• Home
  • Signature Papers
  • Presentations
  • Videos
  • Archives
  • Resources
  • About
  • Curriculum Vitae
  • Contact

Charles F. Mullen

Challenges and Opportunities in Optometry and Optometric Education

Challenges and Opportunities in Optometric Education: Keynote Address by Charles Mullen on Installation of NECO President

ICO President Shares Vision of the Future at Installation of Incoming New England College of Optometry President.

On June 10th ICO President Dr. Charles Mullen represented the Deans and Presidents of America’s Schools and Colleges of Optometry and spoke at the installation of Alan Laird Lewis, O.D., Ph.D., as incoming President of the New England College of Optometry (NECO). Inasmuch as the challenges and opportunities envisioned apply to ICO as well as NECO, Alumni Matters is pleased to reproduce Dr. Mullen’s brief remarks in their entirety.

Dr. Lewis, Chairman Spector, members of the Board of Trustees, distinguished members of the New England College of Optometry faculty and administration, colleagues and honored guests.

It is indeed a pleasure and a privilege for me to be here today as the representative of the Deans and Presidents of America’s Schools and Colleges of Optometry, as a friend and colleague of Dr. Lewis, and to return to my Alma Mater.

Over the years Dr. Lewis and I, to some extent, followed similar paths. We are both graduates of the New England College of Optometry. We both served as officers in the United States Navy and we both pursued careers in optometric education.

As Director of the Optometry Service at the Veterans Health Administration, I had the opportunity to work with Dr. Lewis while he was Dean at the Michigan College of Optometry. We worked closely during those years to expand clinical training for optometric students at various Department of Veterans Affairs medical facilities.

I have the greatest respect for Dr. Lewis’ abilities as an administrator and as an educator. He possesses those rare and most desirable talents of a keen intellect with the ability to comprehend and act on the larger issues, challenges and opportunities along with an appreciation for the importance of detail.

The challenges and opportunities all of us in optometric education will face during Dr. Lewis’ tenure as president are numerous.

We will see a lessening of our dependency upon campus-based facilities for the clinical education of students. Perhaps initially driven by economic considerations, the greater diversity of educational experiences provided by externships will increase pressure for more community-based training sites. The New England College of Optometry maintains a leadership role in the development and management of community-based sites and is already meeting this challenge.

College based clinics will play a significant role, however, as faculty practice becomes more important as a means for enhancing faculty income and improving our ability to recruit and retain highly qualified clinicians.

We will see a movement away from traditional classroom teaching toward more technology assisted self-learning through the rapid advances being made in communications and computer-based technology.

There will be an increased recognition that the function of a school or college of optometry is to prepare graduates for a lifetime of learning. We will redefine the entry-level attributes of our students and modify our curriculum to emphasize a lifelong commitment to learning. Students will learn to commit to a philosophy that emphasizes the acquisition of knowledge over mere information absorption and memorization.

We will recognize our responsibility to expose our students to a wide variety of practice opportunities.

We must also be prepared to offer meaningful advanced competency education to practicing optometrists as a core value of institutions of optometric education.

And, we must be ready to assist our faculty in adapting their teaching strategies to reflect this new paradigm.

And, finally we must find ways to reduce the level of indebtedness students face upon graduation, perhaps by controlling tuition increases and by providing increased scholarship support.

I also believe that the future direction of optometry will be fueled more than ever by the economics of the managed care marketplace. Quality assurance programs, appropriate advanced competency certifications and accreditation of clinical facilities will become increasingly important.

Consultation among professionals and the national academic eye centers of excellence will take advantage of advanced technology to become a standard practice. Precise retinal images and other data will be instantly transmitted from one point to another in real time.

We will see the development and utilization of a national faculty in several disciplines linked through developing technology. Schools and colleges of optometry will be able to access a faculty of our finest educators.

In such an environment, made possible by advances in technology and made necessary by economic imperative to be as efficient as possible, there will be unprecedented pressures to work together in a cooperative spirit. In this environment Dr. Alan Lewis, who has earned the respect and admiration of his peers will be indispensable as a leader.

I am confident that his contributions to the College, optometric education and the profession will be numerous and his leadership exceptional.

