Shield of the SOM Committee on Medical Education
Home || New || Search Net || Search SOM

Summary of 6-28-01 CME Minutes 

  1. Dr. LaManna congratulated Dr. Hue-Lee Kaung on her election to a three-year CME term; she had previously been appointed by the Dean to fill Dr. Mieyal’s vacated slot for the remainder of this year.  Dr. Terry Wolpaw is the other newly elected faculty member, and she will be joining us when the new academic year starts with the first CME meeting in September.  In addition, according to the new CME Charge (created by the Committee to Review the Standing Committees, modified at the Faculty Council on June 11, 2001 and approved by the general faculty on June 13, 2001), there will be 9 elected faculty members (instead of the previous 7) to balance addition of the 3 appointed voting curriculum leadership council chairs.  The CME needs an additional 2 elected members. 

  2. Distribution of the following documents took place:

  • CME Schedule for the 2001-2002 academic year.  Since the LCME site visit is taking place March 10-14, the CME March meeting date has been changed to March 21.

  • The new CME Charge (approved by the Faculty of Medicine 6/13/01)

  • Patient-Based Program Annual Report 2000-2001 – Dr. Jay Wish, Patient-Based Program Coordinator

  • Introduction to Clinical Medicine 2000-2001 Executive Summary – Ms. Kathy Cole-Kelly, Dr. Ted Parran, Dr. Elizabeth Patterson, ICM Co-Directors

  • Physical Diagnosis Course Summary 2000-2001 – Dr. Baha Arafah, Physical Diagnosis Director 

  1. The wording of the CME resolution concerning scheduling of the USMLE Step 2 that was passed at the May 10 CME meeting had been modified once and was again “fine-tuned” for the Student Handbook.  As of June 29, the resolution for this coming year’s Student Handbook now reads:

Students are required to take the USMLE Step 2 by January 15th in the year they expect to graduate.  A passing score on the USMLE Step 2 is one of the graduation requirements.  Passing scores on the USMLE Step 2 must be received by the Registrar no later than May 10, 2002, for all students who intend to graduate on May 19, 2002.

  1. Year IV student representative Abbie Miller brought up a problem that arose concerning the Acting Internship (AI) at RB&C in Pediatrics.  Students sign up in February of their third year for the AI elective that is taken for one month during the fourth year.  The RB&C resident makes it clear that this is binding.  Students must let the resident know if they want to drop the RB&C Pediatric AI 30 days in advance and also must find a replacement student for each slot.  Via our Registrar, CWRU students who needed to drop found replacement students from other schools who are wait-listed for the RB&C AI.  Wait-listed students (CWRU and non-CWRU) are all in good standing.  The Registrar does not require a CV from students.  Rainbow would not sign the forms to allow the CWRU students to drop the AI, even though a standing list of student replacements existed, and wanted to see the résumés of the replacement students.  This has resulted in hard feelings between students and residents and a desire to find a solution to the problem so that it does not occur again next year.  This was the dilemma:  1) Student frustration over not being allowed to drop when they had given notice greater than 30 days prior to the onset of the AI and had found student replacements, and 2) RB&C’s reluctance to consider non-CWRU students due to uncertainty of their quality.  After some discussion, Dr. LaManna suggested that the Student CME write a letter to Dr. Nieder requesting working toward a solution for the future and adding a cc: to Dr. Wish.
  2. The new CME Charge was created by the Committee to Review the Standing Committees, which incorporated elements of the Resnick Report and the previous CME charge.  The document was modified at the Faculty Council on June 11 and approved by the general faculty on June 13.  This new CME charge supersedes the previous CME Charge and the Resnick report.

Dr. LaManna went over the new Charge to the Committee on Medical Education.  Noteworthy segments follow.  Article I designates the Responsibility and Role of the Faculty and Administration. 

Article II Section 1 lists the CME’s responsibilities, which are generally similar to those listed in the previous charge.  The last sentence is new and designates the CME’s exclusion from operational responsibilities:  “The CME is responsible for overall goals and policy and does not have the responsibility for operational matters regarding the curriculum.”  

