LaManna went over the new Charge to the Committee on Medical Education.
segments follow. Article
I designates the Responsibility and Role of the Faculty and
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
“The CME is responsible for overall goals and policy and does
not have the responsibility for operational matters regarding the
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:
chair (an elected or appointed member of the CME)
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)
student representatives (one from each class and elected by his/her
curriculum leadership council chairs (Core Academic Program Council,
Clinical Rotation Development Council, and Flexible Program Council)
faculty members appointed by the Dean
Dean for Education
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.
5 deals with the voting privilege, which is granted to
9 elected faculty members
2 faculty members appointed by the Dean
- Student representatives from the fourth and
second year classes
of the 3 Curriculum Leadership Councils
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.
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
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.
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.