I pledge to Dr. Lewis my personal support and that of his fellow Deans and Presidents of Schools and Colleges of Optometry, and I wish him continued success as the President of The New England College of Optometry.

Thank you.

Alumni Matters – Summer 2000
Illinois College of Optometry
Charles F. Mullen O.D.

June 10, 2000 by Charles F. Mullen

Interview with the Journal of the American Optometric Association

Three years have passed since Charles F. Mullen, O.D. assumed the presidency of the Illinois College of Optometry (ICO), the oldest and largest educational facility dedicated solely to the teaching of optometrists. This fall, ICO concludes its year-long celebration of its 125th anniversary. In response to the Editor’s questions, Dr. Mullen shares his responsibilities at ICO, his objectives for the college, and to what degree they have been achieved. He also discusses the future direction of ICO, optometric education, and the profession of optometry.

Why did you accept the position of President of the Illinois College of Optometry?

Given ICO’s historical position of prominence within optometric education, I was concerned when I learned of the difficulties the college was experiencing in 1996. I believed these difficulties had the potential to harm not only ICO, but possibly even the profession of optometry itself. When approached by the Search Committee, I felt a responsibility to my profession of thirty years to interview for the position. Since I had extensive experience in health care management and clinical education, I felt confident that with the support of the Board of Trustees, faculty, and staff, we could redirect the resources and energies of the college toward programmatic improvements and that in a fairly short time we could create an institutional culture in which faculty, staff, and students were positively engaged in strengthening the institution.

The interview process for the presidency began in the summer of 1996. I met with the faculty. The faculty provided anonymous evaluations of my potential as ICO’s new president. The returns were favorable. By November, I was commuting between Washington, D.C. and Chicago. In December 1996, I assumed the presidency of the Illinois College of Optometry.

What were your expectations and initial objectives when you arrived at ICO?

Although I found there was an understandable sense of uncertainty regarding the immediate future of the College, morale was surprisingly good. It was my perspective that faculty and staff were not only willing, but eager, to “right the ship” and to positively engage in strengthening and improving the institution. I felt confident I could immediately assemble a capable administrative team from the existing faculty and staff.

My initial objectives included:

  • Initiation of a strategic and tactical planning process.
  • Enhancement of the academic culture by increasing support for faculty development, research, and scholarly activity.
  • Expansion of the clinical educational program by initially adding 50 community-based training sites.
  • Initiation of a search for a new Dean/Vice President for Academic Affairs.
  • Review and modification, as appropriate, of the administrative organization.
  • Enhancement of the institutional culture, by improvement of services to students, patients, alumni, and employees.
  • Ensurance of the financial stability of the institution, including the enhancement of revenue streams.
  • Review and modification of the master buildings and facilities program.
  • Improvement of management information systems.
  • Enhancement of personnel management.
  • Development and implementation of public relations and fund-raising programs.
  • Redirection of resources formerly allocated to an ambitious building program into programmatic improvements.

I believed that it was vital that our planning process promote open avenues of dialog with internal and external constituencies. I knew from my PCO experiences that each graduate of ICO is important to the college. I needed their perspective, but – even more importantly – I had to make them part of the decision-making process. I commissioned a survey of alumni/alumnae needs and concerns that not only had an immediate impact on our strategic planning, but led to the creation of ongoing communication channels that continue to affect our strategic planning. One very dramatic outcome of alumni input was ICO’s recent decision to freeze tuition, increase scholarship funding, and reduce the entering class size.

We also brought the broader community into the planning process. The Illinois Eye Institute had a long and well-recognized record of serving the community and we wanted to be even better neighbors. We appointed a Community Advisory Board (CAB). This Board includes leaders of neighborhood organizations, school principals, representatives of government agencies serving the community, clergymen, and members of ICO’s senior administration. We deal with various issues of mutual interest to ICO and the community, such as employment opportunities, construction projects, real estate transactions, and minority student recruitment.

It was now our task to channel these processes into a tangible plan of action. With input generated through countless meetings, reviews, evaluations, and reevaluations, we created a 70-page document, the Prescription for Excellence. It contains five major goals, each with detailed, quantifiable action steps and completion dates. Thee action steps also identified the department responsible for their implementation. Regular monthly meetings were scheduled to evaluate our progress. These meetings – which continue today – are open to all members of the ICO community.

