assistance toTERC in development of instructional materialsand would eventually function within and amongthe participants to provide project continuity.*

2. Develop instructional systems including on the jobtasks performed by BMET's, based on equipment mostfrequently worked on by the BMET. This informationis key to the development of instructional modulesfor BMET programs.

3. Survey needs and interests of institutionsestablishing BMET programs and existing programsand develop materials and services to assist them.

In 1972 the following new activities, based on feedbackfrom the interactive network, were instituted:

1. Develop materials for BMET Program counselors andguide for follow-up surveys of BMET graduates.

2. Refine and explore implications of BMET careerladders.

These two goals were perhaps the least well realized ofall the goals for the BMET projec.. Materials were developedfor both as the appendix materials will indicate. Recruitmentand guidance materials were developed and warmly received bythe field. However, follow-up surveys of graduates in a fieldthat still had few graduates was a bit premature. A careerladder was developed but no attempt was made to explore itsimplications because a more serious career problem was subse-quently identified. Hospital administrators' failure to hireBMET's was causing a crisis for the BMET programs. In mid-1971the project used resources designated for career ladder tooperate a workshop for hospital administrators in cities with

* As later discussions of the BMET Interactive Network will indicate, theconcept was not fully developed until 1972. At that time it was clearTERC activities had led to significant changes in communications.Initially the Interactive Network participants were to be reviewers toinsure TERC's relevance to the BMET field. Through 1970-71, it becameclear that interactions between others in the network were becoming asimportant as TERC's contribution to the network. At that point, TERCbegan to fully realize that the network was a vehicle for projectcontinuity.

14

20

programs beginning that September. Thus TERC's flexibilityand response to the field allowed for a more productiveactivity than was planned for initially.

The Third Phase (1973-74)

As the appendix material indicates, the BMET Projecthad developed a great many products by 1973. The interactivenetwork system had begun to disseminate many of them. Duringthe Third Phase BMET project activities focused on two basictypes of activities: synthesis of the lessons learned by theproject into one document, and more effective disseminationand implementation of BMET products and programs. As a partof this effort two specific new goals were established:

1. Develop and evaluate a curriculum guide that willsummarize a model program for biomedical equipmenttechnology based on the most successful aspects ofall BMET programs. This document will assistprogram planners in establishing curricula forBMET programs.

2. Survey community colleges and technical institutesto determine whether additional materials arerequired other than those already available forestablishment of BMET programs.

These goals were accomplished by the end of 1974.

During the Third Phase a continuing effort was made toexperiment with various techniques for disseminating of BMETproject products and for facilitating the development ofBMET programs throughout the country. Some of these techni-ques are outlined in the section on Dissemination andImplementation and are believed to be applicable to thedissemination and implementation of other types of educationalprograms.

Project Products

As a part of the BMET project more than fifty programplanning materials, instructional materials, and other projectproducts were developed and disseminated to meet specificproject goals. The appendix contains a summary of thespecific project goals outlined above together with a listof project products which were developed in response to eachgoal.

15

21

CURRICULUM DEVELOPMENT

Introduction to Springfield Technical Community College

The Biomedical Equipment Technology program at SpringfieldTechnical Community College in Springfield, Massachusetts isbeginning its eighth year of operation. Six classes have

graduated. The program is a strong addition to the technical

offerings at the college. When the program began inSeptember, 1967, only two other civilian schools in theUnited States had BMET programs. The planning experiencefor this program was necessarily difficult. There were nopreviously established curricula to follow. There was noconsensus of what BMETs needed to know. Therefore, theproblems encountered at STCC had several important lessonsto teach other BMET programs and research organizations suchas TERC.

Summary of Lessons Learned

When the idea for the BMET program at STCC was developed

in March, 1967, the original plan called for an experimentalBMET class to enter in September. The state funding wasdependent on this plan. The BMET project funding wasexpected to be received in June, 1967 and the STCC facultyand TERC project staff were supposed to begin work oncurriculum development at that time.

Because of delayed funding of the BMET project the STCC

staff had to bear the entire burden for planning the programuntil October, 1967, when the project funding was received.The faculty were overworked because, in addition, on shortnotice, the campus was moved to a new location during the

summer of 1967. The faculty carried full time teaching loads,

administrative responsibilities for the relocation, and BMET

program planning responsibilities.

In retrospect, the program might have had a smoothercourse the first two years if the first students had enteredSeptember, 1968. The program would have benefited from aplanning year and funding delays would not have caused suchserious problems for the faculty members. During the firstyear of the program the STCC curriculum was in the process

of development. Some students found their course of study

confusing. Part of the problem perhaps springs from the

nature of emerging technologies. Even the experts were notcertain about what information should be included in a BMET

curriculum.

Curriculum Content

It was planned that the curriculum was to be developed

based on the occupational survey of the BMET occupationsconducted by TERC in 1966-67. This survey was not designed

to provide detailed performance objectives but did provide

2217

f.

general guidance that the curriculum should include electronics,physics, and biomedical electronics. The curriculum, accordingto the project plan, was to provide a two year associate degreecurriculum with all courses--electronics, physics, mathematics,and even English--integrated into the BMET curriculum. It wasplanned that the curriculum content of the pilot BMET programwould be based on the occupational survey supplemented by theadvice of experts in the field of Biomedical EquipmentTechnology.

The first problem surrounding curriculum developmentwhich is typical in an emerging occupation was that the expertopinion frequently differed. It was impossible, without afirm data base on which all could agree, to come to consensus.All the curriculum planners had had extensive experience inthe field of medical instrumentation. Given the undefinedstate of biomedical equipment technology, each of theirdiffering opinions were probably somewhat correct. Thesedisagreements did take time to resolve and curriculum develop-ment did not proceed at the pace anticipated.

When the planners attempted to integrate all coursesinto the BMET curriculum, they discovered that non-technicalcourses could not be changed. Massachusetts regulations7..oncerning community colleges would not permit changes. Thecommunity college system stresses transferrability of credit,and non-technical courses are the keystone to this transfer.The curriculum planners and project director therefore limitedfurther development of the curriculum to those coursesconcerned with biomedical equipment technology.

Instructional Materials

The curriculum and course outlines were to be supportedwith the development of needed instructional materials forthe biomedic,1 courses. Other text materials were availablefor the electronics and physics courses that could supportthe BMET curriculum.

A major problem encountered with materials developedby instructors was lack of time. The instructors developedinstructional materials that were adequate for their use inthe classroom. However, these materials were not suitableas disseminable products without a great deal of refinement.The instructors did not have time nor the funds to refine,revise, and polish their materials. Educational publisherswere understandably not interested in texts that could besold to only a handful of BMET programs in the country.

Summary of the STCC Program in 1969

By the time the First Phase ended at STCC, despite allthese problems, the BMET program was well established.Although the integrated curriculum was not fully realized,

18

2.3

BMET students were pursuing a rigorous course of study thatincluded nine semester courses in biomedical equipmenttechnology. The instructors were using the materials theyhad developed.

The TERC/STCC effort to establish a BMET program hadone underlying problem. In defining the scope of work, theplanners had assumed that they could achieve on limitedfunding more than was realistically possible. The mostimportant aspect of the plan of work had been successfullyachieved. STCC had an operating program in biomedicalequipment technology. Considering the problems involved withemergi g technologies, the establishment of the program wasan important achievement.

The STCC Experience Today

The BMET program at STCC has clearly flourished. Eachyear, approximately 20 students enroll in the program. Thesestudents have heard of the program from many sources. Somecome directly from high school. Several come from militaryprograms.

The STCC program director is proud of the placementrecord of his graduates. The placement experience reflectsone of the strengths of the program. The curriculum providespreparation in the specialty of biomedical electronics butalso provides diversity so that students may, if they chose,pursue careers in related electronics fields. For example,in 1974 the BMET program graduated 12 students. Two graduateswent to work repairing hospital equipment; six graduatessecured employment in electronics-related fields; two trans-ferred to four year programs; one is unemployed and one haslost contact with the school.

The initiative and drive of the graduates is exemplifiedby four students who formed their own company. They providemedical equipment repair services to eight hospitals in theSpringfield region. In addition they are the sales represen-tatives for three medical electronics firms. This companyhas begun hiring other graduates of the STCC program.

Transplanting the Program to TSTI

The original plan was to transplant the STCC BMETcurriculum directly to the second pilot school, Texas StateTechnical Institute. This did not prove possible. Therewere several differences between the schools that suggestedfrom the beginning that major changes would have to be madein the curriculum. STCC had a semester calendar, TSTI hadtrimester. STCC provides students with equal options foremployment or transfer to a four year program. TSTI emphasisis employment not transfer at completion of a technicalprogram. STCC acquired an intensive care system for the

19

24

laboratory from TERC's Laboratory Equipment Assistance program.TSTI had no such system but had operating room equipmentinstead. The differences may be best summed up in theirnames. STCC is a community college and TSTI is a technicalinstitute.

When TSTI began offering its BMET program in 1969, theInstitute was spared some of the confusions that surroundedthe early planning experiences at STCC. The TSTI programplanners had all the course outlines and other curriculummaterials that had been developed at STCC. However, theyfelt that these materials were not appropriate for theirinstitution and began seriously rewriting and revising thecurriculum to suit their needs.

From participating in this transplant, TERC learned someimportant lessons about curriculum development and especiallydissemination. The TSTI curriculum planners insisted onmaking changes in the STCC curriculum. These were not changesfor changes' sake. Rather, the instructors had invested theirown effort and thus had a better understanding of a curriculumthat they themselves had helped design. However, they diddraw on the STCC materials and as result the course outlinesand curriculum were developed faster at TSTI than at STCC.

In reviewing the experience, TERC had learned two veryimportant lessons about program planning. The first lessonwas that direct curriculum transplants are very difficultfrom one school to another. The second lesson was thatexternally developed planning information and curriculummaterials is needed by program planners to speed up theirwork.

The TSTI Program Today

The TSTI program has operated for six years and hasproduced four classes of graduates. It is clear, from theemployers' response to these graduates that the program isflourishing. In 1974, there were 12 graduates, five went towork in hospitals, six for equipment manufacturers, and onewas employed in a field unrelated to BMET. There were manymore requests from hospitals for BMET graduates than studentsto fill these positions.

The program has been successful from the students' pointof view. Enrollment has been no problem. Approximately 30students enroll in the program each year. Several of thesedrop out and later return to the program. Others secureemployment before they graduate and some transfer to otherprograms. However, those that return to discuss their newjobs usually report that they enjoy the challenge of theirpositions. Few appear to be dissatisfied whether they workfor equipment manufacturers or hospitals.

20

Developing a Curriculum Guide

The First Phase experiences of 1967-69 had convinced theBMET project personnel that development and dissemination ofa single curriculum was not feasible. Schools would not usea curriculum implemented at another school without adaptingit to their needs. The curriculum guide, while still a futurepossibility, became a secondary issue. It was concluded thatit was premature to write a curriculum guide until considerableexperience with BMET programs existed in a variety of schools.

By 1972 there were 32 BMET programs operating, and TERChad provided materials and servicc,s to all of them. Some ofthe program directors had attended, workshops, others hadsupplied information for many of the products that weredeveloped in 1969-72. In a new approach to the curriculumguide in 1972, TERC sought to synthesize the differentstrategies these BMET programs had developed for theircurriculum. However, the results were fragmentary andconfusing.

The final plan for the curriculum guide formulated in1973 involved a new conception as to the use of the document.TERC knew from experience that a curriculum would be adaptedby each school. Instead of selecting one curriculum fromamong the 32 operational programs as the "one", TERC addresseditself to devising a model program. The model programincluded the best characteristics cf all the programs thathad been studied. The model curriculum would be a summationof the best program an instructor would lite to develop ifthere were no restrictions on resources and funding. It setan "ideal" that probably would never be achieved. But theexistence of the model would assist in establishing qualityprograms and upgrading existing ones.

Once the function of the curriculum guide was clearlydefined, an additional problem developed. TERC researchindicated that a BMET who worked for an equipment manufacturerwas likely to require different preparation from the BMET whoworked in a hospital. Was a curriculum to be devised toprepare both technicians? TERC and its advisors concludedthat for the curriculum to be a successful model, it mustprovide the strongest recommended curriculum for preparationof clearly defined lobs. Since discussion with BMET programdirectors indicated that they felt the most challengingemployment for the BMET was in the hospital, the curriculumwas designed primarily for a BMET to be employed in a hospital.

The Model Curriculum

The Curriculum Guide titled Biomedical Equipment Tech-nology: A Suggested Two-Year Postsecondary Curriculum offersguidelines for a model BMET program. Several of thesesuggestions for establishing a program are the direct result

21 2G

of the STCC and TSTI and other school experiences. The Guidecontains several overall guidelines for schools consideringestablishing a BMET program as follows:

1. A community college with less than 5,000 full-timestudents is not likely to have resources forestablishing a comprehensive BMET program.

2. A school should have an electronics program, andtwo-three allied health programs before consideringa BMET program.

3. Faculty members must be dedicated to integratingthe technical core of the BMET program.

4. The school should hire a full-time BMET programdirector one year before the students are admittedto the program.

5. An occupational needs survey is required beforeinitiating the program to determine job availabilityand tasks the BMET's will be required to performfor local employers.

6. A BMET program should have a clinical program ofat least 500 hours in a hospital.

7. The curriculum guide recommends 608 hours of BMETcourses, 528 hours of technical subjects, 320 hoursof sciences, and 144 hours of related courses. In

addition 900-1,000 hours of clinical experience arerecommended.

An outline of the model BMET curriculum is shown on thefollowing pages.

22

277

The Curriculum

Biomedical Equipment Technology

FIRST YEAR

FIRST SEMESTER

Electronics Fundamentals: AC, DCCircuit'S, Batid Circuits andElectronic Devicet

Technical Math I: AlgebraThe BMET at Work: Introdudtionto the Hospital and Industry

Medical Teraiinology

TeChnical PhySicsBaSic Shop Practices

SECOND SEMESTER

Class Lab Outside TotalHours Hours Study Hours

-3 6

03

6 15

6 9

4 6

0 4 6

3 6 122 2

TOTALS 13 11 26 CC

Intermediate Electronics: Ampli-fiers, Signal ProcessingCircuits, and Power Supplies 3 5 6 14

Technical Math II: Trigonometryand Advanced Algebra 3 0 6 9

Operation of BiomedicalInstrumentation 2 3 4 9

Technical Chemistry 3 3 6 12

Communications Skills 3 0 6 9

TOTALS

SUMMER

14 11 28 53

1) Work experience: 0 40 0 40Clinical practicum (10-12 weeks) in hospital performing safetychecks, inventory, and training hospital personnel in operatingprocedures.

2) Studies to meet special requirements of State or institution,if necessary.

23

COMPREHENSIVE BMET CURRICULUM

SECOND YEAR

THIRD SEMESTER

Advanced Electronics: FeedbackSystems, Signal Processing,

ClassHours

LabHours

OutsideStudy

TotalHours

Telemetry 2 3 4 9Digital Electronics 2 3 4 9Electromechanical Systems 2 2 4 8Biomedical Instrumentation:

Patient Monitoring, ClinicalLab 2 5 4 11

Anatomy and Physiology 3 0 6 9Technical Report Writing 3 0 6 9

TOTALS 14 13 28 55

FOURTH SEMESTER

Biomedical Instrumentation:Troubleshooting Techniques 1 3 2 6

Biomedical Equipment Selectionand Design 2 3 4 9

General Medical Instrumentation 3 3 6 12Biomedical Instrumentation:

X-Ray and Nuclear Medicine 3 3 6 12Social Psychology for theHealth Sciences 3 0 6 9

TOTALS 12 12 24 48

SUMMER

Work experience: 0 40 0 40Clinical practicum (10-12 weeks) inhospital - repair and maintenanceof equipment under close super-vision

24

9.g

INSTRUCTIONAL SYSTEMS DEVELOPMENT

During the First Phase of the BMET project, a study wasmade to assess the most serious gaps in available BMETinstructional materials and to determine what new materialswere most urgently needed to facilitate the development of

new BMET programs. It was found that the most serious needwas for the development of a series of laboratory basedinstructional modules which would familiarize the studentwith the basic components, electronic circuits and systemsmost commonly found in biomedical equipment. One of theimportant objectives of the Second and Third Phases of theproject, therefore, was to develop and test the neededinstructional materials. This work was carried out by TERC'sCurriculum Development Laboratory in Cambridge with thecooperation of 16 community colleges and technical institutesand resulted in the development of 17 independent learningmodules and associated laboratory apparatus.

The module development was based on the BMET occupationalanalysis as reported in the Interim II Report: Survey of JobCharacteristics, Manpower Needs and Training Resources and onthe BMET Task Analysis by Selected Criteria. Each module wasdesigned with specific learning objectives. Taken togetherthe nodules form a hands-on laboratory program in the basicsof biomedical equipment technology. Although specificallydesigned for BMET programs these-materials may be used inmany general electronics or instrumentation courses as wellas in allied health programs.

The Medical Electronics and Instrumentation (MEI)learning modules are of three types each covering a differentaspect of medical instrumentation--Operation and MeasurementModules, Systems Analysis Modules, and Component AnalysisModules.

Operation and Measurement Modules discuss methods ofoperating an instrument and the medical applications of thedata. They are designed to provide the student with a back-ground on the source of signal for a given instrument, thebasis on which the measurement is made, and the use of theresults. An experiment instructs the student in the properoperating technique for the instrument and the method ofanalyzing the data.

System Analysis Modules give a systems overview of thedesign of an instrument, explaining the function of eachcircuit and transducer component. In these modules thestudent analyzes an instrument system in terms of the flowof information from the source to a particular output displaymode or feedback loop. In the laboratory, the studentassembles and calibrates a functioning system from thecomponent blocks and studies the problems of their interfacing.

25

Component Analysis Modules give an in-depth analysis ofcircuits and transducers which are used in instrument design.Each module includes experiments so that students can gethands-on experience with the equipment. In these modulesthe hardware component is discussed, an analysis of itsoperation is presented in terms of input-output character-istics, and a laboratory exercise is given for the studentsto assemble the circuit and study its operation.

A brief description of the seventeen MEI modules and ofthe associated student apparatus which was developed to beused with them may be found in the appendix.

After initial development and testing in Cambridge theMEI modules were field tested during 1973-74 in sixteencooperating schools. A report on these Field Trials iscontained in the appendix.

In accordance with the procedures of the U. S. Office ofEducation relating to instructional materials developed underUSOE grants, a Publishers Alert was issued to all publishersand apparatus manufacturers interested in the MEI modules.A briefing session was held in Cambridge in April, 1974attended by two publishers and six apparatus manufacturers.Interest from four additional publishers was received afterthe briefing session. Requests for proposals for publishingthe modules and manufacturing the student apparatus wereprovided to all interested publishers and manufacturers.Proposals were received from two manufacturers but none werereceived from publishers. TERC queried those publisherswhich had expressed initial interest as to the reasons theyhad not made proposals. The reasons in each case were thatthe potential market was too small for adequate profitability.Several publishers also indicated that they were veryreluctant to go into new publishing areas because of thecurrent economic uncertainties.

In view of the fact chat no commercial publishers areavailable for the MEI modules, TERC plans to publish themodules as developer under a limited Copyright to be authorizedby the USOE and plans to appoint PASCO Scientific Company ofSan Leandro, California as the designated manufacturer of thestudent apparatus.

26

PROGRAM PLANNING MATERIALS

The Development Model

When the Second Phase of the BMET project began in 1970,the project plan was focused on the development of productsdesigned to assist schools in planning and implementing BMETprograms. As a first step a model for designing, developing,and establishing a new educational program was conceptualizedand a number of needed research products were identified.This model is shown as Figure 5. The steps that an educationalinstitution must take to establish a new program are shownhorizontally across the top of the model. These includeawareness /interest, feasibility study, program design,program start-up, ongoing program operation, and ongoingevaluation and revision. A program development project suchas the BMET project can effectively assist schools toestablish new programs by developing and diSseminating aseries of products and services each of which is keyed toone of the five steps. Some of these types of products andservices are shown as "TERC Research Products" across themiddle of Figure 5. These products and services result froma series of program development activities shown, along thebottom of the model. This conceptual model was adopted bythe BMET project in 1970 as the basis for the second and thirdphase activities. An "interactive network" strategy wasadopted as a mechanism to facilitate both the development anddissemination of these products. The development of severalspecific BMET program planning products will be describedbelow. The development and utilization of the interactivenetwork will be described in the following section.

Interim II Report: Development of Job Opportunities forBiomedical Equipment Technicians--June, 1970

The STCC planning experience had indicated that TERC didnot have sufficient information on the tasks BMETs perform:toform a sound basis for curriculum development. Therefore anationwide survey of employment opportunities for BMETs wasinstituted. The survey was designed to determine how BMET'sfunctioned for hospitals and equipment manufacturers and toupdate and refine the occupational analysis which had beencarried out in 1966-67.

The survey was completed March, 1970 and published inJune. The findings for the first time identified the varietyof the jobs covered by the term Biomedical Equipment Technician.The report indicated that personnel involved with medicalequipment ranged from janitors with a high school educationto highly specialized technicians with impressive job prepara-tion. The equipment these BMETs repaired ranged from patient'sTV sets to the sophisticated cardiac monitoring systems in theintensive care units.