Section 4 deals with CME membership.  While teaching experience of members was implicit in the CME make-up, it is now explicit in descriptions of the chair’s qualifications and the elected faculty members’ qualifications.  According to the new charge, CME membership consists of:

  • The chair (an elected or appointed member of the CME)

  • 9 elected faculty members (previously there were 7)—at least 3 of the elected faculty shall be from clinical science departments and at least 3 of the elected faculty shall be from basic science departments (as was also stipulated in the previous CME charge)

  • 4 student representatives (one from each class and elected by his/her own class)

  • 3 curriculum leadership council chairs (Core Academic Program Council, Clinical Rotation Development Council, and Flexible Program Council)

  • 2 faculty members appointed by the Dean

  • Vice Dean for Education

Requiring that at least 3 of the elected or appointed faculty members be department chairs has deliberately been dropped in the new charge.  It had become increasingly difficult to recruit department chairs to serve.

Section 5 deals with the voting privilege, which is granted to

  • The CME Chair

  • The 9 elected faculty members

  • The 2 faculty members appointed by the Dean

  • Student representatives from the fourth and second year classes
  • Chairs of the 3 Curriculum Leadership Councils

With the addition of the 3 appointed voting curriculum leadership council chairs, the number of elected CME members increased from 7 to 9.  A faculty committee must have a majority of elected members.

Article III deals with Subcommittees (which may include students) appointed by the CME in consultation with the Vice Dean for Education.

Article IV describes the CWRU Program of Medical Education as best taking place “in an atmosphere that encourages freedom of discussion, expression of divergent views, sound educational experimentation, and the vigorous participation of faculty members, departments, and students.  Major changes in the medical education curriculum in structure, overall content, organization, and evaluation affecting the curriculum as a whole are expected to be presented to Faculty Council after initial formal approval by the Committee on Medical Education…  At its discretion, Faculty Council may elect to present any such major changes to the entire faculty for discussion and formal approval.”

Appendix I describes the three curriculum leadership councils.  The chairs of the Core Academic Program Council, the Clinical Rotation Development Council, and the Flexible Program Council are CME members with the voting privilege, who are to report periodically to the CME “regarding operational matters” and to provide “an annual summary and report of actions jointly to the CME and Faculty Council.”  Like other CME members, curriculum leadership council chairs are expected to have extensive teaching experience in medical education.

Dr. LaManna brought out the organizational chart he constructed and presented at the April 26 CME meeting and then revised as of April 27, 2001 to use as a working diagram.  Discussion focused on the chain of command if issues arise that cannot be resolved, even though we try to work for a consensus decision and go through the proper pathways.  There is a dialogue pathway with designated leadership.  Many things depend on camaraderie and collegiality of the faculty.  There is also a structure of checks and balances.  The CME will discuss the policy decision of adding student representation to the three leadership councils and may then suggest such a proposal to the councils.  There was also discussion about Dr. LaManna’s placement of the Syllabus and Exams in the Operations and Administration category with no links to Content, medical education, faculty, etc.  Dr. LaManna emphasized that the electronic curriculum/syllabus is a huge operation.  Dr. Nosek reports directly to the Dean.  The Office of Biomedical Technologies produces the syllabus/exams operationally, but it does not create it.  Dr. LaManna acknowledged the CME needs to clarify that link.  In Dr. LaManna’s opinion, his diagram is the “truth” as it currently exists.  Dr. LaManna felt that his diagram is an accurate expression of this currently existing problem.

  1. Dr. Smith made three brief announcements:

  • Starting in July, the Cleveland Clinic will take one CWRU student per rotation for the Neuro clerkship.  There are just four slots total for each month-long Neuro clerkship at the Clinic.

  • It has been jointly decided by the Vice Dean and CME that there will be a focus on further development of the Flexible Program this year.

  • The method of running the core clerkships starting in July is being finalized.

See Curriculum Revision Update

Return to CME Home Page



This page was last updated on 8/20/01 by John Graham.

This website is maintained by the office of
Information Systems at the CWRU School of Medicine.