The Prescription for Excellence was immediately effective. The goals and directions we established continue to be important, but even more important is the process we created whereby each member of every ICO constituency has the opportunity to be meaningfully involved in the planning process. The Prescription for Excellence is now in its second generation, as the Journey to Excellence.

Several important themes emerged during the planning process that have helped created a new culture at ICO. Through the planning process, five major goals were crystallized:

  • Provision of excellence in education and scholarly activity.
  • Creation and maintenance of reputation as an institution that is characterized by exceptional accountability.
  • Provision of excellence in service, as defined by our students, patients, alumni, and employees.
  • Provision of excellence in health care.
  • Achievement of recognition as a center of influence within the profession and the community.

These goals are now the basis for the performance agreements that exist between every member of senior administration and the President, as well as an agreement between the Board of Trustees and the President. These agreements are what each of us is measured by; they are the basis for budgeting and for departmental planning.

What progress have you made in addressing your objectives and have your expectations been met?

Strategic planning has been very successful at ICO and not just by our own measurement. Nearly 70% of the initial action items contained in the original plan have been completed. The following are all the direct outgrowth of ICO’s planning process:

  • Appointment of Janice E. Scharre, O.D., MS, as Dean/Vice President for Academic Affairs.
  • Achievement of continuing accreditation by the North Central Association of Colleges and Schools, without stipulation or monitoring.
  • Creation of open dialog with key constituency groups.
  • Achievement of strong financial position for the institution.
  • Diversification of the Board of Trustees, including the appointment of faculty representatives and minority representation.
  • Achievement of increase in patient encounters at the Illinois Eye Institute.
  • Successful restructure of ICO’s debt through the issuance of $45 million in variable-rate tax-exempt bonds, which allowed more flexible investment of $22 million in assets.
  • Institution of numerous financial controls and safeguards.
  • Reorganization of the administrative team, including the formation of a President’s Advisory Council
  • Improvement of student services and culture by response to a comprehensive student satisfaction survey.
  • Affiliation with the Department of Ophthalmology and Visual Sciences at the University of Chicago.
  • Expansion of externships from 9 sites to 97 sites in the United States and abroad.
  • Completion of $8.5 million in campus capital improvements, including renovations to the physical plant, purchase of new ophthalmic equipment, and installation of extensive informational systems technology.
  • Achievement of an all-time high student retention rate of 97.1%.
  • Participation in the continued resurgence of the neighborhood development around the College by improvement of the external appearance of the college campus and other college-owned property.
  • Reinstatement of a faculty practice plan.
  • Enhancement of employee and trustee communications by issuance of a comprehensive Employee Manual, a revised Faculty Handbook, and a Board of Trustees compendium of Resolutions and Action Items.
  • Receipt of a report from the Council on Optometric Education, during an interim site visit in 1998, that ICO had addressed all previous recommendations and suggestions.
  • Revision and improvement of the Practice Management course, including the initiation of an annual practice opportunities symposium, in which students have the opportunity to learn about all modes of optometric practice.
  • Enhancement of faculty governance with creation of the faculty executive committee and expansion of the committee structure.
  • Achievement of increased student-patient care encounters by 68%.
  • Development and implementation of a course for University of Chicago second-year medical students in basic eye care procedures.
  • Expansion of ICO’s residency program to include residencies in cornea/contact lenses and anterior segment/refractive surgery.
  • Achievement of increased quality of entering students, as measured by average GPA and OAT scores over the past three years.
  • Settlement of all outstanding legal matters.
  • Freeze of the tuition at FY98-99 level.
  • Achievement of increased scholarship funding.
  • Improvement of relations with the corporate community.

I can honestly say that my expectations have been greatly exceeded. I attribute this to the dedication, hard work, and perseverance of ICO’s Board of Trustees, faculty, staff, and student leadership for their support and willingness to adjust to my management style.

I am very proud of our affiliation with the Department of Ophthalmology and Visual Sciences at the University of Chicago. It came about, in part, as a result of the account of my earlier experiences with cooperative efforts between optometry and ophthalmology that had appeared in Archives of Ophthalmology. Terrance Ernest, M.D., Ph.D., chairman of the Department of Ophthalmology and Visual Sciences at the University of Chicago, had read the article I co-authored with Myron Yanoff, M.D. in 1990 on the affiliation between Hahnemann University and PCO. Dr. Ernest believes – as I do – that there is tremendous potential for further cooperation between optometry and ophthalmology. Now that I was at ICO, Dr. Ernest approached me with the possibility of a similar agreement with the University of Chicago. The proposed affiliation quickly became part of our planning process. In October 1997, Dr. Ernest and I signed the affiliation agreement as one event of my inaugural-week activities. The affiliation continues to be highly successful as the relationship expands and new elements are added to the basic agreement.

What is the future direction of ICO, optometric education, and the profession of optometry?

Although in retrospect I believe I may have underestimated the complexity of the issues facing optometric education when I assumed the presidency of ICO, I remain as optimistic of the future as I did on my arrival. But I do see changes ahead for ICO and optometric education. Indeed, my optimism is grounded in the belief these changes are not only necessary, but inevitable. I believe for ICO to continue to excel, we must:

  • Successfully mange the decreasing optometric and health care student pool.
  • Reduce student indebtedness.
  • Address issues of eye care manpower.
  • Restructure the clinical education program to be more cost-efficient while we maintain academic quality.
  • Launch major capital and deferred giving campaigns and sustain an intense development effort.
  • Significantly increase the Illinois Eye Institute revenues and expand our faculty practice plan.
  • Further diversify the Board of Trustees and increase its size by recruiting Board members with needed expertise and philanthropic capabilities.
  • Continue to provide students with a voice in College affairs, including representation on the Board of Trustees.
  • Improve faculty scholarly activity – specifically, externally funded research, clinical trials, and publications.
  • Greatly expand instructional technology.
  • Ensure that curriculum is consistent with defined entry-level attributes.
  • Continue the emphasis on strategic and tactical planning with outcome-based assessment as the measure of progress.
  • Develop and implement an advanced competency curriculum.
  • Enhance our position – in cooperation with the University of Chicago – as a provider of comprehensive eye care services within the Chicago-land health care market.
  • Develop and implement and O.D./Ph.D. program in cooperation with the University of Chicago.
  • Achieve continuing accreditation by the Council on Optometric Education.
  • Improve personnel relations with ICO – particularly as it pertains to positive attitude and respect for one another, with a special effort to acknowledge individual and group achievements.
  • Expand our foreign student recruitment program to extend beyond North America.

The challenges facing ICO – to a greater or lesser extent – are the same issues that face many of the schools and colleges of optometry. In general, I see the following trends in optometric education:

  • We will see a lessening of our dependency on camps-based clinics for the clinical education of third and fourth-year optometry students. Driven initially by economics – but, I believe providing for greater diversity of educational experiences – we will see more community-based training sites or externships for fourth-professional-year students and some third-year students.
  • Campus-based clinics will remain valuable for first- and second-year students.
  • College-based clinics will serve a significant role as faculty practice becomes more important as a means to enhance faculty income and improve the schools’ and colleges’ ability to recruit and retain highly qualified clinicians.
  • We will see a movement away from traditional classroom teaching toward more technology-assisted self-learning through the rapid advances being made in communication and computer-based technology. The college, however, must be prepared to assist the faculty in changing their teaching strategies.
  • Acquisition of critical analysis skills will become as important as a solid foundation in the basic and health sciences.
  • There will be recognition that the function of a school or college is to prepare doctors of optometry for a lifetime of learning in their field.
  • We will have to redefine the entry-level attributes of our students and modify our curriculum to emphasize a lifelong commitment to learning.
  • While graduates must learn to be well-grounded in the fundamentals of their profession, the purpose of this grounding must be to position them to continue the learning process.
  • Students must learn to focus on the opportunity for interaction with faculty and with one another while on campus – they must commit to a philosophy that emphasizes the acquisition and appropriate application of knowledge over information absorption and memorization.
  • We will see the development and utilization of a national faculty in several disciplines, linked through developing technology. All schools and colleges of optometry will be able to access a faculty made up of our very finest educators.
  • Cooperation between optometry and ophthalmology – that began at the New England College of Optometry’s Boston clinics and carried forward at PCO with Hahnemann University and at ICO with the University of Chicago – will continue and intensify.
  • We must then be prepared to offer meaningful advanced competency education to practicing optometrists as a core value of optometric education.
  • Residency programs will continue to increase, but at a more modest rate.
  • I believe the future direction of the profession of optometry will be fueled by the economics of the managed care marketplace.
  • The cooperative environment among opticians, optometrist, and ophthalmologists that exists at the academic level and – in several instances – in other practice modes will intensify.
  • Distinctions in practice modes will continue to blur among the three groups. Economic realities will override emotional opposition and force closer cooperation. Individual claims of priority and historical territorial imperatives will be forced to give way.
  • Quality assurance programs and advanced competency certification and accreditation will become increasingly important.
  • The expansion of the scope of practice of optometry will consist mainly of amendment and clarification to existing practice laws.
  • Ultimately, all states will grant appropriate and extensive prescriptive authority to optometrists.
  • The expanded use of laser technology by optometrist will evolve slowly over the next two decades.
  • Consultation among practicing professionals will take advantage of advances in technology. Consultations with national eye centers of excellence will become the norm, as precise retinal images and other data are instantly transmitted from one point to another in real time.
  • We will see fewer independent, private practitioners of optometry in the future and more multi-practice settings, more optometrists in HMOs, hospitals, and other institutional settings. What is often termed “corporate optometry” will continue to expand for the foreseeable future.
  • Schools and colleges of optometry will recognize their responsibility to expose their students to a wide variety of practice modes, and to discuss each opportunity openly and honestly.
  • Health care third-party payers will continue to exert enormous influence on the practice of health care – eye care included. In this vein, it is imperative that optometry solidify its position as the primary eye care provider with the managed care market.

We live, learn, teach, and practice in tremendously exciting times. I believe the future of optometry is as great as our ability to translate our vision for the profession into strategic and tactical plans of action – and as promising as our courage and tenacity to implement those plans.

Charles F. Mullen, O.D.
Journal of the American Optometric Association.
September 1999. Volume 70. Number 9.

September 24, 1999 by Charles F. Mullen

Illinois College of Optometry to Freeze Tuition, Increase Scholarships and Reduce Entering Class Size

In a bold move to insure ICO’s position of leadership in the next century the ICO Board of Trustees voted to endorse President Charles Mullen’s proposals to freeze tuition and increase scholarship aid while gradually phasing in a reduction in the size of entering classes.

The most immediate ramifications of this decision will be felt by current ICO students. “I am pleased to inform the ICO community,” Dr. Mullen announced, “that tuition for the academic year 1999-2000 will not increase above the current level of $22,668.”

The decision to freeze tuition was based on several factors, according to members of the President’s Advisory Council (PAC).

While ICO’s tuition has traditionally been high, it has been close to other private schools and colleges of optometry. In recent years, however, the gap between ICO and its private counterparts has begun to widen, lessening ICO’s ability to compete for top quality students in some instances. “There is no doubt the high cost of tuition at ICO is beginning to make an impact,” said Dean for Student Affairs Mark Colip, O.D., “and not only in relation to other schools of optometry.” He said there are indications that nationwide academically gifted undergraduates are sometimes bypassing optometry altogether to pursue less expensive educational avenues.

Another concern was the high level of indebtedness carried by recent ICO graduates. “Our students are graduating with debts averaging $145,000,” said Janice Sharre, O.D., Dean for Academic Affairs. “Servicing debt of that size, even amortized over thirty years, can have a significant impact on both one’s professional decisions and personal lifestyle” she said.

“Obviously, we’re pleased that tuition is going to be frozen,” said Student Body President Keri Navi. “We feel this step is absolutely necessary to ensure that today’s student will be an active member of the Alumni Association.”

The reduction of entering class sizes will begin with a five student reduction in the size of the class admitted in the year 2000 (the class of 2004). The intention is to continue to reduce entering classes by five students for five years, when the class of 2010 will enter with 149 students. Again, a number of considerations led to this decision.

