Faculty Bibliography

Lifelong learning is a term frequently referred to in the training and continuing professional development of genetic counselors. It implies the ability to continuously engage in self-motivated reflection to identify knowledge gaps and develop a learning plan to address identified needs or interests. In contrast to this definition, the path to continuing professional development for most genetic counselors involves attendance at conferences; yet much data suggest that other forms of learning are more effective at leading to practice change and improved patient or quality outcomes. These conflicting ideas beg the question: what is professional learning? A dialogue between two genetic counselor educators, both with advanced training in health professional education, shares personal beliefs regarding lifelong learning in the genetic counseling profession. This discourse represents an authentic conversation that was audio-recorded and transcribed with minimal editing to improve clarity and readability. The views presented in this dialogue are highly personal, yet grounded in educational theory. References are provided to those that desire further reading on the topics discussed. Several authentic learning strategies are described, including communities of practice, peer supervision, and personal learning projects. The authors consider ways to increase knowledge acquisition from conference attendance and discuss how learning on the job becomes embedded in practice. As a result of this discourse, the authors hope to inspire genetic counselors to reflect over their continuing professional development and consider their job as a learning environment that presents rich, ongoing, and unique opportunities for growth. The authors invite and challenge readers to identify learning needs and set goals for themselves to address those needs. For those with interest in education, it is hoped that the conversation sparks new or invigorated interest that will lead to novel or more effective learning opportunities with improved outcomes for patients, students, and colleagues alike.

There is currently a gap in the literature regarding education by and for genetic counseling (GC) students and genetic counselors. Since little is written about current strategies used in GC graduate programs, we conducted a qualitative semi-structured interview study of North American GC program directors to learn about their educational goals and practices. We recruited 25 program directors from the United States and Canada through the Association of Genetic Counseling Program Directors for interviews using a video conferencing platform. Interviews were recorded and transcribed, followed by content analysis to analyze education frameworks; processes of program planning and development; approaches and strategies for teaching and assessing GC core knowledge and skills; and systemic factors that influence GC education. We emphasized areas that are challenging to teach, particularly ethical, legal, and social issues (ELSI); disability issues; genomics; counseling skills; diversity, equity, inclusion, justice (DEIJ) issues; professional identity; research skills; and teaching skills. We found commonalities supported by standards and practice-based competencies and also a rich diversity of program cultures, approaches, and techniques for teaching and assessing genetic counseling skills. There was a consistent theme of integration across the program for all areas examined. A multilayered, comprehensive approach to DEIJ issues was advocated. Planned change was a logical outcome of program assessment, while unplanned change called for flexibility and creativity. The description of GC educational practices provides documentation of current approaches and strategies, guidance for new GC programs, and inspiration for continued evolution of existing GC graduate programs.

Due to the high prevalence of mental illness in the general population, genetic counselors are likely to encounter patients with mental illness in practice, regardless of specialty. However, previous studies have shown that recent graduates of genetic counseling programs do not feel comfortable discussing mental illness in clinical encounters. One possible explanation for this discomfort is stigma toward mental illness, a well-documented phenomenon both in society and in the healthcare field. Previous studies of this phenomenon in genetic counselors and trainees have relied on self-report measures and are vulnerable to social desirability bias. We sought to gain a holistic understanding of attitudes toward mental illness held by genetic counseling trainees by measuring implicit and explicit biases. This study assessed 141 responses from genetic counseling students and recent graduates from master's graduate programs across North America. They were asked to complete a survey, which included a demographic questionnaire, a scale that has been validated for use for a variety of healthcare professionals (Nordt et al. 2006, Schizophrenia Bulletin, 32, 709), measuring explicit attitudes toward those with depression and schizophrenia (i.e., social distance and stereotype endorsement), and an implicit association test. Mean scores on the social distance and stereotype endorsement scales were higher for schizophrenia than depression, indicating higher levels of explicit bias toward the former than the latter. Participants held slightly significant implicit bias toward individuals with either physical or mental illness. These data suggest that unconscious or implicit bias may not contribute to unpreparedness to address psychiatric disorders in clinical practice that has been previously reported by new graduates. Therefore, genetic counseling trainees may be receptive to clinically relevant education pertaining to mental illness. These results could inform the curriculum of genetic counseling programs and facilitate provision of services to this population.

