Practical Strategies for Assessing Curricular Integration
Practical Strategies for Assessing Curricular Integration in the UME Curriculum
Stephanie Swanberg, MSI, AHIP; Keith Engwall, MS LIS, AHIP; Gustavo Patino, MD, PhD; Robin Rivest, MEd, MBA Oakland University William Beaumont School of Medicine Rochester, MI
Disclosures • None of the session presenters have anything to disclose…
Objectives • Review definitions and benefits of curriculum integration • Summarize processes for approaching analysis of integration in the curriculum • Recognize the unique skills and expertise needed in successfully approaching integration analysis from multiple departments and fields • Share and discuss best practices and strategies for implementing and assessing curriculum integration at their own institutions
Overview of Today’s Session 8:45 – 8:50am
Overview of Curriculum Integration
8:50 – 9:05am
Summary of Integration Initiatives at OUWB Discussion • Small group discussions (20 min) • Large group takeaways (5 min)
9:05 – 9:30am
OVERVIEW OF INTEGRATION
Preferred Definition
“a fully synchronous, trans-disciplinary delivery of information between the foundational sciences and the applied sciences throughout all years of a medical school curriculum” --Brauer & Ferguson, 2015
Benefits of Integration FACULTY • Increase faculty communication and collaboration – Particularly among faculty from different disciplines/ specialties
• Share teaching responsibilities • Reduce redundancy in delivered content (Bandaranayake 2011)
STUDENTS • Increase knowledge retention • Practice knowledge application • Encourage creative & critical thinking • Reduce redundancy in learned content
Recommended Reading • The Integrated Curriculum in Medical Education: AMEE Guide No.96 (Medical Teacher, 2015) • The Integrated Medical Curriculum by Raja Bandaranayake (Book, 2011)
INTEGRATION AT OUWB
Curriculum Decision-Making Curriculum Committee
Curriculum Evaluation Subcommittee
Discipline Teams
Curriculum Integration Subcommittee
Curriculum Review Ad Hoc Groups
M1/M2 Curriculum Subcommittee
Course & Clerkship Directors
M3/M4 Curriculum Subcommittee
Integration Committee CHARGE: To review and advise the Curriculum Committee and ultimately the Associate Dean for Medical Education and the Dean of the School of Medicine on the entire four year undergraduate medical curriculum as a continuum, specifically addressing integration between basic sciences and the clinical sciences
Integration Committee MEMBERSHIP: •
5 biomedical sciences faculty
•
5 clinical faculty
•
Ex-Officio: • •
•
Associate & Assistant Deans for Medical Education Directors of Curriculum Data Management, Student Assessment, & Curriculum Evaluation
M1 – M4 Student Representatives
Integration at OUWB VERTICAL • Integrating basic & clinical science including: – Early exposure to clinical content and experiences in M1/M2 years – Revisit basic science content in M3/M4 years
(Brauer & Ferguson 2015)
HORIZONTAL • Integrating disciplines, topics, and subjects – e.g.: organ system courses
• Coordinating content across simultaneous courses
Goal = Spiral Integration M4
Year
M3
Year
M2
Guided Practice
Experiential Learning
Year
Attitudes Skills
M1 (Engwall 2016)
Year
Instruction Knowledge
Recent Committee Projects • Curriculum Mapping Analysis
• Integration Topic Reports
• Content Sequencing Review
Datasets and Tools
Faculty!
CURRICULUM MAPPING ANALYSIS
Curriculum Mapping Analysis CURRICULUM • Supports our mission to enable students to become skillful, ethical, and compassionate physicians
CURRICULUM MAP •
Shows how we support the delivery of an outstanding curriculum
ANALYSIS 1. Are all competencies sufficiently supported? 2. How do we compare nationally? 3. How is this changing?