“When I sent the annual President’s Letter to the alumni and alumnae this past fall we included a response card asking them to identify challenges facing the College and the profession,” said Dr. Mullen. “A significant number of those responding felt the profession could not continue to absorb the number of students graduating with optometry degrees in today’s health care market,” he explained.

ICO is committed to increasing scholarship support. “Holding the line on tuition and reducing entering class size will make us more attractive to those considering optometry school,” said Dr. Colip. “But competition for students is becoming greater as the number of applicants for optometry schools continues to decline nationwide. If we are to remain competitive for the very best students we will have to increase the amount and the diversity of the scholarship support we offer prospective students.”

While confident of the wisdom, and even the necessity, of this course of action, Dr. Mullen cautioned that it will be difficult and may require adjustment to the plan over time. Still, Dr. Mullen and the Board of Trustees are convinced these actions are necessary. “If we failed to act as we did,” Dr. Mullen said, “and allowed tuition to continue to increase and class size to remain at the current level while scholarship aid remained static we would eventually have faced a crisis where even drastic action might not suffice. In this manner, by implementing measured and carefully considered actions now, as difficult as they might be, we can insure that ICO will retain a position of leadership in optometric education.”

A key component to making this plan viable, said Patrick McCallig, Vice President for Institutional Advancement, will be continued alumni support. “In order to finance increased scholarship aid while reducing tuition income, through a combination of fewer students and freezing tuition costs, we will need to grow our endowment,” Mr. McCallig said. “So far alumni approval for the plan has been strong, and I anticipate it will be reflected in alumni support for the College.”

In announcing these plans to the College Dr. Mullen thanked those whose hard work had made it possible. “To do this required that some difficult decisions be made,” he said. “It would not have been possible without the support and encouragement of our students, faculty, administrators, staff and Board of Trustees. To all of you I extend my sincere appreciation.”

Dr. Mullen reaffirmed his commitment that these reductions and reallocations in resources would not result in any diminishment of ICO’s commitment to excellence, “I can assure you,” he said, “that appropriate resources will be available to support our mission of excellence in education, patient care and scholarly activity.”

“I am very proud to be associated with ICO and its tradition of leadership which,” he concluded, “once again was demonstrated by this bold decision.”

ICO Matters. Spring/Summer 1999.
Dr. Charles F. Mullen, ICO President

July 6, 1999 by Charles F. Mullen

The Past, Present and Future of Externships in Clinical Education

I believe that the future of Optometric externships in clinical education is of the greatest importance to us as educators, and to the future direction of the profession of optometry. I would even venture the opinion that where, and under what circumstances, clinical experience is gained by optometry students will determine the direction of clinical optometry.

Before presenting my thoughts on the future of externships, it might be useful to review where we are, and how we got here.

The Past

Community based clinical education – commonly referred to as externships – has its roots in the late 1960’s. Several factors coalesced at that point in time to create the impetus for what was then a new direction for optometric education.

First, faculty and administrators had become increasingly aware of the need to enhance student-patient encounters, both in terms of quantity and in diversity of experience. This impetus was bolstered by increases in class size at several institutions. Space and patient volumes at many college-operated clinics simply were not adequate to meet student needs.

Second, and closely connected, there was a growing recognition that student-patient encounters would be more beneficial to the students’ education if they took place in an environment outside the traditional academic environment. Supporting this view was the awareness of the need to train optometry students to interact with other health care disciplines.

Third, pressure was coming from practicing optometrist to expand the scope of our profession. Those of you who were in the service as optometrists in those days many recall that military protocols allowed optometrists greater latitude in treatment options, particularly in regard to pharmaceutical agents, than did state regulations. Having expanded their practice while in the Military, these optometrists were reluctant to step back into the more restrictive guidelines of civilian practice. They realized that optometry students, as well as the faculty, needed training in the use of pharmaceutical agents.

Fourth, several colleges of optometry had urban campuses, often in areas with significantly undeserved populations in terms of health care. These institutions had a strong commitment to provide eye care to those residing in proximal neighborhoods.

