As the world changes rapidly, so too must a school’s curriculum. This cyclical process of changing a curriculum is often challenging and can be hampered by several factors, including politics, poor policymaking and inertia. In a medical education setting, curriculum change may be initiated by a committee or an individual faculty member and the decision to change can often be met with resistance, opposition and questions of feasibility.
Significant curricular change, like the development of new curriculum, is a complex endeavor that requires a coordinated effort between institutional, programmatic and classroom curriculum planning. Moreover, curriculum change must be a bottom-up rather than top-down effort and must involve the active participation of teachers in planning and deliberative knowing (MacDonald, 2003).
During a formal interview with a random sample of clinical and basic science faculty at our college, respondents were asked about their knowledge of the five new curriculum design elements that the Curriculum Review Committee had established as the foundation for its curriculum reform. Respondents also were asked about their management concerns relating to resources, student and faculty time, assessment and evaluation and faculty development and training.
Although many of the respondents were aware that the Curriculum Review Committee was considering curriculum reform, a substantial number did not recognize the five curriculum design elements and had limited or no knowledge of the specific decisions the Committee had made to guide their curriculum revision efforts. This lack of understanding is problematic because it may inhibit the ability to implement a successful and long lasting curriculum change.
About the Author
