University of Virginia School of Medicine
Curriculum Committee
 Minutes 08.26.99

 Pediatric-Pathology Conference Room 4:00pm

 Present (underlined) were: Reid Adams, Robert Bloodgood, Anita Clayton, Al Connors, Gene Corbett, Donald Innes (Chair), Steven Meixel, Jerry Short, Bill Wilson, Robb Williams, Debra Reed (Secretary)

1) The meeting opened with a continuation of the previous week's discussion of Medical School Objectives. Gene Corbett presented two proposals for the addition of the "research" objective.

Alternative #1:

Add a #13 to the original 12 objectives - Competency in understanding and applying scientific method to the development (and publication??) of new medical knowledge.

Alternative #2 (revision of the original second objective) was favored by the committee.

Competence in the human sciences:

a. in the acquisition of current scientific knowledge as it applies to the clinical understanding of human health and disease, and 

b. in the application of scientific method to the acquisition and development of medical knowledge pertaining to human health and disease. 

However further revision of Alternative #2 was made with a final version reading:

Competence in the human sciences:

a. in the acquisition of current scientific knowledge as it applies to the clinical understanding of human health and disease, and

b. in the application of research methodology to the acquisition and development of medical knowledge pertaining to human health and disease.

When viewing these objectives from our current perspective of years 1&2 (basic sciences) being distinct from year 3 (clinical) one might interpret the objective statement as having an imbalance between basic science and clinical training objectives. However, it is a major goal to blend basic sciences and clinical practice throughout the four years, incorporating all the objectives into all years of medical education.

Gene Corbett will detail the text of objective #2, contact Gary Owens, Director of the M.D., Ph.D. program and Al Conners for input and present the detailed text of objective #2 to the committee next week.

Objectives should not be tailored to any special group of students. Instead we want to make sure we don't limit the clinical or research pursuits of students. Opportunities should be available with enough flexiblity and direction to help students navigate their chosen path.

2) Future activities:

Susan Squillace will meet with the committee on 9/9/99 to discuss the Generalist Scholars Program interface with the general medical school curriculum.

Gary Owens has agreed to meet with the committee on 9/15/99 to discuss the M.D./Ph.D. program interface with the general medical school curriculum.

Steven Borowitz will address the committee on 9/30/99 regarding the Health Information System and it's role in medical education, especially as it affects third year students. This system is likely to have great impact on medical education especially in regard to medical information management. The HIS can have a positive influence on medical education if incorporated into the curriculum with care and imagination.

Consider other medical school programs we might want to meet with and explore for possible ideas to incorporate into our curriculum. The programs itemized in the AAMC packet distributed at the 8/12 meeting are actively working on curriculum reform. The Cornell program appears to be innovative.

University of Missouri (Jack Cowell)

University of Massachusetts (strong faculty development & community based medicine)

Duke and Cornell were contrasted.

3) Adequacy of classroom facilities and their impact on curriculum was discussed.

At present, the availability of rooms for small group teaching is inadequate at the UVA School of Medicine. Rooms are widely scattered and inconsistently available. Rooms generally lack proper lighting, lighting control, climate control and computer access.

Adequate small group facilities are a critical necessity for the successful functioning of a contemporary medical undergraduate curriculum.

The committee agreed completely that properly equiped additional small group facilities are a necessity for curriculum modernization. Other schools at UVA, the Darden School being the best example, and other U.S. medical schools have recognized this need and acted to provide adequate instructional space.

It was noted that at this time, a 3 story bustle to the library is proposed (going toward Lee St.) and is primarily for education. A new building MR6, with potential for research and medical education, is also in the planning stages.

Utmost care must be taken in design of the building(s) when constructed to accommodate small to large groups of students, control lighting and in the selection of AV and digital equipment. Rooms should be large enough to accommodate large ICM groups and small enough for patient encounters. Can rooms be designed to be flexible without sacrificing function in an attempt to be all things to all people?

4) An article "Capping off the Medical Curriculum: Our Approach", Academic

Medicine, 74:8, 1999, was distributed by Jerry Short. This article examines a fourth year four-week rotation in which all medical students attend general sessions such as courses in advanced cardiac life support and computers in medicine. This experience "addresses both the academic and personal development needs of graduating students and seeks to enhance their sense of community and pride as doctors." The possibility of such a program at UVA was discussed. A suggestion was made that one Friday per month, all 3rd year students attend a series of seminars and workshops. Social activities, class meetings and administrative functions might be incorporated.

 Don Innes is meeting with Dr. Wheby on 9/8 and with Dean Carey September 22.

Donald J Innes, M.D.