27

FIGURE 5

STEPS INPROGRAMESTABLISHMENT

PROGRAM DESIGNAWARENESS/INTEREST FEASIBILITY STUDYSTUDY

Definition of Field.2. Estimimon of Needs end

Growth3 General RICW.MentS Of the

Educational Training Program

I. Identifya. State. Regional, Nations!

Sources of Information.b. Employers In steekiniesen-

pun, Needse. Functions Issrlormed by

Technician and LikelyChola.

d. Unioue Aasocctof Proffer's.S. Sources of Fording.f. Costs*. Seronoup/Onnet-

ing Program.2. Amos !ablutions. Ability as

Offer Program.

I. Appoint Prograrn DincrodCendinetor.2. Ettabl oth Advisory Committee.3. Delarmire Performance Standards Required of

Graduates.4. Licensors/Certification Requirements.5. Evolve*, Nod foe Cooperative Program.6. Specify Marlyn Obiettlions.7. Omen Cuniculum/Couros Outlines.S. onernsine ECMOrrent Rewind_9. 011111.174110 and AlloeMe Speak

TERCRESEARCHPRODUCTS

I

REPORT ON JOECHARACTERISTICS. MANPOWERNEEDS, TRAINING RESOURCES

IDIRECTORY OF INTERACTIVENETWORK PARTICIPANTS

COMPENOIUM OFEDUCATIONAL

PROGRAMS

'PROCEDURES FOR OCCUPATIONALANALYSIS AND NEED

WORKSHOPS TOFACILITATE

DEVELOPMENT/USE OfPROGRAM PLANNING

MATERIALS

4

REGIONAL CONFERENCESFOR ADMINISTRATORS

PROGRAM PLANNINGGUIDE

IPROGRAMSTUDIES ON

RAM IMPLEMENTATION

COOPERATIVE PROGRAMPLANNING GUIDE

IFACILITIES /EOUIPMENT GUIDELINES

RESOURCE ALLOCATIONMODEL

ISURVEY OF NEEDS AND RESOURCESII

PROGRAM PLANNING MATERIALS

I. Carry out a Netanal &o w, to define the I. Survey interest of states and educational institutions in setting upjob and rote of the technician. the techn toclutician training programs and determine most needed types oflogical characteristics and dynamics. the information.manpower needs, and the mailable training

2. Collect and analyze data on needed types of information. 9.

PROGRAM2. Compile list of individuals to form the

nucleus of the interactive network operations.3. Plan and carry out case studies of program implementation with

institutions offering program.4:

DEVELOPMENT3. Identify most urgent needs and plan respon-

sive actions

4. Develop Program Planning Guide.

5, Organizecon Winces for administrators.4, Review and revise procedures for carrying

Out survey.

tc

700-011 33 29

9.

to:

TERC MODEL FOR DESIGNING, OIL

tPROGRAM STARTUP ONGOING PROGRAM OPERATION wi.ew ONGOING EVALUATION AND REVISION

1. Nee Needed Instructions' Staff. 1 Identify Problem Area and Find Solutions. t. carry Out Gradusa and Employer Follow-up Studies.2. Chyme In sewioe TranifleiOriontedan Prop-ern 2. Monitor Student Ability to Meier, Stolid Obieb 2. Monitor and ,Aseese Implications of Changing Iodine-

lewolrer of for Support Staff. heft ^ logical Requirements for Training Program.3. Detail Course and Instrucbonal Obsectmos and 3. Manton Placement Sersion end Orgenue Follow. 3. Monitrx and Asses New Dewlopmente in Instructional

Teetung Strete#eafteedia up Studies. Technology, Materiels. Aida, etc.4. Dewlap Eraluesson Plan. 4. Operate Annular Conferences of :netructional end 4. Periodically Upgrade TINICIIrt.5. Select and Pumbase Instructional Maier," Aids. Guidance Stilt 5. Revise Program Obrenlves when Appropriaes.

are Equipment.6. Sift Contrwts wigs Cooperating Employen.7. Primo% Proper,.Z. Reauit and West Students.

TASK ENUMERATION

TASK ANALYSISAND DESCRIPTION

WORKSHOPS TOFACILITATE ISO

PROCESS/IMPLEMENTATION

PERFORMANCE OBJECTIVES

=111 CRITERION ASSESSMENTINSTRUMENTS

LEARNER ACTIVITYGUIDES

MODULARIZED INSTRUCTIONALMATERIALS

/1=1.1110WSUGGESTED PATTERNS

MODULARIZED CURRICULAR

TEST/REVISE CYCLE WITHSELECTED SITES

as

PROCEDURES FOR INSTRUCTIONAL SYSTEM DEVELOPMENT

INSTRUCTIONAL SYSTEM DEVELOPMENT

1. Define job family and possible career ladder.

2. Minify tasks by frequency, job level, and other factors.

3. Analyze tasks for skill and knowledge requirement.

4, Define standards of performance, and develop pert omunce obrectives.

S. Develop criterion ascerament instruments.

6. Determine needed instructional materials and aids, and identify newmaterial needs.

7. Organize and fund development of instructional modules

8. Design modulenzed curricula.

9. Develop student and instructor modules.

ID. Seect and contract with schools to test materials.

WORKSHOPS TOFACILITATE

DEVELOPMENT /USE OFSTUDENT RELATED

PRODUCTS

ITECHNIQUES AND MATERIALSFOR RECRUITING STUDENTS

ISTUDENT ASSESSMENT

OF PROGRAMS I

GRADUATE FOLLOW-UPSTUDY REPORTS

DEVELOPMENT OFCAREER LADDERS

COUNSELINGGUIDELINES

I

PROCESS OF A LEARNERBECOMING A TECHNICIAN

STUDENT PERSONNEL SERVICES

t. Collect/annotate/develop materials for use in recruitingstudents into field.

2. Plan and organize follow-up studies of employees andprogram graduates.

3 Analyze feedback Ind suggest curriculum changes.

4. Organize and analyze student assessment of program andprogram components

INTERACTIVENETWORKS.

mammon FORMAINTAININGCURRICULARRELEVANCE

IMAINTENANCE OF

PROGRAM RELEVANCE

t. Systematize the process of inter-action between technical educa-tors and employers thirst*

operating a clearing houie tofacilitate exchange of data, matwists and information and,

funding development activities,in response to need

development of instruments,and procedures for regenerative:feedback from the changes in thetechnology,

DESIGNING, DEVELOPING AND ESTABLISHING A NEW EDUCATIONAL PROGRAM

Technical Education ResearchCenters.BC

This survey collected information to assist BMET schoolsestablish their programs. The survey found that the threemost frequently mentioned pieces of equipment and the threemost frequently repaired by BMETs were--the Electrocardio-graph, Spectrophotometer, and Cardiac Monitor. The followingskills and knowledge were judged essential to a BMETeducational program:

1. Troubleshooting and making major and minor repairs.

2. Instrument theory, with emphasis on integration ofrelevant concepts in electronics, optics, mechanics,and physics.

3. Transducers and their role in a component's trans-formation of input signals into output signals.

4. Procedures and standards for calibration and preven-tive maintenance.

5. Equipment operating techniques.

6. Related aspects of physiology, chemistry, anatomy,and biology.

One of the key findings was the updated estimate ofoccupational needs over the next five years. The reportindicated that in 1970 hospitals would require a total of3,000 technicians and equipment manufacturers 5,600--by 1975hospitals would need 5,180 BMETs and equipment manufacturers11,100. Each year educational programs would have to graduate1,900 BMETs to fill this need.

The Interim II Report was designed to provide informationon which systematic BMET program developed could be based.First, more specific information than ever before was providedon what BMETs in the field actually do on the job. Somegeneral guidelines were developed for BMET program plannersas to the skills and knowledge BMET's require and the equipmenttypes BMET's most frequently will encounter. Second, andequally important, the extensive profile of the BMET waspotentially as valuable to employers as to educators. Basedon this information the hospital administrators and equipmentmanufacturers could determine more clearly what a BMET coulddo for them.

Task Analysis by Selected Criteria: A Manual (1972) (TASC)

A task analysis approach was also undertaken as acomplementary effort to the Interim II Report. Interim IIprovided general guidelines to the schools on establishingtheir BMET program. The TASC report was a More rigorousstudy of the actual job performance of various BMETs in many

31

a5

different job situations. From the analysis of expertopinion, TERC concluded that there are 230 tasks BMETs havebeen known to perfOrm in the field. These 230 tasks thenwere ranked according to numerous selected criteria. Thesewere reported in the TASC Manual which was designed to assistschools and others in several ways:

1. Since tasks were ranked by various criteria, theBMET educators could determine which tasks weremost important and most frequently performed.These tasks could form the basis for curriculumdevelopment.

2. Since there was a method for selecting tasksessential to the BMET's education, performanceobjectives could be task based.

3. If a curriculum was designed to prepare techniciansto perform a selected number of tasks, a moreflexible program would result. Technicians withprevious experience who could demonstrate competencyin several sets of tasks could complete the programin a shorter length of time. Students could pacetheir own learning experiences.

4. Employers were no longer at a loss to understandwhat a BMET could do. The employer could structurea job by selecting from among those 230 tasks thosethat were essential for his institution. The BMET'sjob performance could be measured also on a taskbasis.

5. Professional societies could have a clearer defini-tion of the jobs that BMET's perform in the field.This material could be the basis on which certifi-cation examinations were established.

The BMET Workshops

Several kinds of BMET workshops were conducted from1970-72. All workshops were designed to bring various keypeople together to become involved in solving some of theproblems surrounding BMET education. The process ofinvolving people with these problems was in many instancesas important as the solution they proposed.

The first BMET workshop was for hospital administratorsin July, 1971. The Second Phase of the BMET project had acommitment to implementing career ladders for BMET. Althougha career ladder had been developed, discussions with BMETprogram directors indicated that TERC's concern with careerladders was premature. The program directors were concerned

32,f1G

with their graduate's difficulties securing hospital employ-ment. A career ladder could not be implemented in a hospitaluntil hospitals were aware of what BMETs could do in solvingtheir problems with medical equipment.

Consequently, 18 administrators from hospitals in citiesloated where BMET programs were being established wereinvited to Chicago for a workshop in September, 1971. Theseadministrators were sent questionnaires about how theymaintained their medical equipment. From the analysis of thedata, the hospital administrators concluded that many of themhad not fully considered the importance of systematicmaintenance of their medical equipment and the role the BMETcan play. In discussing the role of the hospital in BMETeducation, these potential employers also concluded that theythemselves had a responsibility to assist in the developmentand operations of BMET programs in their areas.

These employers were not directly involved in BMETeducational programs at thG time the workshop was held, buttheir cooperation was essential to the future success of thePrograms in their area. This workshop was one of many projectactivities in the BMET field to convince hospital administra-tors that BMEms are valuable. TERC's workshop and otherorganizations' efforts helped develop an understanding of theBMET among employers. An informal survey of .BMET programdirectors two years later (October, 1973), indicated thatthe job possibilities for BMETs were rapidly expanding. Manyprogram directors reported that they had more requests forBMETs for hospital jobs than BMETs to fill them.

A companion workshop to the hospital administratorsworkshop was the Instructional Resources Workshop (September,1971). The purposes of this workshop were:

1. To introduce the TASC manual to employers andeducators as a communications tool.

2. To assist educators and employers to identify anygaps in BMET education that were not being filled.

3. To identify gaps in educational materials.

When the educators and employers scrted through the tasklists for BMET, each was asked to identify tasks that thenewly graduated BMET could be expected to perform. There wasa considerable gap between the tasks that the equipmentmanufacturers required and those that the educators prepared.Although the sample was quite small, the workshop resultsindicated that electromechanical tasks were more important toemployers than they were to educators. Although no attemptwas made to determine whether the educator& actually used thetask approach to defining their curriculum with employers,several of the schools that attended the workshop orderedmaterials that would help them do so.

332.7

The Guidance Workshop (December, 1971), was a jointeffort with the Nuclear Medicine Technician project--10representatives of five (5) BMET schools and 10 representa-tives from five (5) NMT schools attended. Each school sentan instructor and a guidance counselor. The workshopattempted to sensitize instructors and counselors to oneanother's problems, thus providing a more favorable climatefor the students. Following the workshop, communications withthe participants for several months indicated a great dealmore interaction was taking place between instructors andcounselors than before the workshop began.

Although the first two workshops were followed by reportsthat were disseminated to the field,* the principal outcomewas one difficult to measure. Based on the understanding ofthe importance of cooperation and communications within theBMET field, the interactions stimulated by the workshops wereimportant to the development of BMET programs. Analysis ofthe interactive network indicates that after these workshops,communications amont participants began to become significantto the BMET field.

The BMET Compendium of Educational Programs (June, 1971) andthe BMET Digest of Educational Program (March, 1974)

The Digest is an updating and expansion of the Compendium.The BMET Compendium was the first list that TERC compiled ofthe BMET programs and their characteristics such as enrollment,instructors, entrance requirements, and tuition. ThisCompendium listed 14 educational programs including two (2)military and two (2) Canadian programs. This was the firsttime TERC had made an attempt to define and describe theseprograms. The Compendium was designed to fill severalcommunications gaps in the field. On the basis of theCompendium:

1. Educators would know of the existence of otherprograms and could share information.

2. BMET program planners could contact operationalprograms for information on how to begin theirprogram.

3. Students and guidance counselors would know whereBMET programs were located.

* The "Instructional Resources Workshop Report" became part of theSourcebook of Working Papers. Later it was retitled "What Does theBMET Need to Know?" and issued separately. The hospital administratorsworkshop was summarized Ln The BMET in the Hospital. This documentwas issued separately.

34

4. Employers had a list of the programs whose graduatesthey could hire.

When the Compendium was revised and retitled Digest ofEducational Programs, the purpose of the Digest was slightlyexpanded from that of the original Compendium. All theinformation included in the Compendium was updated in theDigest. Eighteen new programs were added plus an entirelynew section summarizing the curricula of 26 or the 32 programs.One of the most frequent requests from those planning programswas for information on the curricula of BMET programs. ThisDigest provided a significant sharing of information to thosewho used it.

Sourcebook of Working Papers, Biomedical Equipment Technology(March, 1972)

The Sourcebook was conceived as an essential key inTERC's attempts to insure all those interested in BMETeducation were able to effectively share information. TheSourcebook, which was a loose leaf document, was a series ofprocess papers concerning various aspects of BMET education.

For example, before conducting the InstructionalResources Workshop, BMET instructors were surveyed aboutavailable instructional materials in the field. Theseresults were reported, sent to workshop participants, andincluded in the Sourcebook of Working Papers. The resultsof that survey were updated and expanded into a Digest ofEducational Materials (BMET) 1974,* which became too largefor the Sourcebook. However, the initial survey was renderedobsolete by the information the BMET instructors had suppliedfor the listing of educational materials.

Other materials included in the Sourcebook were casestudies of Monroe Community College and British ColumbiaInstitute of Technology, a summary of hospital administratorsworkshop report, curriculum lists of eight (8) BMET schools,the Instructional Resources Workshop Report, and a report onthe status of the certification effort for BMETs by theAssociation for the Advancement of Medical Instrumentation.All of these materials were presented as tentative statements

* The BMET Digest of Educational Materials served the same purpose forthe field as its predecessor survey--instructors could share theirinformation on the usefulness of existing materials for their biomedicalcourses.

35

Irort4.71

about the status of an emerging field. Comments andcriticisms were always welcomed from any reviewer. TheSourcebook with its flexible format and open posture toproblems in the field attempted to assist the field in thefollowing ways:

1. BMET program planners could learn from theexperience of others through the case studies andcurriculum lists.

2. BMET program directors shared their informationon instructional materials already available to thefield.

3. The Association for the Advancement of MedicalInstrumentation could provide information to allprogram directors about the current status oftheir certification efforts.

Recruitment Materials

In September, 1971 a nine month effort to deviserecruitment materials was launched under the Second Phaseof the BMET project. The recruitment materials were toinclude several products: a brief brochure, and descriptionof an average BMET's day, a slide/tape presentation for useby schools, and a survey of other recruitment materialsavailable for BMET. Although a draft of the last twoproducts was completed under the project, additional funds,not forthcoming, were required to complete them. Thematerials that had been developed were seen as adequate tomeet the need.

A recruitment brochure, summarizing the possibilitiesfor BMETs and the programs available, was printed in 1972and was reissued and updated in 1973. Over 10,000 copieswere distributed, mostly to schools that were establishingprograms. One measure of the effectiveness of the brochurewas them number of schools that used most of the material fromthe brochure in designing their own iniividualized descrip-tions of their BMET programs. At least six school programdescriptions were based extensively on these recruitmentbrochures.

In addition, a short pamphlet, A BMET's Day was developedand printed. These were distributed to 'educators and students.Had funds been available additional copies would have beenmade available tr students to help acquaint them with theday to day activities of a typical Biomedical EquipmentTechnician.

36

THE INTERACTIVE NETWORK-A MECHANISM

FOR PROGRAM DEVELOPMENT AND DISSEMINATION

The National Conferences on BMET Education

As a first step in involving schools throughout thecountry the BMET project sponsored the First NationalConference on BMET Education which was held in AtlanticCity, New Jersey, April 17-18, 1969. This meeting wasarranged to coincide with the annual meeting of the Federationof American Societies for Experimental Biology (FASEB). Thisconference was attended by nine (9) schools comprisingvirtually all schools which at that time were operating orwere considering establishment of a BMET Program. The schoolsrepresented were: Air Force Medical Service School, Texas;Algonquin College, Canada; Army Medical Maintenance TrainingBranch, Denver; British Columbia Institute of Technology,Canada; James Connally Technical Institute, Texas; MedicalCollege of South Carolina; Monroe Community College, New York;Northeastern University, Eve'ing Division, Boston; andSpringfield Technical Community College, Massachusetts.

Topics discussed included teacher recruitment andtraining, instructional materials, equipment, administration,curriculum development, certification, and student personnelservices. This conference produced good interaction amongthe schools attending and the BMET project staff. It was theconsensus of participants that a similar conference shouldbe held during the following year.

The Second National Conference on BMET education wasplanned for Denver in August, 1970. The Denver Conferenceincluded educators from both civilian and military programs,employers, and representatives of professional societies.Individuals were selected because they were deeply interestedin the BMET field and were likely to carry on activities thatwould support the BMET project goals. It was hoped that theparticipants could advise the BMET project as to which projectactivities should receive most emphasis in the future. Atthe time the conference was planned, the participants wereviewed primarily as "reviewers" and informal advisors on theconduct of the project. Their value as persons active in theBMET field who would work apart from TERC but towards theessential goals of the project became clearer much later.

The Denver Conference on Biomedical Equipment TechnicianTraining was held as planned in Denver, August 17-21, 1970.It was attended by 38 participants including representativesof 13 schools conducting or planning BMET programs andrepresentatives of a variety of biomedical equipment manufacturers, service companies, hospitals, and medicalspecialty organizations. The Denver Conference in additionto providing important information exchange among the

37

di

attending schools, employers, and BMET project staff membersmade several important recommendations as to the currentpriority needs for assistance to schools interested inestablishing BMET programs. These recommendations whichprov5ded the basis for many BMET project activities duringthe Second and Third Phases of the project were as follows:

1. Job descriptions should be made available toeducators and employers. (The TASC Manualaccomplished this goal.)

2. Educators need information on curriculum develop-ment and equipment lists. (The BMET CurriculumGuide served this need.)

3. A cost effectiveness study of the hospital with aBMET was needed to convince hospital administratorsof the need for this technician. (The BMET in theHospital although not a cost effectiveness st *v

attempted to achieve the same end.)

4. Certification of BMETs would help them gainrecognition. (TERC participated in the initialefforts but withdrew as AAMI took over. Informationon certification was included in the Sourcebook ofWorking Papers.)

5. Student recruitment materials were needed.(Materials were developed.)

6. Information on available instructional materialsshould be made available to educators and newmaterials developed to fill the gaps. (Both ofthese were accomplished.)

7. Some ongoing mechanism should be developed tocontinue the work of the conference and to keepothers besides TERC active in the field. (The BMETInteractive Network served this purpose.)

Initial Product Dissemination Efforts

The first major BMET product dissemination effort wasthe dissemination of the Interim II Report. All 265participants in the survey received complementary copies.All the reports were issued free of charge, since at thattime the report was viewed as a way of interesting people inthe field. The Regional Medical Programs and state directorsof vocational education received unsolicited copies. Theremaining 800 copies of the report were distributed on ademand basis. Announcements about the availability of thereport along with summaries of the findings were reported

38

in several professional journals. By November, 1971, therewere no more copies of the report available. All those whorequested them were referred to others in their area who hadcopies. At the time this referral was viewed as a convenientway for people to secure copies. As it turned out, this wasalso a way of getting people interested in BMET in contactwith one another.

After the Compendium and Interim II Report wasdisseminated free of charge, the project considered chargingfor materials. All subsequent announcements included aprice for materials to cover the costs of printing andhandling. When 1,000 members of the BMET interactive networkwere told that the Sourcebook was available for a nominal fee,300 of them ordered it. Charging for materials did not seemto dampen the enthusiasm. In fact, the project often receivedrequests to pay for xeroxing materials out of print.

The BMET project learned several lessons about distribut-ing materials. First, it is essential to determine theaudience that will be most interested in the document andconcentrate efforts on well defined populations. Individualannouncements are costly and should be limited to thoseaudiences most likely to purchase. Second, the productivelife of a journal advertisement in this field is about sixmonths. Periodic announcements are required to keep thesubject active. Third, although the loose leaf format of theSourcebook of Working Papers was planned to provide maximumflexibility for the project, as a dissemination idea, it wascostly to implement. When 500 Sourcebooks are printed, itwas costly to keep an accurate record of those who hadreceived each of the materials. Each mailout of materialsto update the Sc.urcebook required more elaborate recordkeeping than mailing out a new product.