Mapping Analysis Competency Domains
Selecting a Common Language Standardized Vocabulary / Keywords • MedBiquitous Standardized Vocabulary – Instructional Methods – Assessment Methods – Resources
• Reviewed multiple terms and established a set of keywords to be mapped to every learning session • Hand-mapped keywords to National Library of Medicine’s Medical Subject Headings (MeSH)
Selecting a Common Language
61
Disciplines
34
LCME Hot Topics
388 Topics
483
Keywords
INTEGRATION TOPIC REPORTS
Purpose Review and report on inclusion and coverage of ‘integrated topics’ in the OUWB curriculum • Promote awareness of curriculum • Promote communication • Identify potential gaps • Identify redundancies
Data Gathering Process Director of Curriculum Data Management provides: • OASIS data reports • AAMC national reporting data
Committee Member cross-checks OASIS data with: • Moodle • iSeek • Hand searching of syllabi • Communication with relevant faculty
Library Faculty Committee Member searches: • Existing literature for approaches at other schools
Sample Report: Abuse
• Request driven by faculty/leadership/Provost Office proposal • Data collection process involves Office of Medical Education and Curriculum Integration subcommittee • Content of report – Instruction on Abuse in the OUWB Curriculum – Abuse curriculum benchmarked at other medical schools – Bibliography of literature on abuse curricula in Medical and Health Sciences education
Topic Areas Reviewed • • • • • • • • • • •
Abuse Cultural Competency Health Care Economics & Administration Health Care Systems & Delivery Leadership Medical Jurisprudence/Medico-Legal Topics Military Health Pain Management PRISM Topics (wellness, career guidance, finances, reflection) Professionalism Sexual Health
CONTENT SEQUENCING REVIEW
Purpose Review the sequencing of topics within and across courses in the M1 year • • • •
Reviews session titles and objectives Identify potential improvements in sequencing Recommend changes Benefit student learning & retention if content is delivered in more cohesive way
Process • Review sessions • Recommend changes • Review and approve recommendations • Present to Course Directors • Collect responses & finalize changes
Task Force
Curriculum Integra>on SubcommiAee
Course Directors
Curriculum CommiAee
Sample Recommendations • Align neurologic exam in Practice of Medicine course with Neuroscience course • Reorganize sequence of sessions between the basic anatomy & biomedical foundation courses • Move nutritional assessment from M1 to M2 year to align with GI and Endocrine courses
DISCUSSION
What strategies or practices does your institution use for continuously assessing curricular integration?
Small Group Discussion 9:05 – 9:10am
Individual Brainstorm: 1 or 2 integration assessment practices
9:10 – 9:25am
Small Group Breakout: Divide into groups to discuss and share
9:25 – 9:30am
Share Group Takeaways
Wrap-Up • What are some ‘take-home’ messages from this session? • What action items will you take back to your institution? • What resources do you need to assist you with this process? • What colleagues have you just met who could work with you to implement new strategies or help you with resources?
Contact Information •
Stephanie Swanberg, MSI, AHIP ([email protected]) – Assistant Professor, Information Literacy & eLearning Librarian; Chair, Curriculum Integration Subcommittee
•
Keith Engwall, MS LIS, AHIP ([email protected]) – Assistant Professor, Web & Emerging Technologies Librarian; Member, Curriculum Integration Subcommittee
•
Gustavo Patino, MD, PhD ([email protected]) – Assistant Professor; Incoming Chair, Curriculum Integration Subcommittee
•
Robin Rivest, MBA, MEd ([email protected]) – Director of Curriculum Data Management; Ex-Officio, Curriculum Integration Subcommittee
References • Bandaranayake RC. The Integrated Medical Curriculum. Boca Raton, Florida: CRC Press; 2011. • Brauer DG, Ferguson KJ. The integrated curriculum in medical education: AMEE Guide No.96. Med Teach. 2015;37(4):312-22. • Engwall K, Rivest R, Patino G. An investigation of graph databases in curriculum data analysis. AAMC GIR Information Technology In Academic Medicine Conference, Toronto, Ontario, June 2016.
