9-20-01 CME Minutes
by Dr. LaManna of new CME
has been increased in accordance with the new CME Charge, approved by
the Faculty of Medicine June 13, 2001.
Increased number of newly elected
voting members serving three-year terms:
Drs. Mireille Boutry, Jason Chao, Hue-Lee Kaung, and Terry
Wolpaw. Addition of three
appointed voting members
consisting of the three council heads:
Dr. Christopher Brandt (Chair, Clinical Rotation Development
Council), Dr. William Merrick (Chair, Curriculum Leadership Council),
and Dr. Tarvez Tucker (Coordinator, Flexible Program).
Dr. Smith mentioned that Dr. Charles Malemud, Associate
Coordinator of the Flexible Program, will be a voting delegate when
Dr. Tarvez Tucker is unable to attend CME meetings due to her
pre-scheduled clinical responsibilities.
of sheet entitled “Correction to the Report on the Flexible Program: 2000-2001
Academic Year” to replace some incorrect figures released in the
annual report presented to the CME on May 10, 2001.
CME’s main focus this year will be on the renovation of the Flexible
Saha announced that there will be an Ovid
sponsored by OhioLINK Thursday,
September 27 in room E324 of the School of Medicine at 10:00 a.m.
CWRU already subscribes to Ovid’s evidence-based medicine
product. The session will
present three clinical products—MedWeaver, Clineguide, and MedCases—along
with Ovid’s online textbook product and a PDA-based service.
Mrs. Saha (email@example.com) is interested in your input
regarding the various products that might be considered for a group
purchase by OhioLINK medical libraries.
Smith made two brief announcements:
to the timeframe of the LCME-initiated CWRU Self-Study, the medical
education retreat has been moved up.
The medical education
retreat at Landerhaven will focus on the Self-Study and take
place Wednesday, November 28,
this week’s tragic events
(September 11, 2001), Dr. Haynie and Dr. Echols are putting
together a post-traumatic stress syndrome program for students.
Nosek mentioned that computer-based
exams were successfully initiated for all first year students.
Second year students are tested using basically the same
system, although they are using paper exams.
Histology has been giving online pre-lab quizzes, which offer
bonus points for students and help them focus on their neuroscience
work. The Nervous System
Committee has also been offering many online activities for second
Wish, Patient-Based Program Coordinator, mentioned that the third
year is going well. The
only dissatisfaction expressed has been with the two orphan weeks of
Psychiatry. This is being
discussed by the Clinical Rotation Development Council (CRDC).
II student Jim Lan presented the Student
enthusiasm (after initial apprehension) for Nervous System Committee
small groups using online activities to enhance learning. Dr. Nosek’s response to Mr. Lan’s inquiry whether the small
group process online is meant to be phasing in to mainly
computer learning for this year:
The Curriculum Leadership Council did not want to make a
major change for the current Year II students.
testing one class at a time was planned to start with the current
Year I class. Due
to the labor-intensive nature of online conversions, it requires 11
BIT (Biomedical Information Technologies) staff members at a time to
work on such online endeavors.
praise for faculty review
session that took place after
the Nervous System interim exam.
More than 50% of the Year II class participated.
Questions and answers were enlarged and posted along the
walls and on screen, and students checked off which questions gave
them the most trouble. Since
this was the Year II class, the exam was not on computer, so 1) test
results could not be analyzed fast enough to be ready for the review
session, and 2) faculty did not have the results of the exam.
Dr. Norman Robbins, Nervous System co-chair, made it clear
that this particular review session was in no way setting any
to have review sessions of this type are left up to the individual
committee chairs. Students
were highly appreciative of the opportunity to go over the exam as
an extension of the learning process.
Both faculty and students interacted well and liked the
review session. Dr.
Smith mentioned that the administration, Dr. Merrick (CLC chair),
and the Academic Cabinet support opening up the exam process for
those students wishing to go over their exam.
The CLC will resolve this issue. Dr.
Lan felt confident that his classmates would not reveal the test
questions and answers to others, because they have not been able to
have a post-exam review like this for such a long time.
An “honors” system prevailed, as students were told to
put away their paper and computers prior to the review.
While the CME consensus seemed to be extremely favorable
regarding this post-exam review session, there was also concern over
the long-term that the security factor of divulging exam questions
and answers could be a problem.
students enjoyed being able to pinpoint a few answers that were wrong,
Dr. Wile explained that an analysis of the class performance on each
question is conducted after each interim examination is scored. Those questions that do not meet technical standards are
reviewed by the subject committee chair, who makes one of the following
the subject committee chair makes changes in the answer key or deletes
questions, the examination is re-scored.
Our exams have to meet high technical standards.
the November 8 CME meeting,
Dr. Peter Scoles, (former
CWRU faculty member and Interim CME chair now at
the National Board of Medical Examiners in Philadelphia) will talk
to us about the USMLE “Step 2½.”
patient exam will probably be implemented after our current first
year students have graduated. Dr.
Scoles will provide an update on USMLE activities.
Dr. Smith mentioned the
following events of special importance to the CWRU medical school:
The Metro affiliation agreement with CWRU is signed.
Talks are taking place at high levels with the Cleveland Clinic.
In one model, students could take their first year courses at
CWRU and then transfer to the Clinic.
There are discussions in progress with no decisions as
of this date.
Active discussions are occurring with University Hospital.
Recognition of the successful relationship with Henry Ford was noted.
Discussion about the Cleveland Clinic ensued.
It was emphasized that much was speculation, since concrete
plans have not been decided yet. CCF (Cleveland Clinic Foundation) students would be additional
students. Dr. Kirby has
met with Dr. Eric Topol, Provost and Chief Academic Officer, and Chairman,
Department of Cardiovascular Medicine of the Cleveland Clinic
discussed in a preliminary way the process to fit the Clinic-bound
students into our system for review and approving them here.
Dr. LaManna was urged to invite Dr. Topol to visit the CME.
Right now October 5 is given as the deadline by our university
board of trustees to act on the Clinic issue.
If the decision is endorsed, we can proceed with suggestions
for the planning.
Dr. LaManna would like
to form two subcommittees:
one to examine the Flexible Program, and the other to look into
the evaluation of all students similarly in the event of a Clinic
track. Interested CME
members and regular attendees are invited to contact either Dr.
LaManna at JCL4@po.cwru.edu, or
Lois Kaye at firstname.lastname@example.org.
See Curriculum Revision Update
Return to CME Home Page