Formation of the BMET Interactive Network*

The BMET Interactive Network concept grew out of thenational conferences on BMET education, the initial productdissemination efforts, and the many informal interactionsbetween the BMET project and educators and employers through-out the country. The BMET Interactive Network was conceivedof as a mechanism for systematically involving in the BMETproject a large number of key individuals and institutionsthroughout the country who were concerned with BMET education.The Network was planned to be an ongoing mechanism forfacilitating development and implementation of BMET programsboth during the BMET project and after the funded projectwas completed.

* The formation and early growth of the BMET Interactive Network isdescribed by L. Allen Parker in "Interactive Networks for InnovationalChampions: A Mechanism for Decentralized Educational Change",Cambridge, Massachusetts: Doctoral Thesis, Harvard Graduate School ofEducation, 1971.

4339

When the Interim II report was issued in June, 1970,planning seriously began for implementing an interactivenetwork for those interested in BMET educational programs.The Interim II Report was a map of the current status of thefield, but the problem remained how to most effectivelyinvolve the maximum number of the "activists" in the BMETfield in the work of the BMET project.

The individuals who received copies of the Interim IIReport were the initial members of the BMET InteractiveNetwork. New participants were added as additional documentswere produced and disseminated. For example, in June 1971when the Compendium of Educational Programs wa3 developed,all those who were surveyed and indicated an interest inestablishing a BMET program were added to the interactivenetwork list. All subsequent products were publicized bothby sending announcements to the interactive network and byplacing announcements in journals. The journal announcementsadded to the list of participants. During the six monthsTERC kept extensive records on the BMET Interactive Network,between 20 and 30 new names were added to the list each monthbecause they initiated a request for information. Duringseveral months as many as 100 new names were added becausethe project had found a new group that was interested in thefield. For example, the state directors of health careersprograms were added when recruitment materials were beingdeveloped. A summary of network participants by categoriesas of May, 1973 is as follows.

Summary of BMET Interactive NetworkParticipants by Categories

May, 1973

Hospitals or hospital administrators 510

Medical Schools or M.D.'s 62

Health Planners or health educators 159

Equipment manufacturers or other potential employers 260

RMETs 242

Four-year colleges 157

Two-year colleges 131

Technical Institutes 98

Other educators 160

Other or unknown 209

Societies 71

TOTAL 2,059

Notice that the participants in the interactive network are byin large the constituency that TERC set out to serve during theSecond Phase of the project.

40 6.4

Role of the Network Coordinator

An Interactive Network Coordinator was appointed whowas responsible for all BMET dissemination plans as well asall other activities of the interactive network includingrecord keeping. The role of this coordinator was key to thesuccessful operations of the network. The coordinator (andother BMET project personnel as well) was responsible forresponding to all telephone and mail inquiries. Theseranged from requests for information on recruitment brochuresto wanting assistance in planning a BMET program. When therewas a simple answer to a question, the coordinator would sendmaterials and any information that was available. However, afrequent request was for information on establishing aprogram. In these instances the person was referred to theclosest program. Thus began an informal net of referrals.These program planners did co.tact the BMET programs nearestthem.

In the process of coordinating the network, the projectitself received a great deal of information. When anemployer called for information on BMET programs nearest tohim, he would often discuss his attitudes towards certifica-tion, his opinions about the kind of BMET he requires, orthe information he would like to have about BMET curricula.Those BMET program directors were in frequent contact withthe BMET project because many of them were workshop partici-pants or were pilot testing the BMET instructional materials.A great deal of information that appeared in the curriculumguide was initially derived from these contacts. The networkwas a two-way system--the BMET project collected as muchinformation on the status of the field as it disbursed inthe process of operating the network.

Strengths and Weakness of the Network Concept

Based on the experience of the BMET project, the Inter-active Network concept is a powerful mechanism for dissemina-tion and communications. The network stresses communicationswith the field at all stages in product development. AllBMET materials at various stages were developed and/orreviewed by those who would finally use them. The modelcurriculum, for example, was reviewed by 12 BMET programdirectors. By using key individuals in the field to assistin product development, all of these people have a commitmentto the final product.

TERC believes that the BMET Interactive Network was alsoa major factor in the rapid growth of BMET educationalprograms throughout the country. The emphasis on programplanning materials--Sourcebook, Compendium, TASC, etc.- -assisted many schools in the initial phases of their develop-ment. Although a curriculum guide was not available until

41

45

1974, other curriculum materials such as the curriculumsection of the Digest gave some guidance to program planners.TERC assisted many programs through the network because thenetwork strategy was flexible and open. Any school wantingto establish a BMET program could contact TERC for informa-tion, specific and general, without fear that TERC wasselling a packaged curriculum. This open attitude combinedwith a wide array of materials was one of the greatest assetsTERC had in spreading the word about BMET education. Oneprogram director said recently, "For the longest time, TERCwas the only place you could go when you wanted information.You helped us when no one else could."

The interactive network has a third advantage ininsuring project continuity after project funding has ceased.The network has established linkages between those who areactive in the field--BMET program directors know one anotherand have contact with one another. The BMET program plannersvisit operational program in their area to gain first handknowledge of problems. Hospitals know where the educationalprograms are located and contact them to hire their graduates.The schools have developed a variety of contacts in thefield. For example, TSTI has worked with the local hospitalassociation in establishing an electrical safety program forlocal hospitals. Los Angeles Valley College provides work-shops for nurses and doctors in electrical safety.

The major drawback of the interactive network is thatit is time consuming and requires a substantial commitmentof project resources. Maintaining an organized network of2,000 people (the maximum attained by the BMET InteractiveNetwork) is clerically a time consuming task. The informalrole of the Coordinator does not lead readily to any measurablepro,:uct. The Coordinator's correspondence with the field mayprovide assistance to hundreds of people, yet all the projecthas to show for that assistance is a list of names. One canissue reports on the numbers of people involved in the network,but the network is a process, not a product. As such itsimpact is difficult to assess quantitatively except in termsof the number and quality of new programs established.

42

rssa..111's

C.,

DISSEMINATION AND IMPLEMENTATION

ACTIVITIES AND ACCOMPLISHMENTS

Product dissemination and program implementation havebeen major objectives of the BMET project from its inception.Previous sections of this report have described disseminationand implementation activities during the First and SecondPhases with special emphasis on the dissemination activitiesof the BMET Interactive Network. During the Third Phase theBMET project focused major experimental effort on ,strategiesand techniques for dissemination and implementation of BMETproducts and programs. This effort was coordinated withsimilar efforts being carried out in connection with theNuclear Medicine Technology project. Some of the dissemina-tion techniques and activities tried include:

1. BMET program displays at AVA Conventions andATEA-USOE National Clinics on Technical Education;

2. BMET program need surveys of approximately 2,000community colleges, technical institutes and otheragencies;

3. Providing consulting services and technicalassistance services to schools for planning,implementation, and evaluation of new BMET programs;

4. Mailings of information on BMET publications andapparatus;

5. Publication of an issue of the TECHNICAL EDUCATIONREPORTER focused on emerging technologies andfeaturing descriptions of exemplary BMET programs;

6. ExpeLimental workshops and short courses particularlyon BMET Instructional Modules;

7. Development of a comprehensive Program DevelopmentCatalog including a broad range of BMET materialsand services;

8. BMET Interactive Network operations;

9. An experimental program for BMET State Coordinatorsin ten states.

Although time and funding limitations precludeddefinitive findings as to relative effectiveness of each ofthese dissemination techniques, there was no doubt that eachof these techniques has value and that effective dissemina-tion and implementation of a major program innovation such asthe BMET program requires a carefully orchestrated combinationof all of these techniques and perhaps others.

43

Since successful establishment of new BMET programs isthe ultimate goal of dissemination and implementation perhapsthe best measure of the BMET project's effectiveness indissemination and implementation activities is in terms ofthe growth in the number and variety of new programsimplemented in association with the BMET project. In 1968only three civilian schools in the United States were pro-viding a BMET curriculum. State and local sources wereinvesting about $150,000 per year in these programs. TheBMET project budget for that first year was $96,469. By1974 there were 40 operational BMET programs, virtually allestablished with the active assistance of the BMET project.These programs operated on state and local budgets ofapproximately $1,600,000 compared with a BMET project budgetin 1974 of $100,000. An additional 30 schools are planningBMET programs utilizing BMET project planning and othermaterials. If all of these programs materialize the 70schools operating BMET projects will have operating BMETbudgets of $2,800,000. A list of seventy schools which havebeen actively involved in the project in pilot testing,operating BMET programs and using project materials is shownin the appendix. Charts of annual growth of BMET programsare shown in Figures 2 and 3 of the Summary section.

A second measure of BMET project accomplishments indissemination is in terms of the number and variety of programplanning and instructional materials which have been developedand tested, to facilitate the establishment and operation ofBMET programs in schools. The appendix details thedissemination of more than 20,000 copies of the more thanfifty different -cram planning publications and studentpublications which ere developed under the BMET project tomeet specific project goals. Although these publicationsare not commercially a,,,ilable because of their small market,TERC expects to continL to make many of these publicationsavailable to schools at the lowest possible price which willcover the costs of reproduction and distribution taking intoaccount the small quantities of each publication produced.

A third measure of BMET project impact is the largenumber and variety of individuals and institutions which havebeen involved in various ways in the BMET development andtesting of BMET project products. Each of these involvedinstitutions helped spread the word about BMET educationwithin its community. The appendix lists more than 20universities, 90 businesses and industries, 160 hospitals,and 60 professional associations which have been involved inthe development of project products. Also listed are 34postsecondary schools, universities, and employers which wereinvolved in the testing o':. the products. The appendix alsolists 13 13MET Workshops and Conferences sponsored and con-ducted by the project.

44

AR

The appendix also analyses the 2,059 individuals whohave been members of the BMET Interactive Network and whohave received BMET project documents. The appendix shows ananalysis of the dissemination of project products categorizedby type of institution and by HEW region.

The appendix also lists 26 articles and presentations bythe BMET project staff members on various aspects of the BMETproject. In view of its particular relevance a copy of thearticle entitled "Program Development for New and EMergingTechnical Occupations" by Nelson and Parker which appeared inthe April, 1974 issue of the Journal of Research and Develop-ment in Education is reprinted in the appendix. This articlecontains an overview of the lessons learned from the BMETproject and the three other emerging technology projectsconducted by TERC. A copy of articles describing typicalBMET programs which appeared in the July-August, 1974 issueof the Technical Education Reporter is in the appendix.

In a very real sense the BMET project's disseminationand implementation activities have been a key factor in thegrowth and development of BMET education during its mostcritical years as an emerging technology. Many of theproblems in the BMET field which existed when the projectbegan have been resolved. The BMET project has structureda broadly acceptable job definition for BMET's and has sentat least 500 of these documents to hospitals and otherpotential employers to help them with job restructuring.BMET program directors no longer feel that hospital adminis-trators say, "What is that?" when asked if they have a BMET.

The American Hospital Association has become activelyinvolved wtih developing educational materials for hospitaladministrators, alerting them to the BMET as one possiblesolution to medical equipment repair problems. The Associa-tion for the Advancement of Medical Instrumentation has grownas rapidly as the BMET field and now provides certificationfor BMET's. In the last meeting the BMET's were discussingthe possibility of establishing their own organization. TERChas developed instructional materials for the 40 schools thatare operating in 1974, and those materials combined withsurveys of existing materials have in large part solved theinstructional materials crisis.

The BMET field is moving out of the category of an"emerging" technology. The BMET project was privileged toplay an important role in that change.

45

EVALUATION ACTIVITIES

Major external evaluations of the entire BMET projectby evaluation teams selected by the U. S. Office of Educationwere carried out in 1969 and in 1971 and were very helpful tothe planning of the project. The first site evaluation wasconducted by a seven man team in 1969. The second siteevaluation was conducted by an eleven man team selected bythe USOE in 1971. Both evaluation teams visited both theBMET project staff in Cambridge, Massachusetts and the twoBMET pilot schools in Springfield, Massachusetts and Waco,Texas. Both site evaluation teams provided very usefulproject planning suggestions and bcth teams stronglyrecommended continued funding of the BMET project tocompletion.

Internal evaluation of project activities and productswas a continuous process throughout the BMET project.Evaluation of certain individual instructional modules wassuccessfully executed using performance objectives, criterionreference tests and validation with a sample from the targetpopulations. However it was learned by the project thatformal evaluation of entire courses or entire programs wasnot feasible. Confidential case studies and studentquestionnaires was found to be so threatening that furthercooperation with educational institutions would have beenunlikely if the project had persisted in their use. Howeverinformal evaluations which occurred during confidential casestudies, workshops, and consultaticns did result in signifi-cant revisions of courses and programs.

Evaluation of Program Planning products developed in theBMET project was ongoing during the data collection andvarious writings and rewritings. Those involved in the fieldwere frequently central in the actual data collection--allthe workshop reports spring frog: information provided by theparticipants. The TASC Manual for example was the sum of"expert" opinion in the field. At various stages in thedevelopment of each product, it was sent out for review. Whenreviewers felt that any idea had een slighted or given toomuch emphasis, that comment was included in a reviewerssection of the report. This review process was designed tomake all of the products responsive to the needs of the field.

In addition, in planning project activities, the requestsrom the field, both formal and informal, were considered. TheDenver Conference was convened to secure participant'sassistance in defining what needed to be done. In the ThirdPhase of the project, an advisory committee met twice withthe project staff to provide guidance, especially in the areaof program continuity. One informal suggestion that wasimplemented, was that information in the InstructionalResources Survey (included in the Sourcebook) be expanded and

47

50

updated by instructcrs in the field. That information wasmade available to other BMET programs in the form of theBMET Digest of Educational Materials.

Although no formal evaluation was completed on whetherthose who received materials actually used them, informalindications from the field were that many programs found thematerials useful. The Interactive Network record keepingsystem was viewed as one way of evaluating the potentialimpact of these products. For example, in March, 1972,within one month, the 1,000 interactive network participantswere sent announcements of the availability of the Sourcebookand Compendium. While some had already received free copiesof the Compendium, both documents were offered at a price.There were 150 orders for these products within the month.In the six months during which extensive records were kept(January-June, 1972), TERC had at least 20 requests for theInterim II Report which was out of print. This report hadbeen issued two years previously. There was a constant demandfor TERC's products from the field, including requests eachmonth to be put on a mailing list so that the correspondentwould receive any future announcements.

48

51

SUGGESTIONS FOR FUTURE COORDINATED

PROGRAM DEVELOPMENT PROJECTS

In carrying out this new type of national programdevelopment project represented by the BMET project, TERCand the BMET project staff has held a very unusual relation-ship to the BMET field during the seven years of the projectAlthough TERC has worked very closely with schools indeveloping new BMET programs, especially the two pilotprograms, TERC did not itself operate any technicianeducation programs. Its role was that of developer, facili-tator, coordinator, and disseminator. As such it has beenable to obtain unique insights into the entire process ofdeveloping BMET programs. It has learned several importantlessons as to how to deal effectively with developing emergingtechnologies and as to how to intervene effectively withstate and local educational systems in order to facilitatethe development of needed new programs. Some suggestions forfuture projects concerned with program development inemerging occupations are outlined below.

In encouraging schools to establish new programs,legitimate differences between institutions must be respected.It is axiomatic that a school will modify any model curriculumfor their own use. This process tailors the program to theschool and establishes a commitment on the part of theinstructors who design it. However, in an emerging technology,especially in schools that are pioneering curricula, thismodification process may serve another essential function.

At STCC, the TERC staff and instructors found that therewas little agreement as to the content of the curriculum--howmuch electronics, physiology, and biomedical equipmenttechnology should be included--was much in dispute. Until32 additional schools had developed their own curricula, TERCwas unable to firmly establish a suggested curriculum. Inan emerging technology, the curriculum development processshould not oe prematurely discouraged until enough experienceis gained to justify establishing a model.

The most effective strategy for disseminating a curriculumin an emerging technology is using a flexible and non-judge-mental manner to distribute essential information. During thefirst five years that an occupation in "emerging", programplanners require three minimum essentials--digests of othereducational programs, instructional materials and/or lists ofthem, and curricula lists from other programs. After 15-20schools have evolved curricula, these experiences can beevaluated and synthesized into a suggested curriculum forothers to follow and can replace curriculum lists.

49

r-2

Information for educational programs is only one part ofan effective approach to an emerging occupation. The entiresystem in which the schools function, including employers,professional societie, publishers, and students is important.Technician education programs operate within a larger systemthan just schools, and the quality of the graduates of suchprograms is affected by many factors.

In viewing an emerging occupation as the concern ofeducators, employers, publishers, professional societies, andstudents, the BMET project has followed a process that insuredrelevant products. In an emerging occupation there typicallyis no consensus as to the content of a good BMET program.TERC developed a kind of consensus for that by involving allthese groups in the BMET project in development, evaluation,and use cf all materials. TERC became a conduit andsynthesizer of ideas that came from the BMET field. By thetime these ideas were translated into produc,s, those whohad helped develop and evaluate materials had a commitment tousing them. By using this technique TERC assisted increating a body of expert knowledge and experience that wasto shape educational programs. In an emerging occupation,especially, a catalyst such as TERC can accelerate the growthof educational programs with this process.

Perhaps the most important lesson TERC learned aboutpioneering programs in emerging occupations from the BMETproject was the importance of an accurate and functioningcommunications system. TERC called its system an inzeractivenetwork. This network provided feedback and evaluation tothe project. In the beginning, the network was primarilyTERC's reaching out into the field with products and requestsfor information. Slowly, educators and employers becameaware of TERC and contacted the BMET project for information.From these contacts, TERC established a series of referrals.As TERC products provided more information on those activein the field, the TERC role gradually became less criticaland those involved in the field took over. This kind ofcommunications network is one of the most significantaccomplishments of the BMET project. During the lite of theproject, the network was the BMET project's vital link to thefield. It is believed that the Network will continue toprovide benefits t.) the field after the BMET project iscompleted.

50

SUMMARY OF PROJECT GOALS AND

MATERIALS DEVELOPED

55

APPENDIX

Summary of Project Goals andMaterials Developed for Them

The First Phase'

Kenneth Dupont.

Topics in Biomedical Measurements

(1969)

Dean DeMarre.

Topics in Bio-Technology

Transducers

Optics

Chromatography

pH Measurement

Spectrophotometers

Radiation

Power Supplies

Specialized Amplifiers

Cardiovascular Measurement

1.

Develop, test, and evaluate a curriculum

for a two year associate degree program in

biomedical equipment technology.

2.

Develop, test, and evaluate instructional

materials which could be used by institutions

desiring to use the curriculum.

It

Springfield Community College Case Study

(March,

1971)

Experimental Instructional Modules

in Biomedical

Equipment Technology (Draft 1)

*CM-1.1

Introductory Cardiovascular Measurement

*CM-1.2

Lab for CM-1.1

*CM-2.2

Intermediate Cardiovascular Measurement

Featuring the Cardioverter

*CM-2.3

Intermediate Lab for CM-2.2

*CM-3.2

Advanced Cardiovascular Measurement

Featuring the Cardioverter

*CM-3.3

Advanced Lab for CM-3.2

*TR-1

Specialized Amplifiers:

Introductory

Solid State Theory

*TR-2

Specialized Amplifiers:

Equivalent

Circuits

*TR-3

Specialized Amplifiers: R-C Coupling

*TR-4

Specialized Amplifiers: Chopper

Amplifiers

*TR-5

Specialized Amplifiers: Operational

Amplifiers

*ICU-1.I Intensive Care Units: Introductory and

Featuring Hewlett-Packard

*ICU-1.1A ICU featuring the Remore installation

*ICU-1.1B ICU featuring the Pacemaker

*ICU-1.1C ICU featuring the Viso-Scope

*ICU-1.1D ICU Safety

The Second Phase

1.

A survey of the BMET field to determine job

performance tasks, types of BMET's, and to

better understand their functioning within

the hospital environment.

2.

Plan, organize, and administer a development

conference to promote greater understanding

of the objectives of existing and planned

programs through the participation by two or

three teachers from each institution.

3.

The organization and administration of an

Interactive Network that would provide

assistance to TERC in development of

instructional materials and would eventually

function within and among the participants to

provide project continuity.

Interim II Report:

Survey of Job Characteristics

Manpower Needs, and Training Resources.

(June, 1970)

TASK Analysis by Selected Criteria: A Manual

(March, 1972)

BMET Task Lists

BMET Task Sort Cards

Report of the Denver Conference on BMET Education

(August, 1970)

Interim II: Report: Survey of Job Characteristics

Manpower Needs, and Training Resources.

(June, 1970)

The Report of the Denver Conference on BMET Education

(August, 1970)

4.

Develop instructional systems including the

job tasks performed by BMET's, a list of

equipment most frequently worked on by the

BMET, information key to the development of

instructional modules for BMET programs.

BMET Compendium of Educational Programs (June, 1971)

BMET Digest of Educational Programs (March, 1974)

(including Curricula compilation)

BMET Sourcebook of Working Papers (February, 1972)

Instructional Materials Survey

Monroe Community College:

Case Study

British Columbia Institute of Technology Case Study

Curriculum Lists

What Does the BMET Need to Know: Instructional

Resources Workshop Report

Status Report on Certification

Biomedical Equipment Technology: A Suggested Two

Year Postsecondary Curriculum (December, 1974)

BMET Digest of Educational Materials (September, 1972)

Task Analysis by Selected Criteria:

A Manual

(March, T972)

BMET Task Lists

BMET Task Sort Cards

Operation and Measurement Series

*Electrocardiography

*Blood Pressure Meansurement

Spectrophotometry

Component Analysis Series

*Linear Operational Amplifiers

*Power Amplifier

*Voltage Level Detector

*Monostable Multivibrator

*Low-Pass Filter

5.

