John Bell, 2nd year medical
student presented several issues from the medical student
Proposal for student involvement in updating faculty lecture
handouts. Some faculty lecture handouts are outdated or unclear
or have errors. Since many faculty indicate that exams are based
on lecture handouts, it is important to have accurate, useful lecture
handouts. Proposal is to assign, on a rotating basis, one medical
student for each lecture handout. After each lecture, the entire
medical class will be invited to submit suggestions for changes.
The designated student will compile all the comments and provide these
to the lecturer to use when revising the handout the following
Another student pointed out that, rather than errors, the global
organization of the lecture notes are of more concern to many
Dr. John Gazewood pointed out that it would be useful to give the
compiled corrections to the medical class at the same time as the
lecturer so that the same students who invest the work to improve the
handouts would also benefit from their efforts.
Dr. Julie Turner suggested that students be paid to do this.
Dr. Howard Kutchai pointed out that most faculty lecture handouts are
already pretty good, that students already do a good job of providing
feedback to lecturers and course directors and worries that the
proposed, rather complicated, system is unlikely to continue on from
class to class. Maybe SMEC should lead this effort. Some faculty are
apt to be refractory to change no matter the feedback.
Medical students present noteed that the suggested rotation of the
compiler duties through the entire medical class might not be well
Dr. Julie Turner pointed out that Microbiology does a variation on this
now in that students provide much feedback on the course lecture
handouts and changes are immediately made to HTML versions of the
lecture handouts that are posted on the course web site.
Dr. Julie Turner raised the question of whether it was necessary to
have both a textbook and detailed lecture handouts in a course.
Bob Bloodgood responded that trimmed down courses often do not cover
much of the material in a textbook and lecture handouts are a mechanism
for a lecturer to indicate what he/she feels is important.
Dr. Wendy Golden pointed out that Medical and Molecular genetics is
this year using a panel of 10 1st year students to provide
feedback on the course, including handouts, using a standardized
B.Mr. Bell pointed out that students would be interested in receiving
some feedback from course directors as to what action was taken in
response to medical student evaluations of faculty. Students want
to know that evaluations of faculty are taken seriously. Dr.
Kutchai pointed out that there is an important confidentiality issue
here and students can not expect to be privy to what actions are taken
in response to faculty evaluations. Dr. Bloodgood emphasized that
students evaluations of courses and faculty are taken seriously and
faculty evaluation data are utilized in the promotion and tenure
One medical student suggested that faculty evaluations be given more
often during the semester so that all the evaluations don't pile up at
the end of the semester.
Bloodgood suggested the Principles of Medicine Committee take a look at
the course and faculty evaluations to see if any improvements
need to be made in the forms.
C. Suggestion that there be some sort of master Calendar of Events that
would list upcoming GTAs, UTAs, registration deadline for Medical
Boards, blood draw labs, etc. It would be important to be able to
make last minute notification of schedule changes, etc.
Bob Bloodgood reported on three issues that touch
on our discussions of a new medical school schedule.
A. Dr. Randy Canterbury (Associate Dean for Medical Admissions)
and Beth Bailey (Director of Admissions) were both contacted to get
their feedback about the possibility of starting the first year of
medical school earlier. Both agreed that there would not be a
problem, from an admissions standpoint, with starting the first year of
medical school two weeks earlier in August than is currently the
B. The data were presented from the survey of faculty regarding
the impact that changing the medical school schedule might have on
them.The survey and the data are now available on-line at:
The potential schedule changes that had the least impact on faculty
were: Start 1st
year one week early, end 1st
2 weeks later and start 1st
year one week early.
C. The results of a survey conducted by John Bell of all four
classes of medical students was distributed (see below).
- Don Innes requested that all 1st and 2nd year
courses think about how issues of professionalism can be conveyed to
students through their courses.
- The Office of Student Affairs has agreed to adjust the start dates
for Fall 2004 entry of the 1st year class by one week in
order to accommodate the introduction of Cells to Society this Fall
without changing the amount of time allocated to the rest of the
1st year curriculum during 2004-2005. For Fall, 2004,
Orientation will be held on Monday, Aug 16th and Tuesday Aug
17th, Cells-to-Society will be held on August 18-20 and the regular
courses will begin on Monday, August 23rd. The
major schedule changes for the medical curriculum that we have been
discussing will most likely begin in the 2005-2006 academic year.
The next meeting of the Principles of Medicine Committee will be
held on Wednesday, March 10th, at2:00 PM in Jordan Hall,