Academic medicine : journal of the Association of American Medical Colleges
-
In 1997, five years after a major curricular reform at the University of Michigan Medical School, the authors revisited the Goals for Medical Education (written by faculty to guide the reform process) to identify factors that had facilitated or hindered their achievement. By reviewing responses to identical questionnaires circulated to faculty in 1993 and again in 1997, they learned that considerably more lectures were being used to deliver curricular content in the first-year curriculum than the faculty thought was ideal, and that less social science, humanities, and ethics material was being presented in the first year than the faculty thought was ideal. The authors also learned that consensus between faculty basic scientists and faculty clinicians about the content that would make up an ideal first-year curriculum had diverged since adoption of the new curriculum. ⋯ Based on faculty comments and the school's experience with centralized governance and centralized funding, the authors propose a direct linkage between institutional funding to departments and the teaching effort of faculty in the departments, and sufficient, centralized funding to relieve pressure on faculty and to foster educational creativity. They maintain that this may be the most effective way to guarantee ongoing innovation, support interdisciplinary teaching, and subsequently move the curriculum and teachers completely away from content that is isolated within traditional department structures. At the same time they acknowledge that changing faculty attitudes presents a challenge.
-
To explore what contributions to scholarship teacher-clinician faculty list in the portfolios that they use as evidence for promotion. ⋯ The academic culture at Harvard Medical School has shifted from promotion based solely on original scholarship to promotion based on a broad array of educational contributions. The faculty, as they seek promotion, create portfolios that list written scholarship, teaching, and service at the local, regional, and national levels and at all ranks of promotion.
-
Little is known about how clinicians find common ground in conflicts with their patients or how educators can teach physicians-in-training to do so. The authors set out to create a conceptual model for the process of finding common ground. ⋯ This hierarchical, multilevel biopsychosocial approach allows the clinician to identify the level in the system at which a conflict has arisen. This clarifies the strategies for resolution, making it easier for patient and doctor to find common ground. This may also be a useful heuristic model for teaching such skills to physicians-in-training.