Surveys of needs and interests of institutions

establishing BMET programs and existing

programs.

6.

Develop materials for BMET program counselors

and guide for follow-up surveys of BMET

graduates.

.91

7.

Refining and exploring implications of the

BMET career ladder.

The T

Unijunction Oscillator

*Wheatstone Bridge

Differential Amplifier

System Analysis Series

*ECG Monitor

*Electrocardiograph

*Cardiotachometer

*Electronic Clinical Thermometer

Spectrophotometer

BMET Compendium of Educational Programs (June, 1970)

"Frontiers of Technology--The Biomedical Equipment

Technician"

16mm.

BMET Recruitment Brochure

A Description of the BMET's Day

Biomedical Equipment Technology:

A Suggested Two

Year Postsecondary Curriculum

BMET Compendium of Educational Programs (June, 1970)

BMET Digest of Educational Programs (March, 1974)

The BMET in the Hospital:

Report of Hospital

Administrator's Workshop

hird Phase

1.

Develop and evaluate a curriculum guide that

will summarize a model program for biomedical

equipment technology based on the most success-

ful aspects of ill BMET programs.

2.

Contact schools to determine needs for

additional material.

Biomedical Equipment Technology:

A Suggested Two-

Year Postsecondary Curriculum

DESCRIPTION OF MEI LEARNING MODULES

4 0

DESCRIPTION OF MEI LEARNING MODULES

NEw ININLAN ROMAN IN

ELECTRONICS AND MEDICAL INSTRUMENTATION

Developed By CURRICULUM DEVELOPMENT LABORATORYA Part Of TECHNICAL EDUCATION RESEARCH CENTERS

Student MaterialsThe student materials consist of a series ofcurriculum materials designed to help electronicsand medical technology students to understandbody functions and to maintain and use medicalinstruments. Developed with funding from theU.S. Office of Education. these materials consistof 17 independent learning modules andassociated laboratory apparatus. Althoughspecifically designed for programs in biomedicalequipment technology. these materials may beused in many general electronics or instru-mentation courses as well as it allied healthprograms.

Learning ModulesThe learning modules that comprise the softwarefor the curriculum combine text and laboratoryexercises. They are of three types, each covering adifferent aspect of medical instrumentation:

Operation and Measurement Modules discussmethods of operating an instrument and themedical applications of the data. They aredesigned to provide the student with abackground on the source of signal for a giveninstrument. the basis on which the measurementis made. and the use of the results. An experimentinstructs the student in the proper operatingtechnique for the instrument and the method ofanalyzing the data. Operation and Measurementmodules include:#059 - Electrocardiography4060 - Blood Pressure Measurement00h2 - Spectrophotometry

System Analysis Modules give a systems overviewof the design of an instrument. explaining thefunction of each circuit and transducercomponent. In these modules the studentanaly7es an instrument system in terms of theflow of information from the source to aparticular output display mode or feedback loop.In the laboratory. the student assembles andcalibrates a functioning system from thecomponent blocks and studies the problems oftheir interfacing. GI

oft°

.0.003'"

M014 Imo{

KG MONITOR

qty

App.

System- Analysis modules include:

#071 - ECG Monitor#072 - Electrocardiograph#073 - Cardiotachometer#076 - Electronic Clinical Thermometer11074 Blood Pressure Recorder#077 - Spectrophotometer

Component Analysis Modules give an in-depthanalysis of circuits and transducers which areused in instrument design. Each module includesexperiments so that students can get hands-onexperience with the equipment. In these modulesthe hardware component is discussed, an analysisof its operation is presented in terms of input-output characteristics. and a laboratory exerciseis given for the students to assemble the circuitand study its operation. Component Analysismodules include:

#063 -#064 -#065 -

#066 -#067 -

#068 -#069 -#070 -

Linear Operational AmplifierPower AmplifierDifferential AmplifierVoltage Level Detector

Monostable MultivibratorLowPass FilterUnijunction OscillatorWheatstone Bridge

7r,

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION WRITE:

TERC Publications/ServicesTechnical Education Research Centers44 Brattle St., Cambridge, Massachusetts 02138A Non-profit Public Service Corporation

Student ApparatusThe laboratory hardware associated with thecurriculum has been designed around integratedcircuits and other contemporary components. Sixfunctioning medical instruments can beconstructed with the laboratory apparatus.Hardware components are as follows:Input Sources and Simulators

ECG Simulator - Produces a well-definedECG Waveform with variable heart rate.Cardiovascular Simulator - Simulates thehuman circulatory system: produces actualblood pressure waveforms and readings.

TransducersElectrodes - Three standard plate electrodeswith leads and straps.Pressure Transducer - Diaphragm bellowsand strain gauge in clear plastic housing;measures both dynamic and static pressuresin fluid or gas systems.Thermometer Thermistor Probe - Smallthermistor mounted in tubular plasticholder ; measures oral temperaturePneumograph - Rubber bellows used todetect respiration rate.Photo- Plethysmograph - Transducer used tomeasure pulse rate by photo-optical means,

Amplifiers

Operational Amplifier - 741 op-amp and off-set potentiometer, mounted on printedcircuit board.Power Amplifier - Designed to deliver up to 5watts for driving such devices as the stripchart recorder and speaker.

Signal ProcessorsInput Selector Switch - A convenient meansof connecting OW electrode leads,

Wheatstone Bridge - Basic 4-arm bridge on acircuit board; can be used with a variety ofresistive and capacitive elements.Level Detector - Modified Schmitt triggercircuit; can be variably set to trigger on agiven positive slope signal.Multivibrator - 741 op-amp functions as amonostable (one-shot) multivibrator.Low-Pass Filter - 741 op-amp, preceded andfollowed by simple RC filters.

Unijunction Oscillator - Conventional uni-junction transistor osciliator circuit: used asaudio tone generator and alarm

Output Display Devices

Heart Rate/Temperature Meter - High-quality 31/2" taut band movement.

Strip Chart Recorder - Simplified version ofstandard lab recorder; records EKG.

Speaker - Standard 21/2" P.M. speakermounted on a P.C. board.

Medical instrumentsFrom the hardware components listed above, sixfunctioning medical instruments can beassembled: ECG monitor (visual, audio), electro-cardiograph. cardiotachometer, blood pressurerecorder. respiration rate recorder, and clinicalthermometer. The operation and use ,f theseinstruments. the data collected, and the medicaluse of these data can then be observed andstudied. fr.

DESCRIPTION OF MEI

MODULE FIELD TRIALS

DESCRIPTION OF MEI MODULE FIELD TRIALS

FINAL REPORT

MEDICAL ELECTRONICS AND INSTRUMENTATION

FIELD TRIALS

The further development of Medical Electronics

curricular materials by TERC in modular form has been

greatly aided by the many comments, suggestions, and

criticisms put forward by the MEI Field Trials partici-

pants. This report is intended to summarize and convey

several of the more general remarks and ideas for improve-.

ment which have been suggested during the course of in-

house workshops, on site visitations of the participating

institutions and in other ways.

The MEI program encompasses two distinct but closely

related avenues of development: 1. the instructional

medium in which the material is presented or "software"

and 2. the apparatus or "hardware" to accompany it. The

assessment of the suitability of both of these items for

use in established MEI instructional programs has been made

from separate points of view, that of the instructor and

that of the student.

In all, sixteen institutions participated in the

field trials, and on-site visitations were made at nine

of them. The feedback elicited was gathered in several

forms, including summarization sheets for both student

and instructor response, instructor-annotated copies of

the software modules, and personal interviews with both

instructors and students.

C4

2

It is fair to say that the overall general reaction to

the modular approach is one of enthusiasm. There is no lack

of interest in both the progress in refining the current

materials and the development of new modules. Although

the division cf the modular materials into three distinct

sub-divisions Operations/Measurements, Components, and Systems,

is felt to be a good idea by most respondents, the require-

ments which each type of module fulfills are different. For

example, the Operations/Measurements modules have enjoyed a

good reception in those programs where heavy emphasis is

placed on the physiological aspects of medical electronics

measurements. These include the operator-oriented curricula.

On the other hand, at several places where the dominant em-

phasis is purely on electronics and repair techniques, these

modules have not been found to be more than marginally use-

ful. This dichotomy in the type of preparation which two

year institutions provide for MEI majors is reason for con-

cern, but nevertheless is not likely to change in the fore-

seeable future.

The Component and Systems modules however, were

met with almost universal interest and enthusiasm.

Leaving aside any comments about specific errors in

typography or content, most general criticisms of

these modules concern the format. Some of the most

common remarks deal with the question of inclusion of

algebraic derivations in the Discussion sections of the

modules and whether they contribute to the clarity and

readability of the text of not. On this particular point,

no clear consensus of opinion was reached, except to say

that the present practice of skipping several steps in an

algebraic derivation is unsatisfactory.

3

Several instructors desire full and complete derivations,

while most studerits have indicated the mere mention of

the final result in the body of the text is sufficient.

It is felt that one resolution of this problem which

would seem to be acceptable to all, would be to follow

the students' suggestions, but to also relegate the full

derviation to a separate summary page.

A second point on which there appears to be full

agreement by both sides is that the Experiments section

as presently constituted in the modules is not clearly

written. Many students have expressed a desire for

more direct succinct procedural instructions, with less

use of erudite language. The presently used system of

reference to figures and equations located back in the

Discussion part of the module apparently causes a great

deal of confusion. Furthermore, there is inadequate

provision for the recording of data in the present format.

In order to remedy this problem, a new format for the

Experiments section is suggested, w!'erein each procedural

step is accompanied by a specifically indicated means of

recording the data. In addition, each circuit diagram

or figure would be included alongside the procedural'

steps as it is needed. TheSe comments stem from the

indicated desire of both instructor and student to

have a more formalized method of measuring progress

toward the understanding and completion of an ex-

periment.

Of all the software, the "Linear Operational

Amplifier" component module appears to:enjoy the most

widespread interest. It is clear from the field trial

results that the discussion of the operation of the

device is made at about the right level for the technical

college student. Except for minor changes, the

4

presentation of the material is easily understood

by the student, and is in fact written in such a

way as to increase his interest (comments to this

effect were heard several times in interviews with

students.) Although it is certainly true that some

of the interest in this particular module can be

attributed to the fact that the device under study re-

presents the current state of the art in electronics

and students with such a bent are quite naturally en-

thusiastic about it, there are definite indications.that

the TERC software module is regarded as offering a

good introduction to the subject, mainly because the

available textbooks cover operational amplifiers at

a fairly advanced level (i.e. from a design stundpoint),.

One unforseen development regarding this aspect of the

component modules which was noted in discussions with

electronics instructors, is the possibility of their

being adopted as part of the regular electronics in-

struction program in the two-year colleges.

The Operation/Mcasurement and System modules,11-

on the otheL hand, are more likely to be used only in

BMET programs due to their specific nature. A common

commont of instructors regarding the content of the

System modules was the expressed desire for more form-

alized troubleshooting procedures which would exemplify

some of the more common system faults encountered in

actual commercial equipment. While it is realized that

most equipment presently in the field is typically not

based on intergrated circuity, the systems concept is

a common feature which can be applied to any device as

an aid in localizing the part of a circuit where any

fault lies.

As for the TERC hardware components, several general

comments concern the size and ruggedness (i.e. the physical

weight and strength of the circuit boards used, particularly

5

the operational amplifier module. The type of solder-

less connections which are to be used is of some concern

to both instructors and students, but the consensus is

generally in agreement with the thought that some sort

of spring-clip or spring-socket type of connector is best.

There is soate feeling that a kind of "mother board"

should be used in assembling the systems hardware, but

this is felt by most instructors to be an idealization

which does not properly take the added cost of such a

system into account.

Another point which was well -taken is the obser-

vation that the schematic-style markings on the circuit

boards are not consistently done. In particular, the

Op. Amp. board has no discrete components marked, while

other boards give no indication of the values of certain

permanently-mounted components such as potentiometers.

These deficiencies only lead to confusion for the student

and should be corrected. It is also recommended that

all of the boards be of uniform size with standard

connecti_an points for input, output, and grounds, in

addition to the existing standard power connection.

In conclusion, it is clear that the field trials

have provided TERC with definite suggestions for im-

proving both the software and hardware modules. Al-

though various methods of obtaining information from

field trials participants were utilized, the type of

information gained was found to be a ...:rong function

of the response mode. In particular, corrections to

specific errors in content are transmitted b..st by

mean.° of instructor-annotated copies, whereas the most

valuable source of suggestions for modification of

the format and content is in personal interviews with

both students and instructors. In this same connection.

the summary forms were found to be of limited value.

APPENDIX - A SCOPE OF THE FIELD TRIALS PROGRAM

I. Participating Schools

A list of the participanting schools and faculty is given below. Onlytwo failed to respond with follow-up evaluations of one sort or anotherof the TERC materials. The places where a personal visitation was madeare indicated by an asterisk.

SCHOOLS

3;*Utah Technical College?Spokane Community College*British Columbia Inst. Technology*Grossmont Community College*Springfield Tech. Community College

-` *Kettering College of Medical Arts*Los Angeles City College*Texas State Technical Institute*New York City Community College:Los Angeles Valley Community College:Michael Owens Community CollegeAmarillo CollegeCatonsville Community CollegeTulsa Junior CollegeCounty College of MorrisMonroe Junior College

II. Type of Student

LOCATION

Salt Lake City,UtahSpokane, WashingtonVancover, B.C.San Diego, Calif.Springfield, Mass.Kettering, OhioLos Angele, Calif.Waco, TexasBrooklyn, New YorkLos Angeles, Calif.Toledo, OhioAmarillo, TexasCatonsville, M.D.Tulsa, OklahomaDover, New JerseyRochester, New York

PARTICIPANT

Mr. William WalkerMr. J. Wesley ToddMr. Finn BauckMr. W.E. DelegarMr. Kenneth DupontMr. Stanley ApplegatMr. Forrest BarkerM :. William ShortMr. Arthur RoitsteinMr. Joseph LabokMr. Thomas RobinetteMr. M. PartenMr. John WalstrumMr. Lawrence JonesMr. Martin Hollander=Mr. Lester Laskowski

The typical classroom situation in which the TERC materials were utilizedwas the instructional laboratory. A breakdown of the major courses beingpursued by the students who either used the materials of had them demon-strated is given below.

MAJOR

Electronics (Technical )

NursingBMET

NUMBER PERCENTAGE

.29

298271

4.7%48.3%43.9%

High School 11 1.8%Other, non students (e.g. Faculty 8 1.3%

Total 617 100%

LIST OF SCHOOLS ACTIVELY

INVOLVED IN BMET PROJECT

- - ,

SCHOOLS ACTIVELY INVOLVED IN BMET PROJECT*

May, 1973

Us3ng Project MaterialsIn Operating In Planned

Pilot Testing Programs Programs

ALABAMA

Regional Technical Institute

ARIZONA

(=Yr,rd;or Collerecv.Liege

CALIFORNIA

O'Connor HospitalGrossmont College X XGolden West College XLos Angeles City College XLos Angeles Valley College X XCollege of the Desert XSan ternardino Valley College XSanta Barbara City CollegeVentura College

CONNECTICUT

Quinnipiac College

Y.

COLORADO

Colorado ElectronicsTechnical Institute X

Community College of Denver X

FLORIDA

Santa Fe Junior College XMiami-Dade Junior College XBrevard Community College X

GEORGIA

Augusta Area Technical School X

ILLINOIS

Evanston Hospital. XParkland College X

Illinois State University X

Triton College X

Belleville Area College X

Coyne American Institute X

Kansas Technical Institute X

*vote: This list dot's incluCe 3? -::itional schools which haveexpressed init.:rest in the LLujuct. which have requested

information ibout it."Y41_

Using Project MaterialsIn Operating In Planned

Pilot Testing Programs Programs

KENTUCKy.

Richmond Community College.- X

MARYLAND

Catonsville Community College XHoward C ^-ml nits CollcreNontgomery Junior College X

MASSACHUSETTS

Lincoln CollegeSpringfield TechnicalCommunity College X X

Mass. Bay Community College

X

MICHIGANSchoolcraft College X XWashtenaw Community CollegeKellog3Community College

MINNESOTA

Brown Institt.c.eTechnical Education CenterSuburban Hennepin CountyArea Voc-Tech School

University of Minnesota

MISSOURI

FOrest Park Community College

NEW JERSEY

Middlesex County CollegeCounty College of Morris

NEW MEXICO

University of New.Mexico

X

X

X

XX

NEW YORK

Monroe Community College X X

New York City CommunityCollege

X

Queensborough CommunityCollege

X

Ulstel Community College X

Suffolk County CommunityCollege

X

v Pvg.

Using Project Materials.In Operating In Planned

Pilot Testing Programs Programs

NORTH CAROLINA

Durham Technical Institute XMcDowell Technical Institute X

OHIO

Lima Technical Center X XM.J.Owens Technical Institute

-7nitv Co2ln:.cKettering College ofMedical Prts X

OKLAHOMA

Oklahoma State University- -The Technical Institute X

Tulsa Junior College XU. of Oklahoma Medical Center X

OREGON

Portland Community College X

TENNESSEE

Chattanooga State TechnicalInstitute

TEXAS

Amarillo CollegeTegas State Technical

InstituteTexas Technical UniversityBexar County Hospital Dist.Dallas County JUnior College

X

UTAH

Utah Technical Collegeat Salt Lake X X.

VIRGINIA

U. of Virginia School ofEngineering and AppliedScience

WASHIrGTON

Spokane Community College

WISCONSIN

X

Western Wisconsin TechnicalInstitute X X

Milwaukee School ofEngineering

X

X

DISSEMINATION OF PROJECT PRODUCTS

.

'74

DISSEMINATION OF PRODUCTS *

Total Number of BMET Interactive Network Participants

The 2, 059 BMET Interactive Network Participants included

on the attached chart represent individuals categorized by region

and by affiliation. There is minimal overlap in number of institu-

tions. Of these 2, 059 individuals, each has received at least one

TERC BMET document (product). These people include only those

individuals who have received official publications. The list of

publications printed and disseminated (plus inventory awaiting dis-

semination) is attached.

*This report was prepared in May, 1973. It therefore does notreflect some dissemination activities in 1973 and 1974.

IC

Dissemination of Products

Number of Individuals Receiving BMET Products by Type of Institution and Region

TYPE OF il A I \INSTITUTION . I II III . IV V VI VII VIII . IX . X Other Total

hospital or hosp.admin. 33 99 38 44 146 27 37 32 33 9 12 510

med school orM. D. 8 13 5 7 6 2 11 1 5 4 62

health plannersor educators 13 14 38 17 18 17 16 6 15 5 159

equipment mfg.or pot. employers 18 64 17 12 52 16 29 2 35 12 3 260

BMET's 12 50 17 15 30 33 26 10 36 8 5 242

four yearcolleges 19 23 7 11 26 13 20 12 20 4 2 157

two yearcolleges 9 22 4 13 22 10 19 9 16 4 3 131

technicalinstitutes 12 15 10 7 16 10 6 6 4 12 98

othereducators 12 75 5 8 10 13 6 9 15 2 5 160

other orunknown 18 34 32 7 40 '7 9 9 34 5 14 209

societies 9 16 14 3 15 3 5 1 1 4 71

TOTAL 163 425 187 144 381 151 184 97 214 571

56 2059

'7G

DISSEMINATION OF PRODUCTSList of Pro&cts and Number Disseminated

'actil

7.4 .cio .._

4-.... b0 ala)

7.4

1-.2 E 0 sa. 0..-4 4 44...4 2.2 e1 0 " 0 0CtS 0 Cd rn ra ..-4 0t5 r, 46 .2 54' mE-1 a. . E-4 0 41 44 4

PROGRAM PLANNING MATERIALS

Surveys of Needs and Resources

1000 1000*Interim I Report: Development and Evaluationof BMET Educational Programs

*Interim II Report: Survey of Job Characteristics,Manpower Needs and Training Resources. 1500 1500

*Compendium of Educational Programs: Bio-medical Equipment Technology (June, 1971) 500 500

Digest of Educational Programs: BiomedicalEquipment Technology (1971-72) 500**

Administrator Materials

*Springfield Technical Community College ModelCurriculum

*Springfield Technical Community College,Case Study 150 90 60

*BMET Task Lists 500 450 50

*BMET Task Key Sort Cards

*Task Analysis by Selected Criteria: A Manual 750 400 350

P7

*BMET Sourcebook of Working Papers

Survey of Instruetional Materials

Monroe Community College: Case Study

British Columbia Institute of Technology:Case Study

Curriculum Lists

What Does the BMET Need to Know: Instruc-tional Resources Workshop Report

Status Report on Certification

The BMET in the Hospital: the Hospital Adminis-trator's Workshop Report

Curricula Compilation

BMET Curriculum Guide

Report on Workshop for Hospital Administrators

Report on Workshop for 1974 BMET ProgramPlanners

Career Ladder Workshop Report

Student/Personnel Materials

*BMET Recruitment Brochures

*A Descriptionof the BMET's Day

*"Frontiers of Technology -- The BiomedicalEquipment Technician" (16 mm)

*Completed* *Estimated number printed when product is complete

Ts2.i 1.4

Qom)G oc 4., +... 110 Cd $.4

42 7x'sQ)

.4E b-.' 15: tt 5'

4..