As a result of these concurrent pressures, several institutions, acting independently of one another, came to the conclusion that the most promising avenue for meeting these needs was to form networks of clinic affiliations with existing health care institutions. However, any illusions regarding the ease with which this strategy would be executed were quickly dispelled.

Those attempting to create externships encountered reluctance on the part of health center administrators to permit students to participate in their programs. Medical staffs were unfamiliar with Optometry, and the benefits optometry students could provide. Ophthalmologists did not have a history of interacting with Optometrists, and were often reluctant to do so. The new model of community based clinical education also aroused antagonism among community optometric practitioners who perceived it as an unwanted competitive threat.

Nonetheless, the need for externships was too great to be denied, and the creation of externships proceeded. These first externships shared several characteristics. Criteria for site selection and evaluation were ill defined. The terms of the affiliations themselves were not always well drafted. Student selection/assignment processes lacked consistency. The length of student rotations varied widely, from a half a day in some to a year in others. In too many instances there was little staff support from the parent institutions.

The first externships were located in a variety of settings, but primarily they were in community health centers, nursing homes, prisons, military facilities, public health facilities, the VA, university student health services, and even in some private practice settings.

Fortunately, many of these facilities encouraged, or even required, the use of pharmaceutical agents by optometrists. This experience would prove invaluable as optometry faculty were called upon a few years later to provide instruction in diagnostic and therapeutic agents as state practice laws changed.

Despite a rather awkward beginning, and with all the missteps and mistakes notwithstanding, the movement towards community based clinical education in the late 1960’s had a profound impact on our profession, and must be considered one of the most important innovations in the development of optometric education. It was through the creation of these external affiliations, and the availability of large patient volumes, that the base was established for the subsequent growth of optometry into a true primary care profession.

The Present

Today community based clinical education has expanded dramatically in terms of the quantity and quality of externships. A recent ASCO survey found that all the schools and colleges of Optometry responding reported that they had externship programs. The number of sites per institution ranged from 25 to 200.

While great progress has been made, it has been uneven. In some areas the problems experienced by those early externships continue. However, most externships enjoy strong support from their parent institutions. Today’s students typically serve two rotations of twelve weeks each. Student preference is an important consideration in the assignment process; housing, meals, and a stipend are provided on a limited basis.

Today site selection and evaluation procedures are in place. Formal affiliation agreements provide guidance and define and expand responsibilities – but with varying degrees of thoroughness. In general those affiliations that include a government entity tend to be better defined than those that do not.

Externship preceptors are recognized with some form of faculty rank, often an adjunct appointment. Externships are predominantly located in government health care facilities, such as those operated by the VA, the Indian Health Service or the Military. They are also found in public and private hospitals, rehab centers, and referral centers. They continue to be found in private practice arrangements, nursing homes, prisons, special needs schools, and university student health clinics. They are also located in community health centers and facilities operated by HMO’s.

In general, the overall state of the national externship program is strong, significant in its impact, well managed and improving. It is firmly established as an essential component in the education and training of today’s optometry student.

The Future

What is the future of externships? As important as the externship has become, I would suggest today that its role is about to increase significantly. Once again forces are coalescing to create a climate conducive to, and even more demanding than the 1960’s.

Today’s health care environment is being driven by the demands of managed care and government that costs be reduced while quality and efficiency are increased.

In this environment I believe externships will become the primary source of clinical experience for optometry students. And while there will always be a need for some sort of sheltered workshop for clinical training of first and second year students, such as college operated campus clinics, the role of these clinics will be correspondingly diminished as the role of the externship grows in importance. Campus based clinical education will be limited to special emphasis areas such as pediatrics, vision rehabilitation and advanced ophthalmic care, while primary care education will be delegated to multiple affiliated health care facilities.

Just as several unrelated and related forces combined in the ‘60s to created externship, a combination of forces at work in the ‘90s will once again drive their expansion.

The large numbers of close-at-hand underserved patients, once the backbone of institutionally based clinics, have become attractive to managed care providers as government units have turned to managed care to administer health care. Once spurned by third party payers as a burden, they are now sought by those who, unencumbered by an educational mission, are able to respond rapidly, efficiently and cost effectively. The ability of large single purpose eye clinics, such as those operated by most schools and colleges of optometry, is now seriously compromised.