In response to mounting concerns regarding a perceived shortage of genetic counselors, the Genetic Counselor Workforce Working Group (WFWG) was established in 2013 to identify barriers to growth of the genetic counseling workforce. After completing a workforce analysis and confirming a shortage, the WFWG convened a strategic planning session in 2017 to identify goals and strategies that would increase the number of certified counselors to meet the current and future workforce demands and ensure access to genetic counselor services. Subcommittees were formed and charged with achieving assigned goals; one such subcommittee included a curriculum working group to build a dynamic and effective educational infrastructure to increase the number of genetic counselors graduated from accredited training program. This paper reports of progress of the WFWG Curriculum Subcommittee toward achieving this goal through a narrative literature review that identifies innovative education methods that help to increase capacity of fieldwork training, both in genetic counseling training programs and in other health professions. Of the five thematic areas identified in this study, four are analyzed for insight into building clinical capacity: systems/infrastructure, rotation structure/models, skill building, and novel techniques. While additional studies are needed to establish best practices in these thematic areas, there are several take-aways that training programs can begin to utilize as they look to expand training opportunities. While growth of the genetic counseling workforce will continue to be a long-term issue, programs should begin to think creatively and innovatively about how to reach beyond traditional fieldwork training formats to build capacity. The strategies explored in this paper offer feasible and untapped solutions that can help support efforts to establish a sustainable genetic counseling workforce.

Advanced training for master's trained genetic counselors has been a topic for many years. In 2016, Baty et al. published a model of advanced training for genetic counselors that interconnects three grids: skills, paths, and positions. The purpose of this qualitative study was to assess how well this model of advanced training reflected the experiences of genetic counselors with advanced genetic counseling skills. Using purposive sampling and deductive content analysis, results of 17 interviews demonstrated that the 3-grid model of advanced genetic counseling skills, paths to attaining these skills, and positions which utilize advanced skills, described elements important for the interviewees' career development. Results suggested refinements to the model in terms of content and organization and also suggested that advanced training be conceptualized as an important element of a career lattice that includes both vertical and horizontal movement. This refined model of genetic counselor advanced training can foster profession-wide career development by stimulating new career paths and career development research.

Career development frameworks help professionals better understand career decision-making, but the genetic counseling field lacks a comprehensive framework to describe career development. The purpose of this qualitative study was to explore commonalities across participants' career trajectories and identify factors which influence decision-making throughout genetic counseling careers. Using purposive sampling, 17 genetic counselors with advanced skills were interviewed about their career trajectories, factors which influenced career decisions, and the process and outcomes of those decisions. Content analysis was both inductive and deductive, employing triangulation techniques to enhance analytic rigor. Results highlighted common experiences and critical processes of interviewees' career trajectories and contributed to the development of the Genetic Counselor Career Trajectory Framework (GCCTF), which depicts an iterative process of considering change in one's career. Each iteration is prompted by predisposing influences (past experiences, personal attributes, and contextual factors), characterized by self-assessment and flexible planning, and completed when a decision about making a change is reached. Multiple iterations collectively create evolution of a career trajectory. The GCCTF adds to existing theories of career development by emphasizing dynamic processes of considering change and applies established concepts to a specialized healthcare profession. Individual genetic counselors can utilize the GCCTF to expand awareness of factors influencing a specific career decision and gain insight into experiences of change across their careers.

Telephone genetic counseling (TC) for high-risk women interested in BRCA1/2 testing has been shown to yield positive outcomes comparable to usual care (UC; in-person) genetic counseling. However, little is known about how genetic counselors perceive the delivery of these alternate forms of genetic counseling. As part of a randomized trial of TC versus UC, genetic counselors completed a 5-item genetic counselor process questionnaire (GCQ) assessing key elements of pre-test sessions (information delivery, emotional support, addressing questions and concerns, tailoring of session, and facilitation of decision-making) with the 479 female participants (TC, N = 236; UC, N = 243). The GCQ scores did not differ for TC vs. UC sessions (t (477) = 0.11, p = 0.910). However, multivariate analysis showed that participant race/ethnicity significantly predicted genetic counselor perceptions (β = 0.172, p < 0.001) in that the GCQ scores were lower for minorities in TC and UC. Exploratory analyses suggested that GCQ scores may be associated with patient preference for UC versus TC (t (79) = 2.21, p = 0.030). Additionally, we found that genetic counselor ratings of session effectiveness were generally concordant with patient perceptions of the session. These data indicate that genetic counselors perceive that key components of TC can be delivered as effectively as UC, and that these elements may contribute to specific aspects of patient satisfaction. However, undefined process differences may be present which account for lower counselor perceptions about the effectiveness of their sessions with minority women (i.e., those other than non-Hispanic Whites). We discuss other potential clinical and research implications of our findings.

What bearing have you set you set your sights on? How do you navigate the ever-changing swells and winds of our professional landscape? Are you feeling a nebulous desire for change, that your career is not going in the direction you were expecting, worry about lack of future opportunities, or even a deep dissatisfaction in your current position? You are not alone. The formation of the Committee on Advanced Training for Certified Genetic Counselors (CATCGC) was partly in response to such sentiments, expressed within a vibrant dialogue amongst members of the genetic counseling community. The CATCGC sought to understand how genetic counselors chart courses for their careers by conducting a Decision Points exercise during a pre-conference symposium (PCS) at the 2014 NSGC Annual Education Conference. Participants were asked to identify a decision point at which they were most satisfied with their careers and one at which they were least satisfied and to describe the situation, their personal goals and intentions, any actions they took, and the outcomes. Qualitative analysis in the constructivist tradition was conducted on participants' responses and facilitators' notes from the PCS to explore what personal meanings were made of the decision points; twelve themes related to Career High Points, Low Points, and how genetic counselors made career transitions were identified. Using a constructivist framework, themes are presented in the context of the authors' personal experiences, and the authors' share their reflections on these data. We wrote this article to offer you a window into your peers' experiences - the good, the bad, and the ugly - hoping to encourage and challenge you to reflect deeply, no matter where you are on your career journey.

There are currently multiple paths through which genetic counselors can acquire advanced knowledge and skills. However, outside of continuing education opportunities, there are few formal training programs designed specifically for the advanced training of genetic counselors. In the genetic counseling profession, there is currently considerable debate about the paths that should be available to attain advanced skills, as well as the skills that might be needed for practice in the future. The Association of Genetic Counseling Program Directors (AGCPD) convened a national committee, the Committee on Advanced Training for Certified Genetic Counselors (CATCGC), to investigate varied paths to post-master's training and career development. The committee began its work by developing three related grids that view career advancement from the viewpoints of the skills needed to advance (skills), ways to obtain these skills (paths), and existing genetic counselor positions that offer career change or advancement (positions). Here we describe previous work related to genetic counselor career advancement, the charge of the CATCGC, our preliminary work in developing a model through which to view genetic counselor advanced training and career advancement opportunities, and our next steps in further developing and disseminating the model.

Telephone genetic counseling (TC) for hereditary breast/ovarian cancer risk has been associated with positive outcomes in high risk women. However, little is known about how patients perceive TC. As part of a randomized trial of TC versus usual care (UC; in-person genetic counseling), we compared high risk women's perceptions of: (1) overall satisfaction with genetic counseling; (2) convenience; (3) attentiveness during the session; (4) counselor effectiveness in providing support; and (5) counselor ability to recognize emotional responses during the session. Among the 554 participants (TC, N = 272; UC, N = 282), delivery mode was not associated with self-reported satisfaction. However, TC participants found counseling significantly more convenient than UC participants (OR = 4.78, 95 % CI = 3.32, 6.89) while also perceiving lower levels of support (OR = 0.56, 95 % CI = 0.40-0.80) and emotional recognition (OR = 0.53, 95 % CI = 0.37-0.76). In exploratory analyses, we found that non-Hispanic white participants reported higher counselor support in UC than in TC (69.4 % vs. 52.8 %; OR = 3.06, 95 % CI = 1.39-6.74), while minority women perceived less support in UC vs. TC (58.3 % vs. 38.7 %; OR = 0.80, 95 % CI = 0.39-1.65). We discuss potential research and practice implications of these findings which may further improve the effectiveness and utilization of TC.