0CI)0 .. '5.4 V ...>

E-, a..T.:

E-, .T/.....LI

500 360 140

300 27 273

250**

2000**

500**

250**

700**

4000 4000

2000 1800 200

INSTRUCTIONAL MATERIALS

Experimental Instructional Modules .in Biomedical*Equipment Technology (Draft 1)

. *CM-1.1 Introductory CardiovascularMeasurement

*CM-1.2 Lab for CM-1.1

*CM-2.2 Intermediate CardiovascularMeasurement Featuring theCardioverter

*CM-2.3 Intermediate Lab for CM 2.2

*CM-3.2 Advanced CardiovascularMeasurement Featuring theCardioverter

*CM-3.3 Advanced Lab for CM-3.2

*TR-1 Specialized Amplifiers; Introduc-tory Solid State Theory

*TR-2 Specialized Amplifiers: Equiva-lent Circuits

*TR-3 Specialized Amplifiers: R-CCoupling

*TR-4 Specialized Amplifiers: ChopperAmplifiers

*TR-5 Specialized Amplifiers: Opera-tional Amplifiers

*Completed

.0Jas. u4.0C 0 a)

.....

C.0 E c ci. 0211 c 74 2n)

4 ,.. 4..1" C.) =CII ..-1 CD4I-J 1 4-) 4 1.10 ii 0 to

*" X CHa HC] W4.54

100 100

100 100

100 100

100 100

100 100

100 100

100 100

100 100

100 100

100 100

100 100

*ICU-1.1 Intensive Care Units: Introductory

Ts

O T.:

Ts4.,ca

-9-E

03 M014 CO)

E-.6

)4 .cio a)bo tif t'c ca. 2

1)4 cto .. c4.,)4ii.144 4

and Featuring Hewlett-Packard 100 100

*ICU-1. IA ICU featuring the Remore instal-lation 100 100

*ICU-1.1B ICU featuring the Pacemaker 100 100

*ICU-1. 1C ICU featuring the Viso-Scope 100 100

*ICU -1. ID ICU Safety 100 100

*Kenneth Dupont, Topics In Biomedical Measure-ments 50 50

*.Dean DeMarre, Topics In Bio-Technology 50 50

TransducersOpticsChromatographypH MeasurementSpectrophotometersRadiationPower SuppliesSpecialized AmplifiersCardiovascular Measurement

*Digest of Educational Materials: An AnnotatedBibliography 250 20 230

Instructor's Guide for Biomedical EquipmentTechnology 250**

* Completed**Estimated number printed when product is complete

Operation :nd Measurement Series (4 Modules)

*Electrocardiography*Blood Pressure MeasurementRespiration and Temperature MeasurementSpec trophotometry

Component Analysis Series (8 Modules)

*Linear Operational Amplifiers*Power Amplifier* Voltage Level Detector*Monostable Multivibrator*Low-Pass FilterAudio Oscillator*Wheatstone BridgeDifferential Amplifier

System Analysis Series (7 Modules)

*ECG Monitor*Electrocardiograph*CardiotachometerBlood Pressure RecorderRespiration Rate Recorder*Electronic Clinical Thermometer

200200

400200200200200

100

200200200

200

187

360l55778170

30

110118142

40

13

200**200**

4045

123119130200**

70200**

908258

200**200**160

*Completed**Estimated number printed when product is complete

DISSEMINATION CHART

PROGRAM PLANNING MATERIALS

Total Disseminated*to Date

10,177

INSTRUCTIONAL MATERIALS

3, 090

GRAND TOTAL

13, 267

Total Inventoryand Anticipated

By End ofPro ect

5, 298

2, 810

8,108

15,

5,

21,

475

900

375

0"-*( .14 (4

UNIVERSITIES, COLLEGES, HOSPITALS,

BUSINESSES AND OTHERS

INVOLVED IN BMET PROJECT

UNIVERSITIES, COLLEGES, HOSPITALS, BUSINESS, INDUSTRIESAND OTHERS INVOLVED IN THE DEVELOPMENT OF BMET PROJECT PRODUCTS

Community Colleges, Technical Institutes & Military ProgramsInvolved in Development of Products

Springfield Technical Commurity College; MassachusettsTexas State Technical Institute; Waco, Tx.Schoolcraft College; Livonia, Mich.Algonquin Community College; Ontario, CanadaBritish Columbia Institute of Technology; Burnaby, B.C.Colorado Electronics Technical Institute; Manitou Sp., Colo.San Bernadino Valley College; San Bernadino, Calif.Grossmont College; El Cajon, Calif.Monroe Community College; Rochester, NYU.S. Air Force Medical Service School; Wichita Falls, Tx.U.S. Army Optical & Maintenance Agency; Denver, Colo.Brown Institute; Minneapolic, Minn.Los Angeles Valley College; Van Nuys, Calif.Utah Technical College at Salt Lake; Salt Lake City, UtahAmarillo College; Amarillo, Tx.Los Angeles City College; Los Angeles, Calif.she Technical Institute: Oklahoma State University;

Oklahoma City, Ok.Regional Technical Institute; Birmingham, Ala.Tulsa Junior College; Tulsa, Ok.Western Wisconsin Technical Institute; La Crosse, Wisc.Central Research Instrument Program; Little Rock, Ark.Golden West College; Huntington Beach, Calif.Michael J. Oweris Technical Institute; Punysburg, Oh.

Universities involved in Development of Products

Tulsa UniversityTexas A & MUniversity of IllinoisOklahoma State UniversityUniversity of HouStonUniversity of MissouriUniversity of MarylandStanford UniversityQueens CollegeNortheastern UniversityUniversity of New MexicoTexas Tech UniversityUniversity of VirginiaSchool of Engineering & Applied Sciences, CharlotteIllinois State UniversityUniversity of MinnesotaUniversity of CincinnatiUniversity of DaytonAmherst College, Amherst, Mass.Tulane University School of Medicine, New Orleans, La.Tufts University, Medford, Mass.Massachusetts Institute rf Technology, Cambridge, Mass.

f.14

Community Colleges, Technical Listitutes & Military ProgramsInvolved in Development of Products

Lowell Technical Institute; MassachusettsMontgomery Junior College; MarylandGlendale Community College; Glendale, ArizonaSanta Barbara City College; Santa Barbara, Calif.Ventura College; Ventura, Calif.Quinnipiac College; Haniden, Conn.Community College of Denver; Denver, Colo.Santa Fe Community College; Gainesville, Fla.Miami Dade Junior College; Miami, Fla.Augusta Area Technical Institute; Augusta, Ga.Maraine Valley Community College; Palos Hills, Ill.College of DuPage; Glen Ellyn,Parkland College; Champaign, Ill.Richmond Community College; Richmond, Ky.School of Allied Health, Louisiana State University; New

Orleans, La.Kellogg Community College; Battle Creek, Mich.Wastitinaw Community College; Ann Arbor, Mich.Technical Education Center; Aroba, Minn.Middlesex County College; Edison, NJCounty College of Marris;Dover, NJQueensborough Community College; Bayside, NYSuffolk County Community College; Seldon, L.I., NYMcDowell Technical Institute; Marian, NCKettering College of Medical Arts; Kettering, Oh.Lima Technical Center; Lima, Oh.Portland Community College; Portland, Or.Chattanooga State Technical Institute: Chattanooga, Tenn.San Antonio Junior College; San Antonio, Tx.Spokane Community College; Spokane, Wash.Milwaukee School of Engineering; Milwaukee, Wisc.Pima College; ruscon, Ariz.Bakersfield College; Bakersfield, Calif.College of the Desert; Palm Desert, Calif.Coyne American Institute; Chicago, Ill.Triton College; River Grave, Ill.Belleville Area College; Belleville, Ill.Kansas Technical Institute; Salinas, Kan.Catonsville Community College; Catonsville, Md.Howard Community College; Columbia, Md.Massachusetts Bay Community College; Watertown, Mass.Suburban Hennepin County Area Voc-Tech Schools; Minneapolis,

Minn.Forest Park Community College; St. Louis, Mo.New York City Community College; l_ooklyn, WYUlster County Community College; Stone Ridge, NY

Community Colleges, Technical Institutes, and Military ProgramsInvolved in Development of Products

Durham Technical Institute; Durham, NCLakeland Community College; Mentar, Oh.Delaware Technical and Community College; Wilmington, Del.Community College of Baltimore; Baltimore, Md.Lincoln Technical College; Lincoln, Neb.S. Oklahoma City Junior College; Oklahoma City, Ok.State Technical Institute at Memphis, Tenn.Centennial College of Applied Arts & Technology; OntarioFullerton Junior College; Fullerton, Calif.Laney College; Oakland, Calif.Ward Technical Institute; Hartford, Conn.Broward Community College; Ft. Lauderdale, Fla.Debalk Area Technical School; Clarboton, Ga.Central YMCA Community College; Chicago, Ill.DeUry Institute of Technology; Chicago, Ill.Middlesex Community College; Bedford, Mass.Ferris State College; Big Rapids, Mich.Michigan Technological University; Houghton, Mich.Burlington County College; Pemberton, NJUr for County Technical Institute; Scotch Plains, NJHudr.)n Valley Community College; Troy, NYMohAwk Valley Community College; Utica, NYCincinnati Technological College; Cincinnati, Oh.Murray State College; Tishomingo, Ok.Connaro State College; Warner, Ok.Fox Valley Technical Institute; Appleton, Wisc.Sasketchewan Technical Institite; Moose Jaw, Canada

BUSINESSES AND INDUSTRIES INVOLVED IN DEVELOPMENT OFPRODUCTS

American Optical Co.Radiometer Co.Hewlett-PackardMennan-G rea tbachAdvanced InstrumentsInstrumentation LaboratoryInternational Equipment Co.Scientific ProductsDavid Kopt Instruo,ientsDallons Inst umentsMedi-Call ServiceGeneral ElectricPicker X-RayDundas AnesthesiaBendix Commercial Service Corp.,nstra Service, L.A.BurdickAldi Electronics, inc., San FranciscoCirbon-Farnsworth, Palo AltoVarian Company, Palo AltoGentec Hospital Supply Co., San FranciscoCobe Laboratories, Inc., DenverRocky Mountain Surgi cal, DenverTechnical Equipment Co., DenverMuckle Eluiprnent, DenverApplied Technical Products, DenverGeorge Burberts and Sons, DenverJohnnie Walker Medical Electronics, Inc., DenverAmerican Hospital Supply, Washington, D. C.Picker Medical Products, Hialeah, FloridaCombridve Instrument Co.Technicon, Inc.Curtin Scientific Co., Atlanta

nvf

Akron Surgical Co., Indianapolis

Seller Instruments, Indianapolis

Curtis & French Co., Indianapolis

Medical Electronics, Chicago

Caltronics, Inc., Metairie, Louisiana

Medical Devices, Inc., Kenner, LA

Control Fabrication and Service Corp., New .Orleans

Murray Baumgartner, Baltimore

Technical Associates of New Orleans

Alpha, Medico, Inc., Boston

Detroit X-Ray

G. A. Ingram, Detroit

Evan-Sharrat, Detroit

Electro-Medical Co., Detroit

Harold Medical Equipment Service, St. Paul

Joseph Dahl Surgical Co., Minneapolis

Universal Hospital Services, Minneapolis

Minnesota Medical Research Foundation, Minneapolis

Physicians and Hospitals Supply Co., Minneapolis

Puritan-Bennett Corp., Kansas City

Kansas City Calibration and Repair

Electrodyne, Hazelwood, Missouri

Sherwood Medical Industries, Inc., St. Louis

ABC Medical Services, Inc., Overland, Mo.

Instrumentation Lab., St. Louis

Siener Corp., Union, N. J.

Harris Calorific Co., Cleveland

Brush Instruments, C ieveland

E. G. Baldwin and Assoc., Cleveland

Shuemann-Jones, Co., Cleveland

H. P. Gardner Repair Co., Cleveland

Air-Shields, Inc., Hatboro, PA.

Medesco, Philadelphia

Smith, Kline & French Lab., Philadelphia

Fisher Scientific Co., Pittsburgh

Impoc Instrument Service, Pittsburgh

Terrell Supply Co., Ft. Worth

Dallas Surgical Supply Co.

Honeywell Corporation

Medirent, Houston

Beckman Instrument Co.

Norco Bio-Systems, Houston

W. A. Kyle Ca., Houston

Physio-Control, Seattle

Van Waters & Rogers, Inc., Seattle

Ohio Medical Products

Profex-Ray, Seattle

Pengelly X-Ray Corp., Milwaukee

Waters Instruments, Rochester, Minn.

Raycomm Industries, Freehold, N. J.

Medi -Tech, Watertown, Mass.

Bausch and Lomb Corp. NY

lane Instruments, Inc., III.

Esterline Angus Corp., Ind.

Perkin Elmer Corp., Conn.

International Equipment Corp, Mass.

Leeds & Northrup Co., Pa.

Sigmamotor, Inc., NY

4- fr-(*.we'y

HOSPTIALS INVOLVED IN DEVELOPMENT OF PRODUCTS

St. Vincent's Hospital, L.A.

Good Samaritan Hospital, L.A.

Queen of Angels Hospital, L.A.

White Memorial Medical Center, L.A.

Childnens Hospital of Los Angeles

Veterans Administration Hospital, L.A

Kaiser Foundation Hospital, L.A.

U.S.C. Medical Center, L.A.

University Hospital of San Diego

Veterans Administration Hospital, Palo Alto

Mills Memorial Hospital, San Mateo

San Francisco General Hospital

U.S. Public Health Service Hospital, San Francisco

Children's Hospital of San Francisco

St. Luke's Hospital, San Francisco

Mt. Zion Hospital and Medical Center, San Francisco

Veterans Administration Hospital, San Francisco

Letterman General Hospital, San Francisco

Franklin Hospital, San Francisco

Stadord Medical Center, Palo Alto

University of California Medical Center, San Francisco

\'sterans Administration Hospital, Denver

Children's Hospital, Denver

St. Joseph's Hospital, Denver

General Rose Memorial Hospital, Denver

Rocky Mountain Osteopathic Hospital, Denver

Colorado General Hospital, Denver

Veterans Administration Hospital, Washington, D. C.

Providence Hospital, Washington, D.C.

Washington Hospital Center, Washington, D.C.

Walter Reed Army Medical Center, Washington, D. C.

-Arr.,r sa

Georgetown University Hospital, Washington, D. C.

National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, MD.

National Naval Medical Center, Bethesda, M D.

Baptist Hospital of Miami

Mt. Sinai Hospital, Miami

Veterans Administration Hospital, Miami

Jackson Memorial Hospital, Miami

Miami Heart Institute

Doctor's Hospital, San Diego

Highland Hospital of Rochester, N.Y.

University of Oklahoma Medical Center, Oklahoma City, OK

DeKaib County General Hospital, Decatur, Ga.

Veterans Administration Hospital, Atlanta

St. Joseph's Infirmary, Atlanta

National Communicable Disease Center, Atlanta

Emory University Medical School, Atlanta

Community Hospital, Indianapolis

Methodist Hospital, Indianapolis

Winona Memorial Hospital, Indianapolis

Marion County General, Indianapolis

Indiana University Medical Center, Indianapolis

Louis A. Weiss Memorial Hospital, Chicago

Presbyterian St. Luke's, Chicago

Children's Memorial Hospital, Chicago

University of Illinois Hospital, Chicago

Charity Hospital of Now Orleans

L.S.U. Medical School, New Orleans

Tulane University School of Medicine, New Orleans

Baltimore City Hospital

Children's Hospital, Baltimore

Mt. Sinai Hospital, Baltimore

University of Maryland Hospital, Baltimom

ro

Children's Hospital, Boston

Veterans Administration Hospital, W. Roxbury, Mass.

Beth Israel Hospital, Boston

Mass. General Hospital, Boston

iw England Deaconess Hospital, Boston

Faulkner Hospital, Boston

Kennedy Memorial Hospital for Children, Boston

University Hospital, Boston

New England Medical Center, Boston

Hutzel Hospital, Detroit

St. John Hospital, Detroit

Henry Ford Hospital, Detroit

Mt. Cannel Hospital, Detroit

Children's Hospital of Michigan, Detroit

Lafayette Clinic, Detroit

Northwestern Hospital of Minneapolis

Mt. Sinai Hospital, Minneapolis

Hennipen County General Hospital, Minneapolis

Lutheran Deaconess Hospital, Minneapolis

St. Mary's Hospital, Minneapolis

Veterans Administration Hospital, Minneapolis

St. Paul-Ramsey Hospital, St. Paul

Charles T. Miller Hospital, St. Paul

St. Joseph's Hospital, St. Paul

University of Minnesota Hospital, Minneapolis

St. Mary's Hospital, Kansas City

St. Luke's Hospital, Kansas City

Minoroh Medical Center, Kansas City

Veterans Administration Hospital, Kansas City

University of Kansas Medical Center, Kansas City

Research Hospital and Medical Center, Kansas City

Barnes Hospital, St. Louis

St. Luke's Hospital, St. Louis

St. Mary's Hospital, Richmond Heights, Mo.

Veterans Administration Hospital, St. Louis

St. John's Mercy Hospital, St. Louis

St. Louis University Hospital

Lutheran Hospital, St. Louis

St. Anthony's Hospital of St. Louis

De Paul Hospital, St. Louis

Jewish Hospital and Rehabilitation Center, Jersey Hospital

Beth Israel Hospital, Newark

St. &amebas Hospital, Livingston, N.J.

Cherry Hill Hospital, Cherry Hill, N.J.

Jersey City Medical Center

New York Medical College Hospital, New York City

Montefiore Hospital and Medical Center, Bronx

Veterans Administration Hospital, Bronx

Mt. Sinai Hospital, New York City

Morrisaria City Hospital, Bronx

Hebrew Hospital for the Chronic Sick, Bronx

New York University Hospital, New York City

Baby's and Children's Hospital, Cleveland

Lutheran Hospital, Cleveland

Albert Einstein Medical Center, Philadelphia

U.S. Naval Hospital, Philadelphia

Institute of Pennsylvania Hospital, Philadelphia

Temr;:. University Health & Science Center, Philadelphia

Hahneaan Medical College, Philadelphia

Thomas Jefferson University Hospital, Philadelphia

Children's Hospital of Pittsburgh

Shadyside Hospital, Pittsburgh

Suburban General Hospital, Pittsburgh

Allegheny General Hospital, Pittsburgh

Veterans Administration Hospital, Pittsburgh

Presbyterian University Hospital, Pittsburgh

Methodist Hospitol, Dolls

Chilren's Medical Center, Dallas

U. S. Air Force Hospital, Ft. Worth

Baylor University Medical Center, Dallas

University of Texas (SW) Medico! School, Dallas

Ben Taub Hospitol, Houston

Texas Children's Hospital, Houston

Veterans Administration Hospital, Houston

Baylor College of Medicine and Research, Houston

Texas Institute for Rehobilitotion and Research, Houston

Texas Heart Institute, Houston

Providence Hospital, Seattle

Burien General Hospitol, Seattle

Veterans Administration Hospital, Seattle

University of Washirgton, Seattle

Madigan General Hospital, Tacoma

Veterans Adrnir,;:tration Hospital, Milwaukee

Lutheran Hospital, Milwaukee

West Allis Memorial Hospital, Milwaukee

St. Francis Hospital, Milwaukee

St. Luke's Hospital, Milwaukee

Mt. Sinai Hospital, Milwaukee

Evangelical Deaconess, Milwaukee

Milwaukee County General Hospital, Milwaukee

Elm Brook Hospital, Milwaukee

O'Connor Hospital, Son Jose, California

Evanston Hospital, Evanston, Ill.

Fitzsimmons General Hospital, Denver

Peter Bent Brigham Hospital, Boston

Riverside Hospital, Trenton, MI

University of Colorado Medical Center, Denver

St. John's Hospital, Tulsa, Oklahoma

St. Paul's Hospital, Burnaby, B.C.Springfield Hospital Medical Center, Springfield, Mass.University of Alabama Hospitals & Clinks, BirminghamUniversity of Utah, Medical Center., Salt Lake CityCharles Miller Hospital, St. Paul

Holy Cross Hospital, Salt Lake City

Hillerest Baptist Hospital, Waco, Texas

High Plains Hospital, Amarillo, Texas

Baptist Hospital Medical Center, Birmingham, Ala.Baptist Memoriol Hospital, Oklohorno CityHollywood Presbyterian Hospital, L.A.

Mercy Hospital, Springfield, Moss.

Memorial Hospitol, Colorado Springs

Wilson Memorial Hospital, Johnson City, N. Y.St. Mory's Hospital, Madison, Wisconsin

Downstate Medical Center, Bronx, NY

Riverside Hospital, Trenton, Mich.