Forced to allocated scarce resources to market to what was formally a virtually reserved patient base, such clinics are finding it even more difficulty to be cost effective, if indeed they ever were. As patient numbers decline, educational inefficiencies increase, and operating deficits increase.

Externships, by contrast, are highly cost effective, offer a challenging clinical environment, and are often staffed by seasoned preceptors. This nicely compliments the basic clinical training provided by college faculty. The clinical experience gained at externships is both progressive and stimulating for students.

I believe, therefore, that the demand for more externships, geographically distributed, will increase in the years ahead. Longer rotations, and more rotations, will be the standard. Advances in communication, such as telemedicine and the internet, will make it easier for institutions to effectively manage a widely distributed network.

There exists today a vast, and largely untapped, potential within the federal sector for externships in optometry, where the growth will take place.

However, I must raise a cautionary note. We learned a great deal from the mistakes that were made in the ‘60s in the creation of externships, and we have benefited from that knowledge. However, that does not mean we must continue to rely on trial and error as the path to wisdom. To the extent that we are able, we must anticipate the problems that will inevitably arise from the creation of a national network of externships.

The Challenge to Optometry

A significant challenge to us all will be the efficient and equitable use of this national network of externship sites by the schools and colleges of optometry. If we follow the competitive model of the past, some schools will find they have a surplus of externships, zealously guarded as a resource, while other schools will find they have an unmet need for student placements.

We must begin to work together to establish a national clearing house and placement service for externships in optometry. Through such a clearinghouse all institutions of optometric education will fully share in this enormous national resource, and each site will be appropriately and fully utilized. The clearinghouse could facilitate the development and implementation of national standards for externships, possibly leading to some form of accreditation for participating sites.

Our purpose, after all, is not to compete with one another, but to cooperate in the advancement of optometric education and the profession. By so doing we not only assure an efficient and effective use of the opportunity that is being presented to us, but we also best serve the needs of our students, the affiliated facilities, and the patients they treat.

I realize this will not happen over night. It will require much discussion and a decision to accept challenges and make compromises. It will require a recognition of the fact that the traditional environments in which we have lived will not be the models for tomorrow. It will require change. It will not be easy. It will be necessary.

Acknowledgements

The author thanks Drs. Daniel Roberts and Stephanie Messner of the Illinois College of Optometry who assisted in the preparation of these remarks.

These remarks were originally delivered to the Optometric Education Section at the December 1997 American Academy of Optometry meeting.

The Journal of the Association of Schools and Colleges of Optometry.
Optometric Education. Volume 24, Number 1. Fall 1998.
Charles F. Mullen, O.D., Guest Editorial

September 1, 1998 by Charles F. Mullen

  • « Previous Page
  • 1
  • …
  • 15
  • 16
  • 17
  • 18
  • 19
  • 20
  • Next Page »

Signature Papers

  • Optometry Specialty Certification Boards Provide a Uniform Indicator of Advanced Knowledge and Skills
  • A New Paradigm for Optometry
  • Optometric Education in Crisis
  • Opportunities Lost – Opportunities Regained
  • Mergers and Consolidations of Optometry Colleges and Schools
  • Transformation of Optometry – Blueprint for the Future
  • Required Postgraduate Clinical Training for Optometry License
  • Why Optometry Needs the American Board of Optometry Specialties (ABOS)
  • The Future of Optometric Education – Opportunities and Challenges
  • A Strategic Framework for Optometry and Optometric Education
  • Changes Necessary to Include Optometry in the Graduate Medical Education Program (GME)
  • Unresolved Matters of Importance to Optometric Education
  • Illinois College of Optometry Commencement Address (Video & Transcript)
  • Charles F. Mullen’s Speech at the Kennedy Library: Development of NECO’s Community Based Education Program
  • Illinois College of Optometry Presidential Farewell Address (Video & Transcript)
  • Commitment to Excellence: ICO’s Strategic Plan
  • Illinois College of Optometry and University of Chicago Affiliation Agreement
  • An Affiliated Educational System for Optometry with the Department of Veterans Affairs

© 1978-2025 · Charles F. Mullen, O.D. · Terms of Use