Design and Evaluation of a Faculty Development Workshop Series on Integrating Generative Artificial Intelligence in Medical Education: Mixed Methods Pilot Study.

Background: Generative artificial intelligence (GenAI) tools are being increasingly applied to teaching and learning in medical education creating both instructional opportunities and pedagogical challenges. While GenAI offers potential to enhance teaching, assessment, and curriculum design, many medical faculty lack structured guidance on how to integrate these tools ethically and pedagogically within discipline-specific, high-stakes educational contexts. Objective: This study aimed to design, implement, and evaluate a faculty development workshop series for ethical and pedagogical integration of GenAI in medical education teaching. Methods: A mixed methods pilot study was conducted to design, implement, and evaluate a faculty development workshop series "Professional Development in Generative Artificial Intelligence for Pedagogy" at Weill Cornell Medicine-Qatar, a US medical school in Qatar. The program consisted of five 1-hour synchronous online workshops grounded in Experiential Learning Theory and the Technological Pedagogical Content Knowledge framework. Ten medical faculty from multiple disciplines participated. Quantitative data were collected through an online preintervention survey, an online postintervention survey with open-ended questions, and an online 2-week follow-up survey. Surveys consisted of 5-point Likert scale items capturing perceptions of workshop quality, confidence, and intended application. Qualitative data included full workshop transcripts, facilitator theoretical notes, and facilitator memos. Descriptive statistics summarized quantitative findings, while qualitative data were analyzed using a combination of deductive and inductive coding, alongside narrative analysis. Findings were integrated to generate convergent interpretations. Results: Qualitative analysis of workshop transcripts suggested evolving engagement with GenAI, with participants describing movement from exploratory use toward more intentional pedagogical application. Postintervention survey results indicated high satisfaction with program content, organization, relevance, and overall quality. Two-week follow-up survey responses (n=5) suggested increased self-reported confidence in applying GenAI tools, and perceived shifts in how participants conceptualized teaching with GenAI. Faculty described intended strategies for integrating GenAI into lesson planning, assessment design, visualization of learning materials, and case-based instruction, while emphasizing the importance of human oversight, critical appraisal, and ethical judgment. Findings highlighted the perceived value of hands-on experimentation, reflective discussion, and adaptive facilitation in supporting early faculty engagement. Conclusions: This pilot study provides early evidence that an experiential, theory-informed, and adaptively facilitated faculty development workshop series may support medical faculty in developing self-reported confidence, awareness, and initial strategies for responsible GenAI integration. Findings are exploratory and limited by a small sample size, a single institution, and reliance on self-reported data. Nevertheless, the Professional Development in Generative Artificial Intelligence for Pedagogy workshop series presents a flexible and theory-informed faculty development approach that may inform future faculty development initiatives in medical education as GenAI technologies continue to evolve.