Curriculum Revision Update - February 11, 1999

Main agenda item: Review of issues discussed at the Medical Education Retreat held at Landerhaven February 5, 1999

Dr. David Katz referred to the creation of the new Curriculum Leadership Council and reviewed the steps leading up to the first meeting of the Council that took place today. On Friday, January 29, Dr. Katz met with a concerned group of faculty to present his alternate proposal; faculty at that meeting consisted of section leaders, subject committee chairs, and directors of clinical programs. Subsequently, the Dean endorsed the following: That the design and oversight of the Year One and Two curriculum would be the responsibility of the teaching leadership, with support and consultative input from department chairs. The Dean has asked Dr. Katz to chair the Curriculum Leadership Council. The Dean has asked the Council to generate a revised first year curriculum for the incoming class of August 1999.

Dr. Katz designated the first year curriculum revision issues as falling into basic categories: 1) macrostructure, and 2) learning environment. Macrostructure encompasses the following topics:

1. Can we eliminate Saturday classes and not compromise the quality of the curriculum?
2. Is there a need for restructuring gross anatomy? If so, how?
3. Is there a need for an orientation at the beginning of Year One to

a. Normal structure and function

b. How basic and clinical sciences are integrated in modern medical practice, and

c. The investigative community at CWRU School of Medicine?

Learning environment addresses the following issues:

1. Increasing integration between basic science and clinical science to create a virtually seamless curriculum
2. Examination policy
3. Guidelines and standards for section leaders
4. Refining year one curriculum learning objectives.

Dr. Katz is hoping that in approximately one month a Council retreat will take place to hammer out the year one curriculum. Currently, subject committee chairs are examining their own curriculums. Dr. Katz was optimistic about the curriculum revision process in that 1) Faculty are very engaged, 2) We have the support of the department chairs as well as the Dean’s support, and 3) There has been positive student feedback. Additional items to be explored: 1) the need for a discussion about what the sequence of the curriculum will be prior to deciding whether or not to move topics from one year to another, and 2) the need for a mechanism to look at year three. The decision on how best to use class time leads to other options. The use of "Saturday enrichment sessions," surfaced as a potential opportunity for those students who have not mastered the material or want to review it. Another example, should we decide that some lecture material is better suited to self-directed learning exercises, would entail bringing the students back to small groups 1) to find out if the students have first learned the material and then, 2) to strive for a higher level of learning involving synthesis and problem solving.

Listing of Past Updates

Return to CME Home Page