PRINCIPLES OF MEDICINE/
CONTENT THREAD LEADER MEETING
New committee structure: Dr. Don Innes has requested that the Principles of Medicine Committee morph into a new dual function committee that represents both the traditional course directors (until such time as we complete the old medical curriculum for the Class of 2013) and the Content Thread Coordinators for the new (Next Generation) curriculum, which commences with the Class of 2014. This committee will continue to report to the Curriculum Committee, as will the separate, new Committee of System Leaders. While many of the Content Thread Coordinators are already members of this committee (because of their previous role as course directors), we are adding many other Content Thread Leaders, in areas such as Complementary and Alternative Medicine, Cultural Competency, Dermatology, Geriatrics, Infectious Diseases, Oncology, Pain Management, Palliative Care, Professionalism and Ethics, Public Health, Radiology, Surgery and Toxicology. The complete list of Content Thread Leaders can be found at:
Scroll down past the list of System Leaders.
This was the first meeting of the new combined committee.
Content Thread Leader Job Description: Dr. Innes distributed an updated “Content Thread Leader Job Description” which was discussed in detail and occupied most of the meeting.
a. One item that attracted much attention was the fact that this document referred to the System Leaders under a new title of “Integrated Clinical Sciences Leaders”. Concern was expressed by some members of the committee that this title tended to downplay the importance of the basic sciences, which have always constituted a significant portion of the pre-Clerkship curriculum.
b. Content Thread leaders should be pro-active in contacting and interacting with the leadership of the various Organ Systems and in providing Learning objectives for their content areas. This led to a discussion about who has primary responsibility for choosing and writing learning objectives. The Content Thread Leader Job Description states that “Content Thread Leaders assist the Integrated Clinical Sciences Leaders to determine the content and learning objectives of their discipline within each unit.” This is a collaborative task. It was pointed out that if Content Thread Leaders have interesting ideas for topics and activities that should be included in the pre-Clerkship medical curriculum, they should go directly to the appropriate system leaders (Integrated Clinical Sciences Leaders).
c. Considerable discussion took plan regarding the last two statements in the job description:
i Content Thread Leaders report to the Curriculum Committee and their Chair as appropriate.
ii. Content Thread Leaders are evaluated by the Curriculum Committee and their Chair as appropriate.
Teaching spaces for the Organ System Units in the new curriculum:
Reference was made back to a recommendation made by the Principles of Medicine Committee to the Curriculum Committee and approved by the Curriculum Committee at their meeting of April 27, 2006 and reflected in the Curriculum Committee minutes as:
“Motion from the Principles of Medicine Committee. A motion from the Principles of Medicine Committee regarding the new educational space was discussed.
Background: The Claude Moore Medical Education Building is currently in the design phase. The plan is to have two large teaching spaces, each large enough to hold an entire medical school class. One is being called the Large Lecture Room and one is being called a Large Learning Studio. In recent meetings of the Building Committee with the Architects, it appears that the Large Learning Studio will not be designed in such a manner as to accommodate traditional lecture presentations.
Motion: "The Principles of Medicine Committee believes that it is essential to have two large teaching spaces available (each accommodating an entire medical class) that are capable of being optimally configured so as to allow the medical school faculty to present simultaneously a "traditional" lecture format presentation to both the 1st and 2nd year medical school classes."
This proposal was voted on with 25 in support of the motion; 1 opposed to the motion. All course directors and co-course directors for all 1st and 2nd year courses are represented in this vote.
Elaboration on the Motion:
The members of the Principles of Medicine Committee, being the course directors for all the courses in the early part of the medical curriculum, embrace innovation and currently teach in a variety of ways. These educational leaders in the School of Medicine welcome facilities that will open up new teaching modes, but not ones that will force the faculty to abandon any of the existing modes of teaching. They want the flexibility to be able to continue to utilize existing modes of teaching, including lecture format, while at the same time experimenting with new ones.
The motion above requests that two large teaching spaces, each with the potential to be configured for a traditional lecture (among other things) always be available to the faculty. Even if the amount of lecturing we now do were to be drastically reduced, it would be very likely that there would be many times when the medical educators teaching 1st and 2nd year classes would want to use the lecture format at the same time. The course directors of one class do not want their scheduling dictated by the teaching of the other class. The two teaching spaces compatible with a lecturing format need not both be in the new medical education building, although that has definite appeal. If the architects and planners and Deans do not want to design both large teaching spaces in the new building so as to allow (at least for a portion of the time) for a lecture format, another option must be provided. One such option is to provide an additional large teaching space elsewhere in the medical center that would be compatible with lecture format teaching for an entire medical class (such as a re-designed old medical school auditorium or a re-designed Jordan Hall auditorium) but the medical curriculum would have to have priority for use of that space.
The Curriculum Committee discussed the motion and fully supports the proposal. “
A discussion of space assignments for the pre-Clerkship portion of the Next Generation Curriculum was prefaced with the following table:
For the 2010-2011 academic year, Dr. Innes has assigned the Large Learning Studio in the new medical education building to the Class of 2014 (the 1st class under the new Next Generation Curriculum; their 1st year of that curriculum) and has assigned the lecture hall in the new medical education building to the Class of 2013 (last class under the “old” curriculum; their 2nd year of that curriculum). Based on the agreement with the Curriculum Committee cited above, the Class of 2014 will also have access to a lecture hall outside the new medical education building (either the Old Medical School Auditorium or one of the old Jordan Hall auditoriums (1-5 or 1-14). Hence both classes will have access to a lecture hall at the same time should that be necessary. Other activities for the Class of 2014 will be held in the clinical skills floor and the Simulation Center floor of the new medical education building, as well as the Gross Anatomy labs, the 2nd floor Jordan Hall medical student teaching labs and the small group rooms in the Health Sciences Library.
A different situation will ensue in the 2011-2012 academic year, which will be the first time that we will have two classes (Class of 2014 and Class of 2015) under the new Next Generation Curriculum. For one semester (the 3rd semester for the Class of 2014 and the 1st semester for the Class 2015, these two classes will be competing for the single Large Learning Studio. In addition, they will have access to two lecture halls (one inside the new medical education building and one outside the new medical education building (if needed). This may represent a complex scheduling problem. While the idea has been raised in the past to have “double sessions”, one medical class meeting in the mornings and one medical class meeting in the afternoons, this approach has many drawbacks and Dr. Innes assured the committee that this approach has been ruled out.