1 / 29

Curriculum Evaluation

Curriculum Evaluation. Reverend Dr David Taylor Director of Quality Enhancement School of Medical Education University of Liverpool. And minister of St. Michael and All Angels, Altcar. Why me?. I am responsible for quality enhancement of the medical school

djacobson
Download Presentation

Curriculum Evaluation

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. Curriculum Evaluation Reverend Dr David Taylor Director of Quality Enhancement School of Medical Education University of Liverpool

  2. And minister ofSt. Michael and All Angels, Altcar

  3. Why me? • I am responsible for quality enhancement of the medical school • I am a visitor for the UK General Medical Council

  4. Evaluation of • Course components • Course/programme • Staff

  5. Two Considerations • Process • What • How well • Product • Outcomes • Knowledge, skills and attitudes • Fit for purpose

  6. Process in the UK • Internal • All components of the course • University • Annual programme monitoring • Periodic review (every 5 years) • External – the General Medical Council • Twice in any 10 year period

  7. Internal University GMC

  8. Internal • Process (Quantitative and qualitative) • Student evaluation of components • Student evaluation of teaching staff • Staff evaluation of components • Product • Student performance in assessment • Against definable/defendable standards

  9. Annual • Based on a Self-evaluation document under 9 headings • Introduction • Progress from last years actions • Feedback from staff • Feedback from students • Feedback from most recent graduates • Programme information • External examiners reports and action on them • Areas of good practice • Statistical commentary

  10. Periodic Review • Every 5 years the course is reviewed by a senior team • Aims and outcomes • Curriculum • Assessment • Enhancement • Learning and teaching • Student progression • Learning resources

  11. External - GMC • Basic information and committee structures • Curricular outcomes, content and structure • Delivering the curriculum • Student support guidance and feedback • Assessing student performance • Student health and conduct • Reflecting modern society

  12. How to make sure the plan comes together David Taylor Liverpool

  13. In the UK there is little flexibility • The GMC have produced two documents • Tomorrow’s Doctors • The New Doctor • Between them they define what we have to make sure the students know

  14. Our handbook gives a generic syllabus • Subject knowledge & understanding • As ‘core’, students will be able to synthesize, appraise, explain, and apply the relevant information/evidence about: • the structure and mechanisms of the body in health and disease, from molecules up to the whole organism related to: • normal and abnormal structure and function of the body and its defence mechanisms; the natural history, symptoms, and signs of disease; and the biological rationale for therapy and the processes underlying its complications • variability in the role of the determinants of health and disease, the presentation of disease, and the response to therapy • clinical diagnosis and management of common conditions • The interrelationships of social, psychological, economic, political, environmental, cultural factors on health and disease

  15. Our first step • Was to decide which 200 cases a student would need to be familiar with when they graduated • We finally agreed on about 208

  16. Core Cases

  17. Then • We decided which cases the students would study through PBL

  18. PBL modules

  19. Scenario

  20. Then • The students determine the learning objectives in their PBL groups – they can see every groups’ learning objectives

  21. Learning objectives

  22. Which we examine

  23. Each year • We review the cases in the light of the learning objectives the students are obtaining • And the examination results • And change the cases accordingly • Or even the course!

  24. As part of a long term project • We compared the supervisors view of the competencies of the graduates from our traditional course and the first cohort of our new curriculum students • A series of papers are coming out this summer (winter…)

  25. Each year • We review the content of one of the four subject themes • Structure and function • Individuals, groups and societies • Population perspective • Professional and personal development • A senior committee of subject specialists does the initial work • Then the programme team makes the agreed changes

  26. Periodic review • 2006 years 1 & 2 • 2007 years 3 & 4 • 2008 year 5 • 2009 whole programme • university plus external advisors • General Medical Council • 2010 year without review! • 2011 I will be 55 …

More Related