Others Involved in Product Development

Health Careers Council; Birmingham, Ala.Health Careers Program, Arkansas Hospital Assoc.; Little

Rock, Ark.Health Manpower Council of CA; Orinda, CAHealth Professions Council of San Fransisco; San Fransisco, Ca.The Connecticut Hospital Assoc.; New Haven, Conn.Georgian Higher Education Authority, State Scholarships

Commission; Atlanta, Ge.Hospital Association of Hawaii; Honolulu, Haw.Maryland Hospital Education and Research Foundation; Lutherville,

Md.Massachusetts Hospital Assoc.; Burlington, Ma.Missouri Health Careers, Missouri Hospital Assoc.; Jefferson

City, Mo.Montana Hospital Assoc.; Helena, Mo.Medical Careers Information, Nevada Hospital Assoc.;

Reno, Nev.New Mexico Hospital Assoc.; Alburquerque, NMNational Health Council, Inc.; New York, NYNorth Dakota Health Careers Council, ND State University;

Fargo, NDHealth Policy Planning Council; Greenville, SCHospital Council of the National Capital Area, Inc.; Washington,

D.C.Maryland Hospital Education and Research Foundation; Luther -

ville, Md.Woman's Auxiliary California Medical Assoc.; Fullerton, Ca.V.A. Hospital Personnel; Boston, Ma.Arizona Hospital Assoc.; Phoenix, Ar.Colorado Health Careers Council; Denver, Colo.Association of Delaware Hospitals; Wilmington, Del.Hospital-Health Careers; Miami, Fla.Operation MEDIHC; Tampa, Fla.Georgia Hospital Assn.; Atlanta, Ge.Idaho Hospital Assoc.; Boise, Id.Health Careers Council of Illinois; Chicago, Ill.Indiana Yealth Careero, Inc.; Indianapolis, Ind.Manpower Development & Public Affairs, Iowa Hospital Assoc.;

Des Moines, Ia.Kansas Hospital Association Educational Foundation; Topeka,

Kan.Health Careers in Kentucky; Louisville, Ky.Health Careers Program, Louisana Hospital Assoc.; New Orleans,

La.Health Council, Inc.; Augusta, Me.

92

Others Involved in Product Development

Horizons Unlimited, Mass. Medical Society Auxiliary; Boston,Mass.

Michigan Health Council; East Lansing, Mich.Minnesota Health Careers Council; Minneapolis, Minn.New Hampshire Health Careers Council; Concord, NHNew Jersey Hospital Assn; Princeton, NJN.Y.S. Department of Health; Albany, NYRegional Health Council of Eastern Appalachia; Morganton, NCNorth Carolina Hospital Assn.; Raleigh, NCGreater Cleveland Hosp. Assn.; Cleveland, Oh.Health Careers of Ohio; Columbus, Oh.Oklahoma Council for Health Careers; Oklahoma City, .01t.Health Manpower .Program, HCWP: Pittsburgh, Pa.R.I. Council of. Community Services; Providence, R.I.Tennessee Health Careers Program; Nashville, Tenn.Health Careers Council of Vermont; Randolph, Vt.Virginia Health Careers; Richmond, Va.Coordinating Council for Occupational Education; Olympia, Wash.North Seattle Community College; Seattle, Wash.Wisconsin Health Careers Program; Madison, Wisc.Hospital Council of Greater Milwaukee Area; Milwaukee, Wisc.American Medical Assoc. (Horizons Unlimited Project); Chicago,

Ill.Division of Careers and Recruitment, American Hospital Assoc.;

Chicago, Ill.National Health "ouncil, Inc.; New York, NYConnecticut Institute for Health Manpower Resources, Inc.;

Hartford, Conn.Alliance for Engineering in Medicine and Biology; Washington, DCBiomedical Engineering & Instrumentation Branch, NIH, Division

of Research Services; Bethesda, Md.Biomedical Engineering Society; Evanston, Ill.Engineers Joint Council; New York, NYFoundation for Medical Technology, Mount Sinai Medical Ctr.;

New York, NYEmergency Care Research Institute, Philadelphia, Pa.Medical Material Field Office, U.S. Air Force, Phoenixville, Pa.Association for Advancement of Medical Instrumentation

PROJECT CONFERENCES AND WORKSHOPS

WI

Conferences and Workshops

First TERC Conference on BMET Education,Atlantic City, New Jersey (April, 1969)

Denver Conference on BMET Education(August, 1970)

Report of the Denver Conference

Hospital Administrator's Workshop (July; 1971)

Instructional Resources Workshop(September, 1971)

Career/Guidance Workshop for BMET/NMT(December, 1971)

First Tech Square Workshop (May, 1971)

First Tech Square Field Trial Workshop(February, 1973)

Second Tech Square Field Trial Workshop(April, 1973)

Third Tech Square Field Trial Workshop(April, 1973)

Field Coordinators Workshop (Feb. 1974)

9 5

L.

ARTICLES AND PRESENTATIONS

qG

Articles, Presentations

*Abele, John. "Administration of Medical Electronics," Hospitals(Journal of the American Hospital Association), December,1969, pp. 53-56.

* . "Cost Effectiveness in Medical Instrumentation,"presented at the American Hospital Association Meeting,New Jersey, September, 1968.

* . "The Role of Industry in an Accelerated National--7----PFEgram of Biomedical Instrumentation," presented to

the Association for the Advancement of Medical Instrumen-.tation at seminar sponsored by U.S. Senate Subcommitteeon Government Research, Oklahoma City, October, 1966.

. "The Role of the Biomedical Equipment Technician in-Medical Instrumentation," presented at the annual meetingof the American Hospital Association, Chicago, September,1968.

Angus, Robert. "Initiating and Operating a BMET program,"presented as a member of the panel at the New Englandregional meeting of the American Technical EducationAssociation, Northeastern University, Boston, March, 1973.

* Cadle, P. J. and Cohn, A. "Career Opportunities for BiomedicalEquipment Technicians," Medical Electronics and Data(September-October, 1972), pp. bl-S5.

. Summary of "Survey of Job Characteristics, ManpowerNeeds and Training Resources for Biomedical EquipmentTechnicians," TERCts Interim II Report. Medical Electronicsand Data (January-February, 1971) pp. 63-69.

Cadle, P. J. "Task Analysis of Training Programs in EmergingTechnologies," presented to the International Meetingof the Institute of Manpower Sciences (Washington, D.C.,1971.

DeMarre, Dean. "The Biomedical Equipment Technician," presentedto the Biomedical Technology and Manpower Conference,Grossmont College, El Cajon, Calif., March, 1970.

"Biomedical Electronics Education," Medical Electronicsand Data (January-February, 1971) pp. 71-75.

"BMET-Biomedical Equipment Technician TrainingUpdate, 1972," Medical Electronics and Data (May-June,1972) pp. 72-75.

Articles, Presen,ations

"Role of the Audio Engineer in Medicine," AudioEngineering Society Journal (November, 1971) pp.-8-997900.

*Frank, N. H. "Lab-Centered Physics Courses are in the Wings,"

Industrial Education (March, 1973) pp. 133-134.

. "Tinkering with Hardware during Lessons in Physics,"Industrial Education (April, 1973) pp. 73-75.

Hubbard, W. D. "Development of Generalizable EducationalPrograms in Biomedical Equipment Technology," presented atannual meeting of Association for Advancement of MedicalInstrumentation, Houston, July, 1968.

"The Development of Educational Programs in Biomed-ical Equipment Technology." Journal of the Association forthe Advancement of Medical Instrumentation (July, 1969)pp. 135-138.

McWane, John. "Biomedical Engineering: A Struggling Technology,"presented to the engineering and medical faculty of ThayerSchool of Engineering, Dartmouth College, Dartmouth, N.HMarch, 1972.

. "Curriculum Materials Being Developed for BiomedicalEquipment Technology," presented at regional meeting ofAmerican Technical Education Association, Springfield,Mass. June, 1972.

Nelson, Arthur. "A Coordinated Research Effort," presented atannual meeting of the American Technical Education Associa-tion, Denver, December, 1966.

"Development of Educational Programs for the EmergingTechnologies,' presented at annual meeting of the AmericanVocational Association, Dallas, December, 1968.

*Rogers, John. "The Biomedical Equipment Technician," IndustrialEducation (January, 1971) pp. 1-8.

Tompkins, Jack. "The BMET Program at Texas State Technical Insti-tute," presented at annual meeting of the Association forthe Advancement of Medical Instrumentation, Washington, D.C.March, 1973.

Articles, Presentations

"Biomedical 7quipment Technicians--a Need and aSolution," presented at the annual Meeting, Associationfor the Advancement of Medical Instrumentation (1971).

Wilkins, Margaret. "Summary of TERC's Instructional ResourcesWorkshop," presented at annual meeting Association for theAdvancement of Medical Instrumentation, Las Vegas, April,1972.

Nelson, Arthur H. and Parker, Allen. "Program Development forfor New and Emerging Technical Occupations." Journalof Research and Development in Education. (Spring,1974) pp. 65-79.

. "Coordinated Program Development for EmergingOccupations." Technical Education Reporter (July-August,1974) pp. 88-98.

Reporter Staff. "The Development of an Emerging Field."Technical Education Reporter (July-August, 1974) pp. 27-32.

Bauck, F. and Ridgway, A. "Better Health Through HospitalEquipment." Technical Education Reporter (July-August,1974) pp. 33-38.

.C4c1._7

REPRINTS OF PUBLISHED ARTICLES

"Program Development for New and Emerging Occupations"

"Development of an Emerging Field"

"Better Health Through Hospital Equipment"

1'w

3

PROGRAM DEVELOPMENT FOR NEW ANDEMERGING TECHNICAL OCCUPATIONS

Arthur H. Nelson and Allen ParkerTechnical Education Research Centers, Inc.

Cambridge, Mass.

Technological advances have creatednew educational needs in our society.Large and growing numbers of supportpersonnel arc now demanded for doinghighly skilled tasks, supervising less skilledworkers and gathering data often with-out direct supervision from managers andprofessionals. These personnel are fre-.quently called "technicians" in engineer-ing, agriculture, and medicine; "profes-sionals" or "specialists" in office, busi-ness, marketing, and community servicefields; and "technicians" or "noncommissioned officers" in the militaryservices.

As these career opportunities emerged,a new kind of education became neces-sary. On-the-job training, union appren-ticeship, vocational education, and theliberal arts proved to be _inadequate. Intheir place, a new type of postsecondaryeducation involving an integrated balanceof theory and practice arc required. Thispreparation, frequently called "technical

education," includes classroom instruc-tion and laboratory, clinical, or fieldexperiences. It is offered by a greatvariety of public, private non-profit,proprietary, business, labor, and militaryinstitutions. It usually but not neces-sarily involves one to three years ofhigher education and leads to either acertificate or an associate degree.

Technical education has grown rapidlyduring the last two decades, but it doesnot yet adequately serve the 35% to 55%of our youths and adults who couldbenefit from it. To help address thisinadequacy, Technical Education Centerswas established in 1965 as an independ-ent, non-profit corporation. TERC, is

dedicated to the expansion and improve-ment of technical and occupational educa-tion.

TERC's founders placed high priorityon curriculum development for new andemerging technical occupations, There areat least a dozen of these important occu-

66

pations, such as biomedical equipmenttechnician, electromechanical technician,marine technician, and urban develop-ment technician. In an emerging occupa-tion, there typically exists an unmetdemand for thousands of well-preparedtechnicians. Because few, if any, educa-tional institutions have high quality pro-grams for preparing such technicians whenan occupation first emerges, 50 to 500schools should establish programs for eachnew occupation during a decade.

These programs are needed to increasethe productivity of public and privateemployers and to provide students withpaths to meaningful careers. Emergingoccupations offer students from dis-advantaged groups and other parts of theU.S. population realistic career oppor-tunities for individual growth, rapid pro-motion, and a foundation for continuingeducation in an expanding technologicalfield. Career education programs in newoccupations are thus particularly attrac-tive to community and junior colleges,technical institutes, and increasingly todivisions of four-year colleges and univer-sities.

Between 1966 and 1974, the U.S.Office of Education awarded TERC aseries of project grants to develop pro-grams for four emerging occupations. Oneproject has now been completed and theother three are nearing completion. Thisarticle describes the program developmentin the four projects and suggests someprocedures and products for programdevelopment not only in technical educa-tion, but in other kinds of education aswell.

1 New Kind of Curriculum Development

Typical curriculum developmentprojects create new instructional materialsfor a single well-established subject such

as physics. These materials are designedwith stated educational objectives and aretested and refined. In many cases, suchprojects devote little attention to makingcertain that educational institutions areactually going to use the materials. It is

assumed that a project needs only todevelop high quality products and canleave dissemination to commercial pub-lishers who will be attracted by largepotential markets.

By contrast, the development of aneducational program for a new technicaloccupation usually presents a morecomplex research and development prob-lem. The specifications of the occupationtypically require that a school initiate afull-time, two-year program with severalnew technical courses, rather thanimprove a single existing course. Further-more, because an emerging field usually isdiffuse and rapidly changing, employersdo not offer schools a consensus onobjectives for program development. Newfields also frequently lack instructionalmaterials and experienced instructors anda school or community seldom can affordto develop the materials and to traininstructors. Consequently, more than tenyears generally elapse between the timeemployers seek new kinds of techniciansand the time educational institutions firstgraduate such specialists.

TERC concluded that the reduction ofthis lag required a new kind of curriculumdevelopment project, which might becalled a program development and demon-stration project. Because of the diffuseand rapidly changing nature of emergingoccupations, such a project could mosteffectively and economically facilitate thedevelopment of 50 to 500 programs bymeans of a nationally coordinatedresearch an dissemination effort. Thecomponents J f this effort are portrayed inFigure 1, the "TERC Model for Designing,

. . ar"'1 . . .< 4

Developing and Establishing a New Educa-tional Program." (See pages 68-69.)

The steps that an educational institu-tion takes to establish a program areshown across the top of the model. Theseinclude awareness/interest, feasibilitystudy, program design, program start-up,ongoing program operation, and ongoingevaluation and revision. To assist schoolswith these steps, TERC implements aprogram development process includingthe five major kinds of activities shownacross the bottom of the model.

A project begins with a national surveyof occupational needs and educationalresources. Based upon survey results andthe ongoing guidance of employers, aproject then develops program planningmaterials, instructional (system) materials,and guidelines for student personnel ser-vices. Throughout these activities,employers and professional associationsare intensively involved to assure careerrelevance. School administrators, instruc-tors and students are similarly included toassure educational relevance. This involve-ment, in turn, encourages the widespreadimplementation of the proj'ect's products,shown across the middle o the model anddescribed in more detail below.

Specific tactics employed in each ofTERC's program development projectsvaried according to the technology of theemerging occupation, its labor market,and the educational institutions withwhich the TERC staff members wereworking. Since program development ofthis sort was new, no detailed model wasinitially posited for the four projects. Themodel shown here emerged as TERCresponded to the common requirementsof technical education in electromechan-ical technology (EMT), biomedical equip-ment technology (BMET), laser electro-optics technology (LEOT), and nuclearmedicine technology (NMT). Since the

67

techniques employed by TERC for manyaspects of program development are inwidespread use, these will not be elabo-rated in this article. However, someunique features of each project deservefurther comment.

The Electromechanical TechnologyProject

Electromechanical technicians dealwith a broader scope of technology thando traditional specialists trained in eitherelectronic or mechanical technology.They install, maintain, and repair complexindustrial m a chinery incorporatingmechanical, hydraulic, pneumatic, elec-tronic, optical, and thermal devices. Afteran occupational survey in 1966, the U.S.Office of Education awarded a series ofgrants to TERC for a program develop-ment effort in this new occupational field.

According to the occupational survey,the traditional lines separating electronicsand mechanics needed to be eliminated sothe electromechanical technician could beequally at home in both of the tech-nologies. The challenge was to teach bothtechnologies in only two years. Sincemany principles that appear in one tech-nology are also found in the other, theEMT Project staff chose to use a series often "Unified Concepts" as the conceptualframework for curriculum development.The resulting curriculum permits mutualsupport among the several courses andthereby facilitates learning. Such a systemfocused attention on technical concepts ascontrasted with special applications ofthese concepts.

The materials for teaching the unifiedconcepts were developed as a series ofsemester-length courses, so that theycould be easily incorporated into existingschool schedules. The organization ofthese courses during the first year pro-

vided the coordination required to presentand integrate the unified concepts. In thesecond year of the curriculum, the stu-dent's technical comprehension and skillswere strengthened through application ofthe basic concepts already learned.

The staff tested the materials withstudents at Oklahoma State Universityand then had them tried in several otherschools. The materials were also critiquedby more than 40 technical experts. Tofurther evaluate curriculum effectiveness,the project staff consciously establishedopen mainly formal lines of com-munication between students and facultyat Oklahoma State. This effort resulted inmuch valuable information.

The EMT instructional materials, in-cluding 33 laboratory texts and instruc-tors guides have now been published bythe Delmar Publishing Company. A seriesof wcrkshops and conferences were heldthroughout the country to familiarizeusers with the EMT materials. Influencedby these dissemination techniques,seventy educational institutions had estab-lished EM'!' programs by June of 1973and were using some or all of thematerials developed by TERC.

The Biomedical Equipment TechnologyProject

Complex biomedical equipment, suchas electrocardiograms and artificialkidneys, is increasingly being used toimprove medical research and the diag-nosis and treatment of patients. A seriousneed consequently developed for a newtype of technician who could maintain,calibrate, repair, and operate this sophisti-cated equipment. Human life frequentlydepends on the knowledge and skill ofthese technicians. Yet in 1966, only twocivilian schools and two of the U.S.military services were preparing bio-

medical equipment technicians. To rectifythis shortage, the U.S. Office of Educa-tion awarded a series of grants during theperiod 1966-1974 to TERC for BMETprogram development.

Based on an occupational survey, theBMET Project staff envisioned a curric-ulum that would prepare a technician whocombined knowledge of biomedical equip-ment and an understanding of anatomy,physiology, biochemistry, and patientcare. The preparation of such a technicianwould have required an integrated curric-ulum similar to that developed by theEMT Project. After program developmentbegan at Springfield (Massachusetts) Tech-nical Community College (STCC), how-ever, some staff members began to ques-tion the need for an interdisciplinarytechnician. Although hospitals provided ahuge potential job market for these tech-nicians, the current BMET jobs were to befound mainly with manufacturing firmsand repair service companies requiringelectronic .technicians with a specializedknowledge of biomedical equipment.

f he staff had further reservations whena second pilot school, Texas State Tech-nical Institute, de:ided not to transplantthe STCC program, but instead to developits own curriculum. These reservationswere strengthened at a conference ofrepresentatives from ten American andCanadian educational institutions withBMET programs underway or beingplanned in 1969. Each institutionintended to develop a program somewhatdifferent from the others in response toits own unique constraints.

The BMET Project staff then shifted itsstrategy to developing products for flexi-ble assistance to every educational institu-tion seeking to initiate or improve aBMET program. These products included:

1. A collection of BMET laboratory modules,2. A program planning and curriculum guide,

3. A compendium of both existing andplanned BMET programs,

4. An annotated bibliography of BMET edu-cational materials produced by TERC andother organizations,

5. An analysis of BMET tasks by selectedcriteria,

6. Recruitment brochures for potential BMETstudents, and

7. A "Sourcebook of Working Papers" con-cerning problems and possibilities in BMETeducation.

The project's staff also created aninformation clearinghouse to assist thenetwork of institutions and individualsinterested in BMET education. By facili-tating the exchange of information andmaterials, the clearinghouse encouragesinteraction among the individuals in thenetwork. An "interactive network"results. Because the clearinghouse periodi-cally revises the compendium describingall BMET educational programs, it alsoobtains up-to-date information from thoseconcerned with BMET education through-out the nation.

The BMET Project staff monitors theinformation flows to and from the clear-inghouse in order to identify both prob-lems and successes in BMET education.The staff then initiates workshops toexplore these problems, and prepares casestudies to document several successfulprograms.

Forty schools have already imple-mented BMET programs with TERC'sassistance, and about twenty more areconsidering initiating programs within thenext two years. More than 2,000 individ-uals throughout the country have con-tributed to or benefited from the BMETproject at last count in May, 1973.

'lite Laser Elec tro-Optics TechnologyProject

The first laser was made operational in1960 and applications grew rapidly after

15

that. Once employers were able to pur-chase laser equipment at a reasonableprice, they required well-prepared tech-nicians to use this complex and poten-tially dangerous equipment. A fewemployers sought technicians who wouldwork mainly with lasers but most wantedpersonnel who could perform a variety offabrication, calibration, and testing taskswith optical and electro-optical equip-ment as well. To meet the urgent need forprogram development in this field, theU.S. Office of Education awarded TERC aseries of grants during the period1968-1974.

After an occupational survey, theLEOT Project staff decided to developmaterials which could be used in opticaland electro-optical programs as well as forlaser technician education. The Project'sstaff also concluded that the materialsavailable were either too academic or toosimplistic for use in technician training.With the assistance of an advisory com-mittee comprised largely of employers,the staff then designed a series of instruc-tional modules which were furtherdeveloped and tested with the help ofTexas State Technical Institute facultyand students.

Each of the more than 100 instructionalmodules developed includes measurableobjectives and a laboratory exercise sup-portive of these objectives. A modularformat was adopted so each module couldbe used either autonomously or in combi-nation with others.This allows educationalinstitutions to choose from among themodules so each school can select a mixappropriate to its local manpower needsand institutional constraints. It also hasmade the materials attractive to instructorsin other technologies and in physics. Withthe series of modules nearing completion.45 schools have indicated an interest in theentire series and an additional 400 schoolsin portions of the series.

72

The Nuclear Medicine Technology Project

Since World War 11, radioactive isotopeshave been increasingly used for medicaldiagnosis and, to a lesser extent, fortherapy. As the practice of nuclear medi-cine expanded, physicians and physicistsinvolved began to need well-prepared tech-nicians to measure radionuclide doses,position patients, operate sophisticatedapparatus, and maintain records of radio-isotope use. To respond to the technicianneeds in this critical health field, the U.S.Office of Education awarded TERC aseries of grants for an occupational surveyand program development, demonstra-tion, and dissemination during1968-1974.

The occupational survey identined fiftyprograms conducted by one or morehospitals, each program training one tothree NMTs per year. Only three programswere discovered which included affilia-tions with education institutions, eventhough most of the physicians andphysicists surveyed indicated a strongpreference for such programs. Affiliationwith schools both improved the quality ofprograms and reduced their costs.

The 53 then-existing programs fortraining NMTs varied greatly in length andcontent. Although part of this variationwas due to the special constraints uponeach program, substantial variationresulted from the fact that six differentprofessional societies were seeking toregulate the NMT occupation. In addition,the Council on Medical Education of theAmerican Medical Association wished tocoordinate the process of accreditingNMT educational programs. The coordina-tion of efforts among the societies had tobe agreed upon before effective programdevelopment could take place.

After the NMT Project staff, based inCambridge, Massachusetts. completed the

occupational survey, it used the contactsacquired during the survey to begin actingas a facilitator of cooperation among thesocieties. The staff asked the AMA Coun-cil on Medical Education to obtain co-operatioa among the societies in sendingrepresentatives to a TERC-financed work-shop to develop an instructor's guide. Fiveof the six societies agreed to assist. Thesixth society initially refused, but laterjoined the development effort to makecertain that its viewpoint was not elimi-nated from the field.

Meeting in a workshop, the representa-tives agreed on the content for an instruc-tor's guide. They then obtained formalapproval of the guide from each of theirsocieties. The AMA Joint Review Com-mittee completed the process by agreeingthat this document be recommended foruse by educational programs seekinginformation supplementary to that avail-able from the AMA for program approval.

The NMT Project staff acted as facili-tators in other ways as well. During the1969 occupational survey, the staff dis-covered that the University of ColoradoMedical School was developing anassociate-degree program with the DenverCommunity College and fourteen hospi-tals. Although TERC had had no role inthe development of this program, the staffdecided to publicize it in a case study. Asthe only program of its size in existence,it automatically became a model. Whenother educational institutions developedassociate-degree programs, TERC wrotecase studies about some of them as well.

The NMT Project staff also organized aclearinghouse and developed productssimilar to those created by the BMETProject. This clearinghouse has providedinformation and services to educationalinstitutions and hospitals planning toestablish affiliations for NMT programs aswell as to hospitals seeking to improve

their existing programs. By May of 1973,the clearinghouse had grown to approxi-mately 1000 users, of whom 30% wereaffill. ed with community colleges, 27%with universities, 32% with medicalschools, and 65% with hospitals.

General Insights About Program Develop-men t

During the four projects in new andemerging occupations, TERC's staffobserved certain patterns in programdevelopment. Research into other kindsof educational innovations indicated thatthese patterns were widespread. Thus,some of the following observations arerelevant to any development projectwhi..:17 intends to have an impact oneducational institutions throughout thenation.

1. Responding to Field Constraints. Todevelop effective programs in many educa-tional institutions, each of TERC's fourprojects had to employ different tactics.The differences reflected variations in thetechnology, labor market demands, profes-sional associations, and educatiooal institu-tions concerned with each occupation. TheEMT Project had to unify several tech-nologies; the BMT Project had to assistmany institutions to adapt electronics cur-ricula for incorporating biomedical equip-ment; the LEOT Project had to offer awide range of modules in response tovariations in local occupational specifi-cations; and the NMT Project had tofacilitate cooperation among several strongprofessional societies.Accepting Local Autonomy. The in-dependence of individual educational insti-tutions and the professional autonomy ofthe instructors within them results in

evident differences among the educationalprograms for the same occupation. In mostcases, a school will not introduce a com-

I, }al11 I

73

prehensive two-year program which is "notinvented here." This unwillingness may bedue to provincialism or to genuine andunique local needs. No matter how much a

technical education curriculum is praisedby professional experts, it frequently isrejected by local administrators and in-structors. Therefore, if a curriculum devel-opment, project expects to impact uponmany educational institutions, it mustaccept the conditions set by each school.These often result in only partial implementation of an "ideal" educational pro-gram.

3. Assisting Local Innovators. To have themost impact on the development andimprovement of many educational pro-grams, a project must seek out and workwith local innovators. As documented byL. Allen Parker (1971), innovations ineducational institutions, business firms.and other kinds of organizations are mostlikely to succeed when at least one individ-ual is highly dedicated to the change effortand also has general management capabili-ties. The best strategy for capitalizing onthe energy and talents of such individualsis to expect them anywhere in the nationand to focus on them whenever andwherever they are identified by surveysand clearinghouse operations. These opera-tions alone are all the support many localinnovators need to develop or improvetheir programs. An active clearinghousecan provide local innovators the moralsupport of knowing that they are part of anational movement with a place to turn to.''or assistance.

4. Developing Modular Materials. Since localinnovators will generally not adopt anentire two-year curriculutn, or even .ill thematerials for a course developed elsewhere,a project serves the field best by develop-ing materials in modules which can be usedflexibly by many educational institutions.The development of modular materials also

facilitiates the updating of those parts of acurriculum which become obsolescent eachyear as a result of technological change.Modular materials permit each school tobuild its own curriculum using qualitybuilding blocks. This approach has theadded advantage that some instructors inprograms outside the field of a particularcurriculum development project will useindividual modules from the project, thusexpanding the usefulness of the project'soutput.

5. Involving Both Teachers and Developers.Two of TERC's projects initially employedtechnical educators who both wrote thematerials and taught the courses in whichtheir materials were used. It was assumedthat developers who taught using their ownmaterials would develop more effectivematerials. At the end of the first year ineach of these projects, however, there wasconcern that the successes being achievedmight be due to the personal characteris-tics of the developer-teachers rather thanthe content of the materials. Each projectthen decided to confine its staff to devel-oping and revising instructional materialsand had other technical educators test thematerials. Development of materials wasoften subcontracted to individuals outsideof TERC. or to the staff of other TERCprojects with specialized expertise.

6. Recognizing the Limits of Evaluation. Theevaluation of individual modules was suc-cessfully executed using performanceobjectives, criterion reference tests, andvalidation with a sample from the targetpopulation. The formal evaluation of en-tire course or entire programs, however,proved to be impossible. Three of theprojects did attempt such evaluations bymeans of confidential case studies andstudent questionnaries. But these mech-anisms were frequently so threatening totechnical educators and students thatfurther cooperation with educational insti-

tutions would have been unlikely if TERChad persisted in their use.

In contrast, the projects discovered thatinformal evaluations which occurred dur-ing confidential case studies, workshops.and consultations did result in significantrevisions of courses and programs. (HenryM. Brickell (1964) obtained similar find-ings during his survey of the innovativeefforts by developers and educators at theelement y and secondary levels in NewYork .:.-te.) The involvement of em-ployers and students in the workshops andconfidential case studies proved a goodmethod for p.odding educators to keeptheir programs up to date, especially if jobplacement opportunities were threatened.Placement in a decent job with multiplecareer optio:4 is the pragmatic criterionfor effectiveness in occupational edu-

cation.7. Encouraging the Interaction of All Con.

cerned with a Field. Ir formal interactionswere found to be vital only to effectiveevaluation but also to effective %iisseraina-tion. Brickell found the same to be true forNew York educators and the NationalCenter for Educational Research and

Development (1969) corroborated thisfinding during a national survey of super-intendents. Most educators of all sortsappear to distrust published researchreports and speeches at conventions. Tolearn about innovations, they instead relyupon informal conversations. In the case ofTERC's projects. informal interactionsduring the surveys. workshops. and clear-inghouse operations were also important inidentifying local innovators and obtainingassistance from employers.

The vital role of informal interactions inthe development and diffusion of innova-tions is elaborated by L. Allen Parker(1971). This doctoral thesis also exploresthe foundations and implementation ofTERC's strategy for facilitating such

interaction as a means to change in

America's decentralized educationalsystem.

Suggested Products of Program Develop-ment

Twelve products are suggested for adevelopment, demonstration, and dissemi-nation project which intends to impactupon educational institutions throughoutthe nation. The priority to be placed oneach product is determined by a field'stechnology, labor market demands, pro-fessional associations, and the educationalinstitutions concerned. Available time andfinancial resources might also limit aproject from developing all of the follow-ing products.

1. Survey of Needs and Resources. A nation-al survey is recommended to determinewhat needs to be done in a field and todiscover the materials and people avail-able in the nation as resources for pro-gram development. In the case of occupa-tional education, the needs include theestimated number of graduates requiredby the nation's employers each year,occupational specifications, any programsand materials which must be developedfor instructional purposes, and qualifica-tions of appropriate faculty and staff.The resources are the network of pro-grams, materials, faculty, staff, profes-sional associations and employers in-

volved in the given field. To encouragelater contributions for employers andexperts in the field, the survey reportconcludes with a section containingsigned critiques of the report from lead-ing employers and experts.

2. Information Clearinghouse. Having identi-fied the needs and resources of thenetwork, the project can begin matchingsome of the resources with some of theneeds through a clearinghouse. As new

75

needs and resources appear, these arc also

included in the clearinghouse, which be-comes the basic information center forboth the project and the nation. Aneffective clearinghouse operation involvesmore than passive collection and dissemi-nation of information. Requests and in-formation inputs must be monitored toidentify emerging patterns of needs andresources. When a pattern emerges, theproject's staff and appropriate membersof the network in the field must bealerted so that decisions can be maderegarding necessary changes in the

project.3. Compendium of Educational Programs.

The resources survey and the clearing-house operations can identify educationalprograms which are in operation or arebeing planned. Descriptions of these arethen compiled into a compendium whichanyone interested can use to discoverwho is doing something about the givenfield of education. Because every programin the nation is included, no educatorfeels unrecognized. After learning aboutother programs through the compendiumand discussions at workshops, some edu-cators will begin to improve their pro-grams. For the compendium to be effec-tive as an informal prod to improvement,it must be updated periodically.

4. Case Studies. From the resources surveyand data collection for the compendium,a project's staff can identify unusual

educational programs if any exist. Casestudies are then undertaken to ascertainthe steps used for planning these pro-grams. the kinds of obstacles encount-ered. the methods of overcoming obsta-cles. and the reasons for unresolved

issues. If a study unearths important factswhich are confidential, the case can bepresented with other case studies as ananonymous example. A thorough studyof an existing program also assists the

project's staff in developing formal andinformal administrative guidelines fornew program implementation.

5. Program Planning and Curriculum Guides.Based on information gained during thesurvey, the clearinghouse operations, andpreparation of case studies, a project candevelop a program planning and curric-ulum guide. This document, or collectionof documents, alerts administrators tofactors which must be considered whendeciding whether to implement a pro-gram. It also provides information onsuch considerations as student andfaculty selection, formation of an ad-visory committee, facilities necessary forconducting a program, and procedures forobtaining the ongoing involvement ofemployers. An extensive section of theguide includes one or more suggestedcourse sequences, detailed course out-lines, laboratory activities, and a descrip-tion of facilities, equipment, and costs.As with the survey report, this guide canconclude with a section of signed criti-ques from employers and experts in thefield.

6. Instructional Modules. The needs surveyusually exposes a lack of quality instruc-tional materials for some or all aspects ofa field. A project then undertakes orsubcontracts the development of thesematerials. Employers need to be inten-sively involved in the developmentprocess and students in the testing andvalidation of its products. Because feweducational programs will adopt all of theproducts, modular materials which can beadopted as autonomous units best servepotential users.

7. Bibliography of Instructional Materials.For those planning or improving educa-tional programs, the project also developsa bibliography of instructiond materialsdeveloped by any and all organizations.The bibliography includes annoted

descriptions not evaluations of thematerials. It can also describe laboratoryequipment of various manufa .urers.

8. Workshops. National and regional work-shops are vital for training instructors andadministrators who are implementing orimproving a program. Guides and clear-inghouse operations alone are frequentlynot sufficient. At these workshops, nosingle activity is more important to edu-cators developing new programs than thechance for informal conversations. Toenhance the informal interactions, theproject's staff purposely invites educatorsfrom operating programs and those plan-ning programs, as well as concerned em-ployers. When a project encounters aserious problem in program development,it can also organize a workshop forparticipants in the field, including em-ployers, to seek solutions.

9. Recruitment and Career Materials.Among other problems a workshop canaddress is the definition of career optionsfor an occupation. When an occupation isemerging, it is likely to be fluid in itscharacteristics and generally unknown toeducators, students, parents, and evenemployers. If the occupation can beplaced in a cluster with similar occupa-tions, guidelines and objectives can beprovided for designing educational pro-grams which offer many career options.Recruitment materials and articles in

journals and trade magazines can thenpublicize the occupation's existence andthe kind of education it requires.

10. Counseling and Student AssessmentGuidelines. In conjunction with the devel-opment of career options, a project canformulate guidelines for counselors andmechanisms for student assessment ofeducational programs. Unless a curric-ulum development project activity en-courages the inv-lvement of counselors inprogram development, TERC has found

-On

that such involvement is likely to occuronly as an afterthought if at all. Theconspicuous inclusion of counselingguidelines in planning materials helps tofocus attention on this area. Among otherthings, the guidelines can include samplequestionnaires and other communicationsmechanisms for obtaining student assess-ments of the program. Similarly, samplefollow-up surveys of graduates can en-courage the faculty to seek feedbackfrom former students who are discoveringthe applicability of their formal educa-tion to on-the-job practices.

I I. Sourcebooks. As those concerned about afield grope for solutions to its problems,the problems and proposed solutions canbe documented in a "Scurcebook ofWorking Papers on Problems and Possi-bilities." Disseminated in a loose-leaf for-mat, sections of a sourcebook can beinserted, updated, or deleted as the fielddevelops. Another kind of sourcebookcombines elements of the compendium,the bibliography, and the program plan-ning guide into one reference.

12. Follow-up Questionnaries and Materials.As a field of education continues todevelop, it fiequently changes so thatsurvey data and some materials becomeobsolete. Although a project's staff moni-tors clearinghouse requests and inputs toidentify some of these changes. the staffcan also make periodic investigations todiscover other changes. Follow-up surveyb

of educators, employers. and programgraduates can be used to complementclearinghouse operations.

Need to Maintain Program ReIevance

New trends identified by follow-upsurveys often require changes in programsto maintain their relevance to the field.Whereas other components of a programdevelopment project for new occupations

i I

77

can be created and implemented duringfive to seven years, the maintenance ofrelevant programs requires developmentand follow-up mechanisms which mustcontinue after termination of researchfunding for the project. As TERC's fourresearch and demonstration projects drawto a close, educators, employers, andprofessionals are expressing concern aboutthe continuation of these services neededto maintain relevance and growth.

They stress the fact that technicaleducation programs must be updatedperiodically if they are to remain relevantto student's and employers' needs. In thecase of emerging technical occupations,such changes may be necessary every yearor two for many years until an occupationbecomes well-defined. New occupationsare also likely to have manpower needswhich increase for decades before becom-ing stabilized; consequently, additionaleducational programs must be establishedeach year for some length of time.

If the nation can afford nothing else,the concerned participants in the inter-active network for the projects havestressed that ways must be found tocontinue active clearinghouse operations.This would include collection of new dataand materials and dissemination of infor-mation and documents. More importantto active operation, however, would bethe organization of workshops on seriousproblems in the field and the initiation ofproposals or projects for the developmentof new instructional modules to replacethose which have become obsolescent.Workshops might also be needed to traininstructors in the use of new materials.Depending on the field involved, suchclearinghouse operations might be con-tinued either by the organization whichinecuted the original development projector by sonic other research and develop-ment organization.

78

TERC has been exploring possible waysto continue clearinghouse operations.Some possible solutions have been pro-posed and two are being tentatively imple-mented, but this is the remaining majorc hallenge of program developmentprojects for new technical occupations.

When this challenge is met, a provenmodel will exist for develping and improv-ing quality educational programs foremerging technical occupations. Thesequality programs will prepare youths andadults for careers as technicians andcomparable specialists who work withprofessionals, business managers, govern-ment employers, and labor executives toimprove the nation's goods and services.

These educational programs will satisfymany students because they provide skillin performing practical tasks and insightsinto why things happen. Moreover,quality programs will offer many dis-advantaged youths a realistic path toremunerative and respectable careers.

The development and improvement ofthese quality programs thus is critical in asociety experiencing rapid technologicalchange. We have the functional modelwithin our reach. The availability offinancial resources for further programdevelopment is and will be the controllingfactor in meeting urgent present andfuture needs of new and emerging tech-nical occupations.

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS

P. John Cad le developed the "TERC Model fur Designing, Developing and Establishing an EducationalProgram." Robert B. Angus, Jr., Roger L. Bull, and Maurice W. Roney also made substantivecontributions to the article.

i 12

79

REFERENCES

Brickell, Henry M. State organization for educational change: a case study and a proposal, Innovationin Education, edited by Matthew B. Miles, New York: Teachers College Press, Columbia University,1964.

Carlson, Richard 0. Adoption of Educational Innovations. Eugene, Oregon: The Center for theAdvanced Study of Educational Administration, University of Oregon, 1965.

Koschler, Theodore A. and L. Allen Parker. How broad is technical education?, Technical EducationReporter, May June, 1974.

National Center for Educational Research and Development. Educational Research and Developmentin the United States. Washington, D.C.: U.S. Office of Education, December, 1969.

Parker, Louis Allen. Interactive Networks for Innovational Champions: A Mechanism for DecentralizedEducational Change. Cambridge, Massachusetts: Doctoral Thesis, Harvard Graduate School ofEducation, 1971.

Rogers, Everett M. What are innovators like?, Change Processes in the Public Schools. Edited byRichard 0. Carlson, et.al. Eugene, Oregon: Center for the Advanced Study of EducationalAdministration, University of Oregon, 1964.

Roney, Maurice W. Development and Evaluation of Educational Programs in ElectromechanicalTechnology. Final Report, U.S. Office of Education Project No. 8-0219. Cambridge, Massachusetts:Technical Education Research Centers, November 30, 1973.

11 3

by REPORTER Staff

The Development of an Emerging Field

THE DEVELOPMENT OF AN EMERGING FIELDHospitals need technicians to maintain increasingly com-pkx health care systems. Filling a need first addressed bythe military, the education of Biomedical EquipmentTechnicians,is now a growing civilian field.

TECHNICAL EDUCATION REPORTERi974

Although the field of biomedicalequipment maintenance has only re-cently gained independent status as anoccupation, its history dates back toWorld War H. At that time, the U.S.Army saw a crucial need for techni-cians to repair medical equipment inits many hospital stations around theglobe. Lacking the maintenance exper-tise within its own ranks, the Army re-cruited some employees of biomedicalequipment manufacturers to train bio-medical equipment maintenance per-sonnel. A small equipment repair shopin St: Louis, Missouri, provided aworking base for the Army's initialtraining program. After the shop wasgreatly expanded, it became the princi-pal repair station in a worldwide sys-tem of shops.

AIR FORCE FROM ARMYThe Army's Medical Equipment

Maintenance training program began in1942 with a sixteen-week course. In1946, it was expanded to a 26-weekcourse including both Army and Navypersonnel. With the subsequent emerg-ence of the Air Force as a separateservice, the program took on a triser-vice configuration. However, in 1957,the Air Force established its own train-

ing program at Gunter Air Force Basein Alabama.

The Air Force training was initiallymodeled closely after the Army pro-gram. But, the Air Force soon foundthat it did not have the number of in-structors or on-the-job training sitesnecessary for an Army type program.When the Air Force program then re-located at Sheppard Air Force Base inTexas. a major restructuring was initi-ated. Programmed instruction wasdeveloped to compensate for the smallnumber of Air Force instructors. Fur-thermore, a laboratory was con-structed which included all the kindsof biomedical equipment used by theAir Force, so that on-the-job trainingsituations could be thoroughly simulated.

The Sheppard program graduallyexpanded to its present size of 120students and 23 instructors. Mean-while, the Army program relocated toFitzsimmons Hospital in Denver, Colo-rado, where its operations were ex-tended to include 100 instructors andsome 600 students.

Although the Army and Air Forceprograms differ in the respect that theformer emphasizes classroom and on-the-job training and the kilter relies onprogrammed instruction and job simu-lation, the two programs share thesame dedication to the "hands on"approach. Both schools stress special-ized knowledge of equipment in thefield rather than a theoretical ap-proach. In addition, both schoolsaddress the specific needs of their ser-vices, and instructors have a clear ideaof the job responsibilities their stu-dents will need to meet. Because themilitary programs operate within a

standardized system, they are not sub-ject to as many variables as confrontcivilian BMET programs.

28

...:

NEED FOR CIVILIAN BMETsWhile the military was developing

its Biomedical Equipment Mainte-nance programs to train BMETs, civil-ian hospitals were still dependent onmanufacturers for repair services.

However, as hospitals began to acquiremore complex biomedical equipmentsystems, this dependence presentedsubstantial difficulties. Most of thecompanies producing biomedicalequipment were small concerns whichcould afford to employ only a fewmaintenance persons. These servicepersonnel were trained on the job tofunction something like BMETs, butwere too few in number to always effi-ciently meet the service needs of thehospitals using their companies' equip-

ment. Hospitals often would have towait a month or more before repairs,which frequently proved to be trivial,could be made on their systems. Giventhe lifesaving function of the systems,such long delays had profound andsometimes dire implications.

Moreover, this equipment had beendeveloped and placed in use withoutdue consideration for supportive main-tenance programs and personnel. Manyhospitals purchased biomedical equip-ment without being able to assure itssafe operation. Sometimes the equip-ment was inadequately designed fromthe start. in other cases, equipmentwhich originally was safe gradually be-came uncalibrated to the point whereit was unsafe to use with patients.

TECIINICAL EDUCATION REPORTERJulyAugust 1974

RELUCTANT HOSPITALADMINISTRATORS

Although hospital administratorsdesired to provide the best possiblepatient care, they frequently did notsee the necessity of setting up in-houseequipment maintenance programs.These programs tended to be firsteliminated during hospital budget cuts,and last to be considered during timesof budget expansion. Even when theneed for such programs was acknowl-edged, hospital administrators wereslow to establish the programs becauseof the shortage of well-preparedBMETs and uncertainty about how theBMET could be placed in the hospi-tal's organizational structure.

Skeptical administrators needed tobe convinced that they would actuallysave money by having their ownBMETs, or by sharing repair serviceswith other institutions. The need forBMETs had to be recognized and theirrole better defined before BMET train-ing programs could gain a footing inthe civilian sector,

OPENING UP THE FIELDWhen the Association for the Ad-

vancement of Medical Instrumentation(AAMI) was launched in 1965, theBMET field entered a new historicalphase. AAMI represented the first for-mal attempt to bring physicians,equipment manufacturers, and bio-medical engineers together to worktoward the solution of their commonproblems. AAMI assumed responsibil-ity for developing badly needed stand-ards for the manufacture of medicalequipment, and greatly facilitatedcommunication between doctors andthe equipment manufacturers.

At the time of AAMI's founding,only two civilian schools in NorthAmerica offered programs for training

TECHNICAL EDUCATION REPORTERJulyAugust 1974

BMETs. Consequently, the U.S. Officeof Education awarded a series ofgrants to Technical Education Re-search Centers (TERC) for BMET pro-gram development. Advised by someof AAMI's members, TERC initiallydocumented the need for BMETs andthen set out to develop civilian educa-tional programs. After an initial at-tempt to formulate an "ideal" curricu-lum for a systems-oriented technician,TERC began to assist schools seekingto initiate BMET programs. In mostcases such initiation involved adding abiomedical equipment component toan established electronics program.

AAMI and TERC then jointly spon-sored several conferences to assistschools and to further define theBMET's role in hospitals. Followingthese conferences. an important hospi-

tal administrators' workshop was heldto explore intensely the considerablecost benefits hospitals could expectfrom hiring their own BMETs. It wasfound that BMETs could reduce theequipment maintenance costs in somehospitals by a factor of five.

As a result of the and other ef-forts made by -concemed individualsand organizations, civilian BMET edu-cation has expanded greatly during thelast decade. Today, there are at least40 two-year educational programs forBMETs in community colleges, techni-cal institutes, and state colleges or uni-versities throughout North America.[One of the first of these programs,that of the British Columbia Instituteof Technology, is described in the fol-lowing article.]

I* t

ORM

THREE KINDS OF BMETPROGRAMS

After three decades of develop-ment. the field of biomedical equip-ment technology now contains threebroad categories of educational pro-grams. a) military, b) technical insti-tute: and c) community college orstate university. As already described,the military programs emphasize a spe-cialized knowledge of specific piecesof biomedical equipment and de-emphasize theory. in contrast to themilitary programs, both technical insti-tute and community college programsoffer less -hands on" experience. Thisis the case not so much by design as byfinancial limitation. Biomedical equip-ment is very expensive, and civilian

30

....0""1.4,1

programs simply do not have the re-sources necessary to assemble the fullrange of equipment that can be foundin the military programs.

While still stressing "hands on" ex-perience, technical institutes usuallyprovide more theoretical orientation inelectronics than either military orcommunity college BMET programs.On the other hand, community col-leges and state universities ordinarilyprovide their BMET students withsome general education, as well as withtheory courses designed to providetransfer credit for baccalaureate de-grees. In general. the programs de-signed for transfer offer less "handson" experience with biomedical equip-ment than do technical institute or

A

military programs.Each approach has its strengths and

weaknesses from the differing perspec-tives of students, teachers, manufac-turers, biomedical equipment engi-neers, hospital administrators, andphysicians. No single perspective is

likely to dominate the field since eachtype of program is capable of satisfy-ing the specific needs of its clientele.

AAMI DEVELOPMENTSGiven the great diversity of BMET

programs, the field needed a methodfor assuring the competence of pro-gram graduates. After much discus-sion, AAMI's Board of Examiners forBiomedical Equipment Techniciansdeveloped a 150-question exam, whichwas administered for the first time inthe spring of 1972. Since that timeover 200 individuals (80% of thosetested) have passed the exam to be-come certified BMETs. A similar examhas since been developed by the Vet-erans Administration.

These exams have been a catalystfor opening up communication be-tween practicing BMETs. Recently, aBMET association was formed withinAAMI by a group of certified BMETs,and it is expected that one or morerepresentatives from this associationwill be elected to the AAMI Board ofExaminers some time in the future.Another concern of AAMI's is theneed for a BMET-program accredita-tion mechanism. Although opinionwithin AAMI is practically unanimousconcerning the need for such a mech-anism, consideration of this is still inthe discussion stage.

TECHNICAL EDUCATION REPORTERJulyAugust 1974

AT`

TECHNICAL EDIJCA1 ION RLPOR I ERJuly August 1974

A

HOSPITALS NEED ALTERNATIVESBecause many hospitals are too

small to afford their own BMETs, theyneed alternative maintenance options.In some cases, a small private companyof BMETs has been formed to serviceseveral hospitals. Another option is"shared services." By linking togetherwith other institutions, the small hos-pital is able to purchase a range of ex-pertise it would not otherwise be ableto afford.

One shared service firm, the Caro-linas Hospital and Health Services,Inc., provides a comprehensive bio-medical equipment service package to27 hospitals in North and South Caro-lina. In addition to installation, cali-bration, maintenance and repair serv-ices, this nonprofit corporation offersits clientele such extras as environ-mental testing and In-Service Trainingto hospital staff. Approximately eightto ten shared service operations arenow in existence around the nation,with another fifteen currently beingdeveloped, As shared services becomesmore popular, it will open up a signifi-cant source of employment forBMETs. This approach may also chal-lenge larger hospitals to develop theirown high-quality preventive mainte-nance systems, or be held liable fornot purchasing available expertise.

Hospital associations can take aleadership role in fostering coopera-tion among their member institutionsand nearby programs preparingBMETs. For instance, the Texas Hospi-tal Association and Texas State Tech-nical Institute (TSTI) have jointlyundertaken comprehensive electrical

31

INF

0

M:

1/1115r_

safety surveys in many Texas hospi-tals. Such surveys have resulted incooperative BMET training venturesinvolving TSTI and several hospitals.In turn, these joint ventures havegreatly extended employment oppor-tunities for BMET graduates fromTSTI .

Several two-day- workshops in Hos-pital Electrical Safety have also beenconducted by the TSTI instructionalstaff. These workshops, which havebeen enthusiastically received by hos-pital adniinistrators, maintenance per-sonnel, and plant engineers, havehelped to increase the awareness inTexas hospitals of the need for compe-tent BMETs. In addition, the work-shops have assisted administrators todefine a viable role for BMETs withintheir individual hospitals.

32

THE BMET FUTUREAccording to a Barron's article on

November 5, 1973, medical equipmentand supplies sales for 1973 were ex-pected to reach 55 billion. Further-more, equipment sales were expectedto continue to grow at a rate of 7% to11% annually. The risk of huge dam-age suits has impressed hospitals withthe need for the best possible diagnos-tic equipment. Moreover, the safetyregulations imposed by the U.S.Department of Health, Education andWelfare have made it necessary forhospitals to update and maintain theefficient operation of electronic de-vices. These pressures will ensure agreater availability of jobs for BMETs.

The nature of future BMETs whowill be educated to satisfy this expand-ing demand has yet to emerge. As in-

'

PROGRAMS

dust ry continues to develop morecomplex biomedical equipment, agreater degree of specialization will becalled for within the BMET field.Many programs preparing BMETs willno doubt respond by educating one ormore specialized kinds of technicians.On the other hand, many programswill probably continue to stress a moregeneralized BMET because the fullycompetent hospital BMET must pos-sess not only the expertise necessaryto efficiently maintain a diversity ofequipment, but also the skills andknowledge that enable him or her tointeract meaningfully with a variety ofhospital personnel.

Thus, both specialist and generalistBMET programs will most likely befound in the future. In any case, it iscertain that improved delivery ofhealth care will require increased num-bers of well-prepared technicians inbiomedical equipment technology.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION:The Biomedical Equipment Technician

in the Hospital. Cambridge, Massa-chusetts: Technical Education Re-search Centers, July, 1972.

Development of Career Opportunitiesfor Biomedical Equipment Techni-cians. Cambridge, Massachusetts:Technical Education ResearchCenters, June, 1970.

Loehwing, David A. "Best of Health:Biomedical Technology-All Sys-tems Are Go," Barron's, November5, 1973.

'Ya Gotta Have Heart' -Bio-medicine Abounds in Risks as Wellas Rewards," Barron's, November12, 1973.

Tompkins, Jack E. Upgrading Biomed-ical Equipment Maintenance Serv-ices and Improving Electrical SafetyIn Hospitals, (unpublished paper)November 16, 1973.

by REPORTER Staff

TECHNICAL EDUCATION REPORTERJuly August 1974

, .777, -

trilL11" .--41111

TECHNICAL EDUCATION REPORTERJulyAugust 1974

Better HealthThrough Hospital Equipment

A

Finn Bauck his a degree in electronics engineering from StockholmTechnical Institute in Sweden. Before moving to Canada in 1957, hewas employed in the Norwegian and Swedish electronics industries.He has also been a Research Associate in neurophysiotogy at theHealth Sciences Center Hospital of the University of British Colum-bia. Mr. Bauck joined the faculty at British Columbia Institute of

N Technology in 1967.

Art Ridgway is Head of the Department of Health Engineering Servicesand Acting Head of the Department of Basic Health Sciences at theBritish Columbia Institute of Technology. From 1958 when he came toCanada from Britain to 1964 when he joined BCIT, he was employed inthe Department of Radiology at the Vancouver General Hospital Mr.Ridgway is co-author of a text on the physics of medical radiology.

9,0

33

BETTER HEALTH THROUGH HOSPITALEQUIPMENTThe electronic devices used in the diagnosisand treatment of disease must be main-tained.

The introduction of complex electronic equipment inhospitals has made possible some major improvements inhealth care. Sophisticated devices such as cardiac monitors,automatic blood analyzers, and heart-lung machines cansubstantially increase the effectiveness of doctors and theefficiency of hospitals. On the other hand, these deviceshave also created problems; improperly maintained instru-mentation can produce an electric shock or a misdiagnosisfatal to a patient. Furthermore, equipment breakdowns cancause havoc in hospital practices.

The use of biomedical equipment has consequentlycreated an expanding field for biomedical equipment tech-nicians or technologists. BMETs must know how to install,operate, and troubleshoot a wide range of diagnostic andtherapeutic equipment: Some serve as support personnel tophysicians involved in patient care and to hospital re-searchers developing new equipment. Others work withmanufacturers to develop, produce and service new devices.The remaining BMETs own or work for firms which con-tract to maintain equipment in smaller hospitals which can-not afford full-time, electronic technologists.

In the early 1960's only the armed forces in the U.S. andCanada were preparing BMETs. As civilian use of biomedi-cal instrumentation expanded, a demand for civilian BMETeducational programs emerged. One of the first schools inNorth America to respond was the British Columbia Insti-tute of Technology (BCIT) in Burnaby. British Columbia.

BCIT INITIATES A PROGRAMSince its founding in 1964. BCIT has been educating

technicians to fill job vacancies mainly within British Col-umbia. In response to the Province's need for a well-trainedhnith work force, BC1T's health division has grown fromtwo programs in 1964 to the eight that now service the 120or so hospitals of the Province. British Columbia also hassix equipment manufacturersall potential employers ofBMETs.

In 1964, Mr. S.T. Richards. full-time director of the In-stitute's health division, contacted Province administratorsand physicians to determine the health technician needs.Technologists trained in biomedical electronic technologywere among those proposed. Planning for the program

34

IV*

began officially in 1966, with the establishment of an advi-sory committee.

The BMET program was established in 1967 with a cur-riculum drawn mainly from the Institute's existing courses.A large portion of the student's time was spent in coursesdesigned primarily for electronics technicians rather thanfor the BMET's special concerns. A more effective programcould not be implemented until the BMET job content wasmore clearly defined and faculty were prepared to teach thenew technology.

Gradually new courses, such as biophysics, were addedand existing ones adapted to better suit the BMET's needs.The mathematics course began to stress the application ofmathematical principles to biomedical electronics. Further-more, laboratory experiences related to biomedical instru-mentation were implemented for the BMET students takingthe electronics course.

THE PRESENT CURRICULUMln keeping with the bask philosophy of most technical

institutes in North America, the student spends about halfof his or her time In the laboratory, and half in lectures.Course materials and sequence are similar to those of manyBMET programs in the United States. During the first 75'4of the program there is a strong emphasis on basic elec-tronics and related science courses in chemistry. anatomy.and physiology. as shown in Table 1, while the last 25',4emphasizes biomedical electronics technology. About 35qof the courses attended are given by BMET program staff:the other 65 are given by other departments. but provideBMET applications.

The BCIT curriculum differs from most BMET programsin two respects. One is the medical materials course, whichconcentrates on the comparative properties of all classes ofengineering materials with biomedical applications. Thiscourse is of special value to the student planning to work inresearch. The other is the biophysics comae. which coversmechanics, electricity, magnetics. waves. and heat withemphasis on the applications of physics to biological sys-tems. Although some BMET programs have specializedcourses emphasizing those physiological systems measurableby electronic equipment. most BMET programs includeonly a standard physiology course.

TECHNICAL EDUCATION REPORTERJulyAugust 1974

TABLE 1. Biomedical Electronics Technology

I L

AWL

, ,

'....1.:41111111111111k

PROGRAMS

t-

7,P

0.5,7

1

Year 1 Quarter A

Classroom

Year 2 Quarter 0(No classes)

ClassroomSubject Hours per Week Subject Quarter E Hours per Week

Gene-al Chemistry for Health Technologists 6 Mathematics (Biomedical ElPctronics) 5Technical Writing 3 Biophysics 3'Mathematics (Biomedical Electronics) 8 Medical Materials 4Electronics Principles and Practice 9 Electronics Principles and Practice 6Human Anatomy and Physiology for Methods of Electrical Measurement 4

Biomedical Electronics Students 4 Medical Instrumentation 3Library and Research 5 Biomedical Electronics 5

Physiology for Biomedical Electronics Students 3'35 Library and Research 5

Quarter B 35

General Chemistry for Health Technologists 6 Quarter FTechnical WritingMathematics (8iorned;a1 Electronics)

34

BiophysicsWorkshop Practice

3'4

Numerical Methods and Computing 4 Electronics Principles and Practice 4Electronics Principles and Practice 9 Digital Principles and Technique I 6Human Anatomy and Physiology for Medical Instrumentation ........ . 3

Biomedical Electronics Students 4.

Biomedical Electronics 5Library and Research 5 Practical Experience in Biomedical Electronics 5

35 Physiology for Biomedical Electronics StudentsLibrary and Research

3'5

35

Quarter C Quarter GGeneral Chemistry for Health Technologists 6 Biophysics 3'Technical Writing 3 Digital Principles and Techniques II 6Mathematics (Biomedical Electronics) 9 Medical Instrumentation 3Electronics Principles and Practice 9 Biomedical Electronics 11

Introductory Mk:obit:1101W 2 Practical Experience in Biomedical Electronics 7Tutorial 1 Physiology for Biomedical Electronics Students 3*Library and Research 5 Library and Research 5

35 35

*Alternate weeks.

TECHNICAL EDUCATION REPORTER- lsilyAusust 1974 12 35

.vc72z,-"sx,s.,

EQUIPMENT NEEDEDBefore the program began, the department head and

senior instructor drew up a list of equipment needed by theprogram. Funds for the equipment were secured throughthe British Columbia Department of Education, of whichBCIT is a part. A 1,000 square foot laboratory at BCIThouses the equipment which includes devices used in vari-ous parts of hospitals such as operating rooms. coronarycare units. pulmonary function labotatolicb, and clinicallaboratories.

Although BCIT funding for its BMET program has beenmore than adequate in comparison to the typical programin North America. it has not been sufficient to purchase allthe equipment des'rable for an ideal program. Securing suf-ficient equipment can be a serious problem, especially fornew programs. There must be one or more devices employ-ing each principle of operation the BMET is likely toencounter.

PRACTICAL EXPERIENCEAl! .9CIT technology programs are designed to provide

training in a realistic work setting. The BMET student isgiven practical work experiences one day per week duringtwenty weeks of the fifth and sixth quarters. To compen-sate for a lack of costly laboratory equipment. many BMETprograms in North America require ninre on-the-job experi-ence of their students. However. BCIT has structured itsBMET laboratory so that many work experiences can besimulated effectively.

The faculty of the BMET program at BCIT maintainsclose contact with the work supervisors, one of whom isalso a membi of tire program's advisory committee. Thesesupervisors and the BMET senior instructor insure that thepractical experience reinforces the theoretical studies pur-sued by the student.

Each BMET student is placed consecutively with twodiffering agencies among five local hospitals. six research institutes, and three equipment manufacturers. This place-ment program is unusual. as most BMET programs offeronly one practical experienceusually in a hospital. BCITstudents thus have the opportunity to compare two kindsof potential cmployers.

36

A

IOW

-=i;

- v TECHNICAL EDUCATION REPORTERJuly--August 1974

-

GRADUATE PLACEMENTThe practical experience also aids in graduate placement

because potential employers have the opportunity to meetthe students. If placement does not result directly from thework experience, BMET graduates can seek assistance fromthe Canada Manpower Office. This federal agency providesplacement information and is often instrumental in settingup appointments between students and prospective employ.ers. Over 95% of the fifteen to twenty BCIT graduates fromthe BMET program have been placed each year.

PROGRAM RECRUITMENTIn February or March, BCIT publishes an annual cata-

logue which is sent to all high schools in the Province. AnyInstitute programs that are still underenrolled before theystart in the autumn are advertised in the local paper. Theapplicants responding to such recruitment devices musthave a high school diploma and a background in math,physics, and chemistry if they are to be admitted to theprogram.

The program has always attracted more than enoughapplicants. At one time, however, the program had a highdropout rate, which was traced to faulty recruitment tech-niques. Many of the students enrolling had little interest inelectronics and were better suited to be equipment opera-tors. Now all recruitment materials stress the electronicsemphasis of the program; BMETs are presented as beingconcerned mainly with the "insides" of the equipment. Stu-dents who now enroll have a better understanding of theprogram's nature, so that the dropout rate has declined to alow level.

GROWTH OF THE ADVISORY COMMITTEEThe original advisory committee served until 1972, when

it was expanded to more accurately represent the potentialBMET employers. Insight into the hospital setting is nowprovided by a physician, a representative of the British Col-umbia Hospital Association, and a representative of theBritish Columbia Hospital Insurance Service. A member ofthe National Research Council represents the needs of theresearch and development area, and an equipment manufac-turer provides feedback from that sector of the field. A stu-dent representative has also been added, and an alumnuswill soon join.

Since its inception, the advisory committee has metsemi-annually to make recommendations on curriculummatters. It also advises on the number of BMETs to betrained in the future.

TECHNICAL EDUCATION REPORTERIulyAugust 1974

14

t-

4

37

38

sr'

OM - .4;wow

4 ;::=i

PROGRAMS

PROGRAM TRENDSThe BMET curriculum has evolved with the refinement

of the BMET job description and will continue to change asa result of new developments in the technology. Thedepartment is planning to increase the number of courses inthe curriculum specifically for BMETs b; designing a firstyear electronics course more closely integrated with secondyear materials. The BMET program is emerging as an area ofstudy increasingly distinct from traditional electronics.

The BMET program is also likely to change as a result ofthe shifting employment situation in the Province. The Brit-ish Columbia Hospital Insurance Service has acknowledgedthe need for an equipment repair system encompassing allProvince hospitals. A government post for a coordinator ofsuch a system has been established, and as soon as a clinicalengineer is hired for the post. implementation of the systemshould begin. The institute will work closely with the coor-dinator to keel, the BCIT program responsive to the Prov-ince's hospital needs.

The systematizing of hospital equipment repair willprobably increase the BMET demand, which already ex-ceeds BCIT supply capabilities. Laboratory space currentlyis the major constraint on the size of the BMET program,but in 1976 this limit will be lifted with completion of anew C!T academic building. The BMET laboratory sizewill then be increased to 3.000 square feet and the studentintake to about 30 per year.

In general the future is bright for BMET graduates.According to a Barron's article, medical equipment sales inNorth America have bear increasing at the rate of 7% to11% annually. Furthermore, hospitals are constantly refin-ing old eauip.ment tv ruLrease their effectiveness in :Ito diag-nosis and treatment of disease. Wherever there is biomedicalequipment. there will be a need for biomedical electronicstechnologists.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION:Biomedical Equipment Technology: A Suggested 2-Year

Post-High School Curriculum Cambridge, Massachu-setts: Technical Education Research Centers. 1974.

Loehwing. David A.. "Biomedical TechnologyAll SystemsAre Go." Barron's National Business and financeWeekly. November 5 and 12. 1973.

M.B. Wilkins made significant contributions to the composi-tion and content 11j this article.

125

by F. Bauck and A. Ridgway

TECHNICAL. EDUCATION REPORTERJuly August 1974