Stephanie Swanberg, MSI, AHIP; Keith Engwall, MS LIS, AHIP; Gustavo Patino, MD, PhD; Robin Rivest, MEd, MBA Oakland University William Beaumont School of Medicine Rochester, MI
Disclosures • None of the session presenters have anything to disclose…
Objectives • Review definitions and benefits of curriculum integration • Summarize processes for approaching analysis of integration in the curriculum • Recognize the unique skills and expertise needed in successfully approaching integration analysis from multiple departments and fields • Share and discuss best practices and strategies for implementing and assessing curriculum integration at their own institutions
Overview of Today’s Session 8:45 – 8:50am
Overview of Curriculum Integration
8:50 – 9:05am
Summary of Integration Initiatives at OUWB Discussion • Small group discussions (20 min) • Large group takeaways (5 min)
9:05 – 9:30am
OVERVIEW OF INTEGRATION
Preferred Definition
“a fully synchronous, trans-disciplinary delivery of information between the foundational sciences and the applied sciences throughout all years of a medical school curriculum” --Brauer & Ferguson, 2015
Benefits of Integration FACULTY • Increase faculty communication and collaboration – Particularly among faculty from different disciplines/ specialties
• Share teaching responsibilities • Reduce redundancy in delivered content (Bandaranayake 2011)
STUDENTS • Increase knowledge retention • Practice knowledge application • Encourage creative & critical thinking • Reduce redundancy in learned content
Recommended Reading • The Integrated Curriculum in Medical Education: AMEE Guide No.96 (Medical Teacher, 2015) • The Integrated Medical Curriculum by Raja Bandaranayake (Book, 2011)
INTEGRATION AT OUWB
Curriculum Decision-Making Curriculum Committee
Curriculum Evaluation Subcommittee
Discipline Teams
Curriculum Integration Subcommittee
Curriculum Review Ad Hoc Groups
M1/M2 Curriculum Subcommittee
Course & Clerkship Directors
M3/M4 Curriculum Subcommittee
Integration Committee CHARGE: To review and advise the Curriculum Committee and ultimately the Associate Dean for Medical Education and the Dean of the School of Medicine on the entire four year undergraduate medical curriculum as a continuum, specifically addressing integration between basic sciences and the clinical sciences
Integration Committee MEMBERSHIP: •
5 biomedical sciences faculty
•
5 clinical faculty
•
Ex-Officio: • •
•
Associate & Assistant Deans for Medical Education Directors of Curriculum Data Management, Student Assessment, & Curriculum Evaluation
M1 – M4 Student Representatives
Integration at OUWB VERTICAL • Integrating basic & clinical science including: – Early exposure to clinical content and experiences in M1/M2 years – Revisit basic science content in M3/M4 years
(Brauer & Ferguson 2015)
HORIZONTAL • Integrating disciplines, topics, and subjects – e.g.: organ system courses
• Coordinating content across simultaneous courses
Goal = Spiral Integration M4
Year
M3
Year
M2
Guided Practice
Experiential Learning
Year
Attitudes Skills
M1 (Engwall 2016)
Year
Instruction Knowledge
Recent Committee Projects • Curriculum Mapping Analysis
• Integration Topic Reports
• Content Sequencing Review
Datasets and Tools
Faculty!
CURRICULUM MAPPING ANALYSIS
Curriculum Mapping Analysis CURRICULUM • Supports our mission to enable students to become skillful, ethical, and compassionate physicians
CURRICULUM MAP •
Shows how we support the delivery of an outstanding curriculum
ANALYSIS 1. Are all competencies sufficiently supported? 2. How do we compare nationally? 3. How is this changing?
