Minutes 09.02.10

Minutes 09.02.10

University of Virginia School of Medicine
Curriculum Committee
Minutes – 09.02.10

Pediatric Conference Room, 4:00 p.m.


Present (underlined) were: Gretchen ArnoldRobert Bloodgood, Megan Bray, Troy Buer, Donna Chen, Eugene Corbett, Thomas Gampper, Wendy Golden, Donald Innes (Chair), Keith Littlewood, Veronica Michaelsen, Mohan Nadkarni, Linda Waggoner-Fountain, Bill WilsonMary Kate Worden,  John Hemler, Christina PortalNicole White, Debra Reed (secretary)  


  1. Announcements:

    The Curriculum Committee was welcomed to the 2010-11 school year. The group was reminded that the Committee regularly meets on the first, second and third Thursday of each month in the Pediatric Conference Room.  Meetings begin promptly at 4:00 pm and conclude at 5:00 pm.

    The new Curriculum is reportedly going well.  Many first year students have related their approval to the visiting 2011-12 applicants.  Approximately one quarter of the first year class is being surveyed weekly.  Veronica Michaelsen and Elizabeth Bradley will be compiling the data and reporting the weekly findings to the Curriculum Committee.

    System Leaders and other involved faculty meet weekly on Friday at noon to discuss c current curriculum issues.  They discuss what worked in the previous week, what didn’t work and what changes to  implement in the immediate and long-term future.

  2. Clinical Performance Development (CPD).    Eugene Corbett, Chair of the CPD Working Group, outlined the creation, development and current work of the group.   Initially, the group was to work on clinical performance development throughout the entire four years of the curriculum.  While still a work in progress, CPD has been incorporated in the preclinical curriculum.  The Group is now ready to begin work on the continuation of CPD in the clerkships and electives portion of the curriculum.  The Group will discuss how best to enhance bedside teaching, whether to require a solo patient workup by each medical students, how to assess clinical skills, OSCI development, and LCME issues in the clerkships.  

    A list of current members was distributed.  Members were asked to suggest other interested parties that should be included in the group.   The Committee suggested that while some Clerkship Directors (CDs) are members of the Working Group, all should be invited to the Group meetings and progress of the group shared routinely through the Clinical Medicine Committee.   The Curriculum Committee charged the CPD Working Group to assess clinical skills in the clerkship/elective years, develop realistic objectives, create a plan for  students to obtain objectives and evaluate student progress.  The Working Group should be prepared to present this plan to the Committee by April, 2011.

    Members of the Curriculum Committee were asked to submit membership, content or implementation suggestions to Eugene Corbett<ecc9h@Virginia.EDU> .   It was suggested that the group also consider how to best integrate Basic Science material into the clerkships and electives as well.  Members also suggested Steve Borowitz or someone from Epic be included in the Working Group to help with incorporating Epic into clinical performance.

  3. National Board of Medical Examiners.  The scores and corresponding graphs from the NBME Step 2 Clinical Knowledge (CK) exam given in the Academic year July 2009- to June 2010 were distributed.  Results were spectacular as all students passed the examination.  These results are posted on the SOM website:


  4. Elective Evaluation Form.  Since the evaluations became  available on-line in Oasis, narrative comments have diminished significantly.    Faculty comments in the narrative portion of the evaluation are often included in the resident application process.  The Elective Evaluation form in Oasis has recently been modified - moving the  “comment” section to the first item in the evaluation - making it more visible to evaluators.  The entire form may will be reviewed before the 2012-12 year with the goal of making it more concise and user friendly.  It was suggested that the number of questions (18) be decreased to a more manageable number (10-12) in the future.

  5. Attendance Policy.  The Student Attendance Policy has been modified due to the implementation of the new curriculum and the new College system.  The revisions to the policy were reviewed with the Curriculum Committee.


    Members had several suggestions to make the policy clearer.  Bill Wilson will circulate the policy to the Clerkship Directors and provide specific suggestions after it is reviewed.  For instance, it was suggested emphasizing in each venue that the two excused days in a course or clerkship are only to be used in cases of illness, compelling personal or family issue, professional meeting or public service. The use of such days is a matter of academic professionalism. Clerkship Directors in particular need to know about planned absences as early as possible and students should provide this information as soon as it is available.  Rescheduling subject exams in the clerkships is not an option so students should make every effort to attend on the date scheduled.

Donald J. Innes, Jr., M.D.