|
||||
|
||||
 |
Summary of August
29, 2002 CME Minutes Capsule Summary:
Dr. Murray Altose opened his first meeting as CME chair by highlighting
three topics for consideration during today’s meeting:
1) outlining the specific
responsibilities of members, staff, and guests, 2) focusing on the charge to the CME, and
3) establishing the agenda for the CME for this academic year. 1.
Elected and appointed CME members need to have the
opportunity to participate and communicate maximally and optimally at the meetings. 2.
Specifically, Article II
of the Charge to the Committee on Medical Education
(endorsed by the Faculty Council and approved by the Faculty of Medicine on June 13,
2001), delegates to the CME responsibilities for evaluating,
reviewing, and recommending goals and policies of the medical
education program. Two significant areas of
CME involvement are developing/evaluating new approaches to medical education and CME oversight
for overall goals and policies. Dr. Altose
views the CME as the body responsible for encouraging and promoting improvement and innovation in the educational programs. In addition to elected
members of the CME, there are council heads. Councils represented by their appointed
designates on the CME are: 1) Curriculum Leadership
Council (CLC), 2) Clinical Rotation Development
Council (CRDC), 3) Flexible Program, and 4)
Dr. Altose invited Dr. Lindsey Henson
to report regularly to the CME in her capacity as Vice
Dean for Education and Academic Affairs. In
this role, she can present issues important to the Dean and the medical school
administration. The CME also solicits her
support for those matters requiring the approval and action of the Dean. Reports from Dr. Henson and Dr. Fishleder, co-chairs of the CCLCM Curriculum Steering Council,
will provide the CME with the opportunity for review and evaluation of the new CCLCM
curriculum. During discussion, several issues
were raised regarding the responsibilities and authority of the CME. Dr. Altose views the faculty governance structure as circular in
nature: The CME is charged by the Faculty
Council for the review and evaluation of the educational programs of the 3. Special initiatives that the CME could take on
during the coming year: a) Faculty development and teaching
initiative Decision to design a plan to
encourage continuation of the faculty development and teaching incentives initiative under
way. b) Flexible Program Need to devise a quality of teaching
assessment of faculty sponsors in the Flexible Program.
Requirements for all electives: 1)
explicit teaching objectives, and 2) evaluation by each student whether or not those
teaching objectives were met. c) Student evaluation Advisory Committee of the AAMC
(Association of American Medical Colleges) is emphasizing performance
standards in the Dean’s Letter. Our
current Dean’s Letter is a letter of recommendation rather a letter of evaluation
as requested by the AAMC. We cannot change the
content
of the Dean’s Letter without giving the students ample notice. Do we want to change the Dean’s Letter? Dr. Altose
asked the CME if the issue of student evaluation is worthy of our attention? The consensus of members and discussants was “yes.” The Dean’s Letter has potential for huge
impact on 1) our evaluation process (i.e., our other evaluative tools), and 2) the
curriculum. d) Vertical themes Issues needing attention: 1) What constitutes a vertical theme? 2) Defining
how to initiate the vertical theme. 3) Deciding who is to provide the care and maintenance
for the vertical theme in order that it continue and thrive. 4) Promoting some new
vertical themes and eliminating those stagnating with no development. See Curriculum Revision Update section.
|
||