Mapping Analysis Competency Domains
Selecting a Common Language Standardized Vocabulary / Keywords • MedBiquitous Standardized Vocabulary – Instructional Methods – Assessment Methods – Resources
• Reviewed multiple terms and established a set of keywords to be mapped to every learning session • Hand-mapped keywords to National Library of Medicine’s Medical Subject Headings (MeSH)
Selecting a Common Language
61
Disciplines
34
LCME Hot Topics
388 Topics
483
Keywords
INTEGRATION TOPIC REPORTS
Purpose Review and report on inclusion and coverage of ‘integrated topics’ in the OUWB curriculum • Promote awareness of curriculum • Promote communication • Identify potential gaps • Identify redundancies
Data Gathering Process Director of Curriculum Data Management provides: • OASIS data reports • AAMC national reporting data
Committee Member cross-checks OASIS data with: • Moodle • iSeek • Hand searching of syllabi • Communication with relevant faculty
Library Faculty Committee Member searches: • Existing literature for approaches at other schools
Sample Report: Abuse
• Request driven by faculty/leadership/Provost Office proposal • Data collection process involves Office of Medical Education and Curriculum Integration subcommittee • Content of report – Instruction on Abuse in the OUWB Curriculum – Abuse curriculum benchmarked at other medical schools – Bibliography of literature on abuse curricula in Medical and Health Sciences education
Topic Areas Reviewed • • • • • • • • • • •
Abuse Cultural Competency Health Care Economics & Administration Health Care Systems & Delivery Leadership Medical Jurisprudence/Medico-Legal Topics Military Health Pain Management PRISM Topics (wellness, career guidance, finances, reflection) Professionalism Sexual Health
CONTENT SEQUENCING REVIEW
Purpose Review the sequencing of topics within and across courses in the M1 year • • • •
Reviews session titles and objectives Identify potential improvements in sequencing Recommend changes Benefit student learning & retention if content is delivered in more cohesive way
Process • Review sessions • Recommend changes • Review and approve recommendations • Present to Course Directors • Collect responses & finalize changes
Task Force
Curriculum Integra>on SubcommiAee
Course Directors
Curriculum CommiAee
Sample Recommendations • Align neurologic exam in Practice of Medicine course with Neuroscience course • Reorganize sequence of sessions between the basic anatomy & biomedical foundation courses • Move nutritional assessment from M1 to M2 year to align with GI and Endocrine courses
DISCUSSION
What strategies or practices does your institution use for continuously assessing curricular integration?
Small Group Discussion 9:05 – 9:10am
Individual Brainstorm: 1 or 2 integration assessment practices
9:10 – 9:25am
Small Group Breakout: Divide into groups to discuss and share
9:25 – 9:30am
Share Group Takeaways
Wrap-Up • What are some ‘take-home’ messages from this session? • What action items will you take back to your institution? • What resources do you need to assist you with this process? • What colleagues have you just met who could work with you to implement new strategies or help you with resources?
Contact Information •
Stephanie Swanberg, MSI, AHIP ([email protected]) – Assistant Professor, Information Literacy & eLearning Librarian; Chair, Curriculum Integration Subcommittee
•
Keith Engwall, MS LIS, AHIP ([email protected]) – Assistant Professor, Web & Emerging Technologies Librarian; Member, Curriculum Integration Subcommittee
•
Gustavo Patino, MD, PhD ([email protected]) – Assistant Professor; Incoming Chair, Curriculum Integration Subcommittee
•
Robin Rivest, MBA, MEd ([email protected]) – Director of Curriculum Data Management; Ex-Officio, Curriculum Integration Subcommittee
References • Bandaranayake RC. The Integrated Medical Curriculum. Boca Raton, Florida: CRC Press; 2011. • Brauer DG, Ferguson KJ. The integrated curriculum in medical education: AMEE Guide No.96. Med Teach. 2015;37(4):312-22. • Engwall K, Rivest R, Patino G. An investigation of graph databases in curriculum data analysis. AAMC GIR Information Technology In Academic Medicine Conference, Toronto, Ontario, June 2016.
