Curriculum Inventory Administrators’ Group May 11, 2016 Terri Cameron, MA Director, Curriculum Programs

May CI in Context: Medical Humanities in US Medical School Featured Report: Interview Processes Used in Medical School Admissions Best Practice for ‘Gateway Exams’ in the upload Using Program Description to Designate Approval of School Name linked to CI Reports April - May Report Requests CI Data Analysis Curriculum Inventory Task Force CI Research Group CI at May – June Medical Education Meetings Medical School Highlight: University of Arizona - Phoenix Next meeting: Wednesday, June 8, 1 pm ET Agenda

CI in Context: May 2016 Medical Humanities in US and Canadian Medical Schools Christine Y. Todd, MD, Southern Illinois University School of Medicine

Featured CI Report: Interview Processes Used in Medical School Admissions

Best Practice for ‘Gateway Exams’ in the upload Gateway Exams: Major Exams for Promotion or Graduation Often multi-day exams Not related to a particular course or clerkship Often a series of unqueued cases Examples: Senior Clinical Competency Exam; CCX; Post-Clerkship Exam

Best Practice for ‘Gateway Exams’ in the upload Documenting Gateway Exams: Separate Sequence Block Duration expected for average student Include all Assessment Methods as Single Event (e.g., All Cases) or Split into Multiple Events (e.g., Case 1, Case 2.) No Instructional Methods Include Keywords for Content if possible Reporting is post-exam and aggregate If exam is split into multiple Academic Levels, reference the AL where most of the exam occurs Use Sequence Block Description to provide innovations, information such as year exam was implemented, etc.

Using Program Description to Designate Approval of School Name linked to CI Reports A Brief History CurrMIT allowed schools to run reports to find schools offering particular content or using particular instructional or assessment methods or resources Received both positively and negatively To expedite implementation of CI and ensure highest participation rate, schools were told all reports would be aggregate Received both positively and negatively

Using Program Description to Designate Approval of School Name linked to CI Reports Solution: Allow schools to choose whether they wish to have their name available for benchmarking and research School name will be in a separate data file – no link to actual data in report Schools Included in This Report link will include: School Name, Curriculum Dean Contact Information, Primary CI Contact Information

Using Program Description to Designate Approval of School Name linked to CI Reports Implementation August 1, 2016, for Data: Use Program Description to include the text: ReleaseName=Y OR ReleaseName=N No ReleaseName text will be the same as ReleaseName=N This should not require changes to programs – simply adding text to a field For systems that do not have this option, an can be sent to will need to be sent each year.

Reports Requested April – May 2016 Anatomy Biostatistics CEPAER Community Service Cost Awareness Disability Endocrine Giving Bad News Health Policy History of Medicine Medical Marijuana Ophthalmology Palliative Care Service Learning Substance Abuse

CI Data Analysis Issue 7: Use of Nested Sequence Blocks Clerkship Rotations Electives Selectives Sequence Blocks in Academic Level Issue 6: Tracks and Use of ‘Parallel Option’

CI Task Force Update: April 27 th Meeting Reviewed overview of participant thoughts on each element Divided DCI, participants will be providing examples of data that they would give as answers During our next meeting, participant-provided answers will be compared to first-pass AAMC calculations Next Meeting is May 25

CI Research Group 10-member committee composed of: Medical education researchers at our member medical schools RIME, MESRE, and SDRME. Charge: Review data collected by the Curriculum Inventory to set a national medical school curriculum research agenda. Research agenda will be used to determine: are we collecting the appropriate data? are we collecting data in a manner that supports the research agenda? what should be considering for trend reporting? what statistical questions users might have as they review CIR charts. what annotations would make curriculum data clearer. options for ‘big data’ as it relates to what types of peripheral data can be collected (and how to collect it) to create a more complete picture of curriculum data.

CI Research Group Task Force Steering Committee Members: Jorie Colbert-Gertz, PhD; University of Utah (SDRME) Carolyn DuFault, PhD; Washington University in St. Louis Rachel Ellaway, PhD; University of Calgary Jeanne Farnan, MD, MHPE; University of Chicago Colleen Grochowski, PhD; Duke University Tanya Horsley, PhD, Royal College of Physicians and Surgeons of Canada (RIME) Brian Mavis, PhD; Michigan State University Martin Pusic, MD, PhD, New York University (MESRE) Valerie Smothers, MS, MedBiquitous (ex officio) Final two members have been invited; awaiting responses

CI Webinar Schedule Curriculum Mapping Workshop: 1-2:30 pm ET Thursday, May 19 Documenting Clerkships and Electives 1- 2:30 pm ET Monday, May 23

CI at 2016 Medical Education Meetings Complete list of meetings on CI Website: Slides are being posted as they become available Presenters will be asked to present at upcoming CIAG webinars Developers are strongly encouraged to attend the CI Developer Workshop at either the GIR or MedBiquitous conference Conference details on CI website

CI Upload Portal opens August 1; closes September 30. Staging open now Goals: US medical schools: 100 percent participation (148) Canadian medical schools: 50 percent participation (9) Osteopathic School Pilot: 30 percent participation (10)

The University of Arizona College of Medicine – Phoenix Paul R. Standley, Ph.D. Assistant Dean – Curricular Affairs Professor – Basic Medical Sciences and Physiology

Brief History – Tucson college sent Year 3 and 4 students to Phoenix 2007 – first class matriculated under branch campus 4-year curriculum 2011 – first class graduated under branch campus curriculum 2013 – preliminary accreditation as stand alone college under UA banner; first class matriculates 2015 – provisional accreditation 2017 – first class to graduate under separate accreditation

In last 10 years Three curriculum management systems One full accreditation for joint program One preliminary accreditation for COM-P One provisional accreditation for COM-P One full accreditation submission October 2016 for COM-P Current class size: 80 students/year Current CMS: one45

Our Curriculum

Objective Mapping COM faculty approved 47 Educational Program Objectives (EPO) 6 competencies: Patient Care; Medical Knowledge; Critical Appraisal / QI; Interpersonal Communication; Professionalism; Societal Awareness / Responsibilities Curriculum Committee approves all Courses’ Learning Objectives (CLO) Course directors approve all Session Learning Objectives (SLO) Map = SLO -> CLO -> EPO -> Competency

Example of Objective Map

Content Tagging Disciplines Combined Curricular Topics (CCT) What we wish to track What we must track for accreditation purposes Course directors who attend ALL sessions tag all relevant content after faculty development session Choose all that apply…

Disciplines – drop downs in one45

CCT Tag List (dropdowns)

Year days in- and out-patient patient care Procedures and Diagnoses lists for each clerkship Examples: P = chest pain; shortness of breath D = lumbar puncture; nutritional counseling. Goal = common discipline and CCT tags as well as “session objectives” Various instructional methods per one45 (30) -> CI crosswalk -> instructional methods (5) 0.5 days “didactic afternoon” Emphasis on flipped classroom, CBI, simulation, etc. Typical SLO -> CLO -> EPO -> Competency

Using CI Reports to Benchmark our Initiatives

Questions?

Wednesday, June 8, 1 pm ET (Second Wednesday of each month, 1 pm ET) Registration Links posted in Training and Resources section of Please send agenda items to Next meeting: