Geisinger Commonwealth School of Medicine.

The future of health professions education: Emerging trends in the United States.

Keck School of Medicine of the University of Southern California.

Texas Tech University Health Sciences Center School of Medicine, Lubbock.

This toolkit brings together those with first-hand experience of designing, delivering, evaluating and participating in a Longitudinal Integrated Clerkship (LIC) within a UK Higher Education Institution and those working closely on programmes focussing on Health Education England (HEE)'s and NHS England's national priorities. In August 2022, a collaborative workshop was held for students and tutors participating in a London-based LIC in 2021–2022, faculty with prior experience in running LICs, and HEE representatives. The aim of the workshop was to co-produce a toolkit to guide undergraduate institutions, who may wish to introduce an LIC within their medical school curriculum that aligns to these national priorities. Although this toolkit primarily focuses on a UK audience, we anticipate that other health systems facing a need for similar educational reform may also find use for this toolkit. The NHS Long Term Plan,1 the HEE Future Doctor Report2 and The Enhance Programme3 have outlined key national priorities for the future of health and social care (Figure 1), including how we can train our workforce to deliver these aims. These priorities include embedding generalist skills in early career doctors, so they can better provide person-centred care in the context of complex multi-morbidity, while considering the impact of deep-rooted health inequity and social determinants of health. They can better provide person-centred care in the context of complex multi-morbidity, while considering the impact of deep-rooted health inequity and social determinants of health. This toolkit has been written for medical schools but may also be beneficial for other undergraduate and postgraduate health educators, who are considering setting up longitudinal educational programmes to meet their local and national health and workforce priorities. This document may also enable health and social care providers and third sector organisations, who are partnering up to support educational programmes, to better understand how longitudinal courses may benefit their health priorities. Currently, undergraduate and postgraduate training is fragmented in its provision of educational supervision and patient care. The lack of continuity of relationships with patients, supervisors and peers, can make it harder to effectively address the increasing complexity of multi-morbidity at an individual and population level. Because this fragmentation continues in the educational experience of postgraduates, it has a domino effect on undergraduates placed within those fragmented clinical settings—it becomes easy to see how this cyclical lack of continuity could perpetuate workforce burnout and poor retention.4, 5 This cyclical lack of continuity could perpetuate workforce burnout and poor retention. There is also a need for the future workforce to better understand the effects of health inequity, both at an individual and community level. It is well-recognised that certain groups of patients have poorer health outcomes than others.6 However, a deeper understanding of local population health priorities is difficult to achieve within our current, fragmented teaching and training programmes and instead requires being embedded into a community over a period of time. A deeper understanding of local population health priorities is difficult to achieve within our current, fragmented teaching and training programmes and instead requires being embedded into a community over a period of time. LICs (Figure 2) are an ideal educational model to address the issues of fragmentation of the student experience, and the need for students to have a better grasp of local population health. LICs place a greater emphasis on continuity for students and patients,7 greater responsibility for patient care, with more rewarding outcomes for students/trainees, and their patients and communities.8 Furthermore, many of the LICs in the United Kingdom are based in primary care,9 which provides a fertile ground for students to develop meaningful longitudinal patient relationships, and allows students to be embedded within a local community. The discussions within our workshop were informed by the existing literature on LICs which provides an international lens on how to develop LICs, what benefit they can provide, and their pitfalls.10-12 This toolkit builds on this literature with our lived experience within a UK health care and higher education environment, and aims to re-frame the importance of LICs as an educational model that better aligns to new integrated care priorities in the United Kingdom. For consistency in this toolkit, we use the term 'Longitudinal Integrated Clerkship' as it is most commonly known within the literature. However, there is debate about whether this term is relevant to the UK context and whether a more general term such as 'longitudinal placement' would better capture what currently exists and is achievable within the UK landscape.13 Design & Development of an LIC Evaluation and Research of an LIC To ensure an LIC that is sustainable, it is important to identify and consult with key stakeholders from the outset. Consideration of your institution's culture will also be important to ensure the success of an LIC, particularly with regard to the assessment process and how the LIC will be perceived within the hidden curriculum.14 A co-created mission statement for your LIC can help to ensure that all stakeholders are on the same trajectory. The overarching aim of your LIC is likely to depend on your local context. For example, in your local area, a main driver may be the need to address workforce recruitment and retention. Alternatively, addressing health inequity within underserved communities in the local area may be your main driver. When considering learning outcomes for your LIC, these can be considered under the headings of educational and health outcomes to ensure mutual benefit for those served by health systems and educational institutions. Similarly to a programme's mission statement, LIC outcomes are best defined with input from educational, health and community stakeholders. Investment at this stage from all stakeholders will be important as there may be conflicting priorities that will need to be worked through. Educational outcomes should align with the broader priorities and values of your institution, as well as national priorities, such as the Medical Licencing Assessment and those from HEE. Creation of a curriculum blueprint will be useful at this stage. Health outcomes would consider NHS policy documents (such as the Five Year Forward view), as well as local policies relevant to health context. The success of an LIC will depend on how the principles of the longitudinal model are adapted to fit with existing educational and service delivery models in your institution and local area. While there are existing frameworks of what an LIC might look like, these are based on the international literature, and local context should be considered for the successful delivery of an LIC. For example, from current literature, an LIC should be long enough for students to establish meaningful relationships, and Worley et al. suggest that an appropriate length of time should be from 6 to 12 months.15 We would suggest the length of time should be conducive to students having repeated encounters with the same patients, educators and peers to maximise relationships. There is no formal consensus on how 'repeated encounters' should be defined but the aim is for students to experience patient care over time in different settings with different health care practitioners. Facilitating sustained patient–student partnerships across the course of an LIC lies at the heart of this educational model. It is through these partnerships that mutual benefit can be garnered. The aim is for students to experience patient care over time in different settings with different health care practitioners. Table 1 outlines some important factors to consider during the design of your LIC. Consider the overarching outcomes of your LIC. Use this to decide what stage of medical school it is best delivered in. Early years E.g., Key LIC outcome = deeper understanding of the health inequity and preventative care for your population. You may wish to introduce these foundational concepts via an LIC at an early stage of clinical training, when there may be more curriculum space to dedicate to these concepts, and students are establishing their values around health equity. Later years E.g., Key LIC outcome = enhancing preparation for practice in line with national priorities In this case, the LIC may be better suited for those who are about to graduate New medical schools or those undergoing curriculum review may wish to implement an LIC for an entire cohort Medical schools with an established curriculum could pilot an LIC with a small group of students, with a phased roll-out in future years, allowing for improvements in your model if you fully roll out. Or there are many LICs that are small cohort student-selected programmes. If do you choose to run a pilot LIC, consider how you will advertise and recruit prospective students. The format of an LIC can vary internationally. Within the United Kingdom, LIC structure can range from a full time LIC to 1 day a week. Also consider the balance between Consider if your original LIC outcomes can be achieved in your chosen format and whether you can evaluate and assess these outcomes (see below for evaluation and assessment) within the constraints of your given structure. LICs can take place in a variety of settings with one setting usually acting as the main base for student learning Adequate supervision ensures clinical and educational safety for students and the patients they care for. This is an important consideration across all clinical settings. Also consider how undergraduates and postgraduates, and students from different health professions within the same learning environment can be brought together to enhance learning for both groups, e.g., through group supervision, tutorials or patient care. Assessment should be considered from the outset of LIC planning to ensure there is alignment with learning outcomes, as well as medical school and national assessments. Consider How and when these assessments will be reviewed should also be factored into the timetable for students and supervisors. LICs are likely to require a shift in mindset and logistics from the existing culture of learning at your institution, not only from the perspective of students, but also placement supervisors and central faculty. Adequate support for all relevant groups will help to identify early teething problems and ensure smoother transitions during implementation (see Table 2). With any educational intervention, particularly one that is new to an institution, there will be multiple reasons to collect data. For future iterations of the course, it is important to establish what worked well and what could be improved. Broadly, this type of data would be regarded as evaluation. Additionally, different stakeholder groups will have particular outcomes they are interested in, and these data might fall under the category of research. When deciding what data to collect, it is worth looking back at the primary LIC objectives, and planning from the outset how evaluation will be conducted and data collected, alongside the design and development of the overall LIC. This will help make early decisions regarding why the data are being collected, when and from whom, and ensures timely ethics and funding applications. Reviewing the existing literature at this stage will help shape both the LIC and your evaluation and research questions. Kirkpatrick's hierarchy can be a useful heuristic when considering what type of data to collect—for example, collecting qualitative data from different stakeholders on their perceptions and experience of the LIC. You may also choose to collect specific quantitative student or patient outcome data. When deciding who to collect data from, consider the whole range of stakeholders. For example, if a key aim of your LIC is to improve patient access to health care in your local area, it would be important to hear from patients themselves on their experiences. When deciding who to collect data from, consider the whole range of stakeholders. While data are often collected to look at what additional value an intervention provided, it is equally important to ensure no harm has inadvertently been inflicted on stakeholder groups in the process. This is also something to consider when deciding what parameters should be evaluated. The timeframe of data collection is also an important consideration. In keeping with a longitudinal process, some research questions may be better answered by looking at different points across the course, to capture how data change over time. When writing up and presenting data, consider involving all stakeholders in this process. It would be worth looking at presenting and publishing avenues that reach a broad audience—for example, health care arenas, patient and community facing publications, and medical educators. The future health workforce will require new complex skills to manage increasingly complex population needs. Current undergraduate training needs to consider how it is preparing future graduates to develop the skills needed to adapt to the rapidly changing health care landscape. An LIC places continuity and integration at its core and is an ideal educational model to embed these key skills within the curriculum. This, in turn, could help prepare our future workforce in providing person-centred integrated care that meets population need. This toolkit can be used to guide those considering educational reform in line with population need. Finally, it is the collaborative partnerships with students, policy makers, educators, and health and social care providers that will help ensure alignment between population priorities, workforce needs and medical education. Current undergraduate training needs to consider how it is preparing future graduates to develop the skills needed to adapt to the rapidly changing health care landscape. We would like to thank Mohammed-Hareef Asunramu, one of our LIC students, and Monika Gupta from Health Education England's London Enhancing Generalist Skills Team for their contribution to this work. The authors have no conflict of interest to disclose. No data have been used in this submission that would require formal ethical approval. All participants of our workshop have been listed as authors and have contributed and consented to the work.

Progress Notes: One Year in the Future of MedicineAbraham M. NussbaumJohns Hopkins University Press, 2024It was in 1896, not long after his arrival at the new Johns Hopkins School of Medicine, that Sir William Osler introduced the modern clinical clerkship. Until then, clinical instruction often occurred in amphitheaters in which students might outnumber patients by 20 or even 100 to 1. Believing that active, intimate work with patients was necessary to master clinical medicine, Osler imposed a new system in which students rotated among the hospital wards, participating in patient care under the supervision of more experienced physicians.1 When Abraham Flexner catalogued the state of American medical education in 1910, he held up the Johns Hopkins School of Medicine as the ideal for other schools to emulate,2 thus ensuring the primacy of the rotating block clerkship model for the next century.In Progress Notes: One Year in the Future of Medicine, Dr. Abraham Nussbaum, a psychiatrist and Chief Education Officer at Denver Health, describes an alternative to the Oslerian clerkship model: the longitudinal integrated clerkship (LIC). Rather than beginning (and ending) their specialty training every 4-8 weeks, LIC students selectpatients, then follow them wherever they receive care. A laboring mother met on the obstetric ward might then be followed through subsequent visits to the emergency department or her psychiatrist. As Nussbaum explains, LICs aim to overcome the erosion in altruism that occurs over the clinical (“cynical”) years of medical education by teaching students not only from “the textbook of the body,” but also the “textbook of the community.”The setting for Progress Notes is the University of Colorado. The protagonists are 7 third-year medical students embarking upon their LIC. The students’ backgrounds are varied—from native Coloradans to international students, from former schoolteachers to former soccer players. So too are their aspirations: the LIC cohort includes both aspiring internists and ophthalmologists. Yet in Nussbaum's hands, the characterization of the LIC participants is uniformly sympathetic, almost always engaging, and occasionally truly captivating. The author casts a discerning eye on the students, through their small wins and big losses, and conveys the sense of becoming nearly as well as the best first-person accounts in the ‘becoming a physician’ genre. The prose is lively and vivid. For readers who have not personally experienced the everyday drama of clinical clerkships, Nussbaum provides a bird's eye view of what it takes to become a doctor. For readers who have, the authenticity and universality of the students’ experiences will resonate.What is less clear is whether the LIC truly represents the future of medical education. It does at the University of Colorado, where the pilot described in Progress Notes has since been expanded to include all third-year students.3 Yet the LIC concept is not new: some schools have utilized such curricula for over 30 years.4 Despite favorable educational outcomes,5,6 fewer than 1 in 3 MD-granting medical schools even offer LICs, and growth in LICs appeared to have plateaued when last assessed in 2016.7 Readers of Progress Notes will have no difficulty identifying some of the barriers to scalability and sustainability noted in the literature8,9 (eg, both tireless, compassionate preceptors and community-focused students and settings are scarce resources in modern medical education). Yet after completing Progress Notes, readers might also wonder whether the LIC model is really so different than the ideal model for clerkship education that Osler envisioned.Nussbaum conveys that, more than anything else, LICs are intended to promote a patient-centered approach to care. From that standpoint, the LIC seems perfectly aligned with Osler's “natural method of teaching,” in which “the student begins with the patient, continues with the patient, and ends his studies with the patient, using books and lectures as tools, as means to an end.”10

Medical Education Program Highlights Yale School of Medicine (YSM) is committed to the scholarly training of physicians and other health care providers with the goal that they will be the leaders of their generation. Our educational mission is “to educate and inspire scholars and future leaders who will advance the practice of medicine and the biomedical sciences.” Consistent with our commitment to educating scholars and future leaders, we have a class size of 104 students, with 20% in our MD–PhD program. The Yale System creates a highly collaborative learning environment that gives our school its distinct identity and character and makes us unique among medical schools. In place since 1931, it is considered the school’s most powerful educational strength and is a major factor in our ability to consistently attract extraordinarily talented students. In the Yale System, medical students are viewed as mature, highly motivated, and self-directed learners. There is a reduced emphasis on grades and no class rank to limit competition. Instead, self-assessment and collaborative learning are emphasized. There is a flexible curriculum to accommodate individual learning styles and allow students to pursue individual interests. Since 1839, Yale has required a dissertation based on original research. The MD thesis is an essential part of the Yale System, and time for this scholarly activity is built into the curriculum. It is designed to promote scientific inquiry, foster critical thinking, and prepare students for lifelong learning. Importantly, the thesis requirement gives students the opportunity to work closely with faculty in a mentoring relationship. Curriculum In 2015, following 5 years of extensive planning, a new curriculum was implemented. Eight overarching goals form its foundation, focusing on areas essential for successful future practice: Health promotion and disease prevention Mechanisms and treatment of disease Clinical reasoning Patient care Professionalism and communication Responsibility to society Creation and dissemination of knowledge Physician as scientist See Supplemental Digital Appendix 1—Curriculum Overview—at https://links.lww.com/ACADMED/A951. Curriculum changes since 2010 Integrated course curriculum: Basic and clinical science content is organized and integrated across 8 sequential theme-based master courses and 3 longitudinal courses. Interprofessional longitudinal clinical experience: Medical students work with physician associate and nursing students as a team and are directly involved in patient care from the beginning of medical school, with an emphasis on interprofessional education, team-based care, and knowledge of the health care system. Clinical skills: Teaching and assessment of clinical skills is coordinated and integrated across the 4 years of the curriculum, and emphasize competencies in medical history and communications, physical examination, medical procedures, clinical reasoning, and professionalism. Clinical clerkships: A remodeled clerkship year begins earlier in the curriculum; includes integration across disciplines; provides opportunities for greater continuity with patients, teams, and mentorship; and allows students the flexibility to explore career interests. Enhanced flexibility: The final 17 months are an advanced training period where students create schedules based on their individual needs and career choices. This includes time for their research, electives and subinternships, residency interviews, and required USMLE Step examinations. Assessment YSM adopted and incorporated the AAMC’s Physician Competency Reference Set as the expected competencies for our medical students. These competencies map to our overarching goals through the individual learning objectives represented in the courses, clerkships, and electives throughout our curriculum. See Table 1—Program Objectives and Assessment Methods.Table 1: Program Objectives and Assessment MethodsYSM hired an associate director of student assessment to focus on assessment “for learning” while ensuring assessment “of learning.” This approach relies on guided self-assessment, reflection, and self-regulation in learning and professional development, and uses an integrated, developmental, and competency-based approach. In addition, faculty are assisted and supported in the development of various formative and summative assessments used in the curriculum. Pedagogy YSM uses a broad range of pedagogical approaches, including team-based learning, simulation, case-based workshops, standardized patients, iBooks, and augmented and virtual reality, along with more traditional learning approaches using lectures and laboratories. We recently completed a major renovation of education space to support the emphasis on small-group and team-based learning. Clinical experiences Throughout the first year and a half of medical school, students participate in longitudinal clinical experiences focused on communication, professionalism, and the skills of taking a patient-centered history and physical examination. Direct patient contact and small-group tutorials with faculty are highlights of these early clinical experiences. Core clerkships and electives occur at Yale New Haven Hospital and Health System, the VA Connecticut Health Care System, Connecticut Mental Health Center, and Yale University Health Services. In addition, global health electives are available in a variety of international and domestic locations including Appalachia Grundy County, Tennessee; Argentina; Chinle, Arizona Indian Health Service; China; San Francisco Free Clinic; South Africa; and Uganda. Curricular Governance The deputy dean for education is responsible for oversight and coordination of the education programs and services. The Educational Policy and Curriculum Committee is chaired by the associate dean for curriculum. This committee oversees the policies that govern the medical education program, provides centralized oversight and review of the curriculum, and is responsible for ensuring that the curriculum addresses the school’s educational objectives. The curriculum directors coordinate the development, implementation, and review of the curriculum. The integration of content throughout the 4 years is fundamental to their roles. In addition, they chair the Curriculum Review Committees that assesses each component of the curriculum and provides feedback to each course, clerkship, and elective director. The Thesis Committee is chaired by the associate deans for student research and is responsible for the oversight, coordination, and management of the thesis required of all medical students. See Figure 1—Organizational chart of deans.Figure 1: Organizational chart of deans.See Figure 2—Curriculum management and governance.Figure 2: Curriculum management and governance.Education Staff Multiple offices collaborate to support undergraduate medical education, including admissions; curriculum; diversity, inclusion, community engagement, and equity; financial aid; global health education; MD–PhD program; student affairs; and student research. Faculty Development and Support in Education The YSM Teaching and Learning Center (TLC) provides expertise in curriculum development, pedagogy, assessment, and use of learning technologies. The TLC also provides a variety of professional development programs and services to support educators, including: Individual consultations Direct observation of faculty teaching with peer feedback Seminars and workshops on teaching methods Support/mentorship for educational research, grants, and scholarship Letters to the appointments and promotions committees summarizing the educational contributions, leadership, and impact of faculty educators in support of promotion/tenure decisions Initiatives in Progress Since its implementation, the curriculum has been continuously and rigorously evaluated. In response, initiatives currently underway to improve the curriculum include: Health equity and social justice in medicine Sex, gender, and minority health Addiction medicine

Carle Illinois College of Medicine.

State University of New York Upstate Medical University College of Medicine

New York University School of Medicine

Rutgers Robert Wood Johnson Medical School.

INTRODUCTION: Entrustable Professional Activities (EPAs) have been proposed for use in undergraduate medical education. The ability of faculty to entrust students with EPAs may differ between Longitudinal Integrated Clerkships (LICs) and traditional block clerkships. METHODS: Participants were core clerkship faculty, 64 in a LIC and 31 in a sequential block clerkship. We administered a web-based survey at the end of the core clerkship year to measure preceptors’ typical entrustment (on a scale of 0–10) in students for the 13 American Association of Medical Colleges Core EPAs. We compared entrustment between LIC and block faculty using a Mann-Whitney test. RESULTS:LIC faculty were more entrusting of students than block faculty in 12 out of 13 Core EPAs (p DISCUSSION: LIC faculty were more likely than block clerkship faculty to entrust core clerkship students with performance of most EPAs. This finding is likely the result of LIC faculty having increased familiarity with student abilities because of the continuity of supervision and education inherent to LIC. More research is needed to ascertain the specific features of longitudinal clerkships that increase faculty entrustment of students. CONCLUSIONS: Longitudinal educational experiences may facilitate the assessment of medical students with EPAs.

Hailed by supporters as the answer to many challenges facing medical schools and the wider health care system, longitudinal integrated clerkships (LICs) offer a practical and sustainable alternative to more traditional block rotational models. Given this, their popularity as a curricular measure is increasing, although such clerkships remain relatively novel within the United Kingdom. This narrative literature review of international work provides a comprehensive introduction to developing and implementing LICs within medical education. This review generates a practical guide for medical educators with a focus on the development and implementation of LICs within the United Kingdom, on which there is little work. Using illustrated examples and with reference to contemporary literature, it outlines the rationale for considering an LIC within a curriculum, the different types of LIC, barriers and enabling factors to LIC implementation and considers the contemporary application of LIC models within the United Kingdom. The practical guide details key questions educators must consider when developing and implementing an LIC, particularly within the landscape of UK medical education.

Background: Traditionally, clinical learning for medical students consists of short-term and opportunistic encounters with primarily acute-care patients, supervised by an array of clinician preceptors. In response to educational concerns, some medical schools have developed longitudinal placements rather than short-term rotations. Many of these longitudinal placements are also integrated across the core clinical disciplines, are commonly termed longitudinal integrated clerkships (LICs) and often situated in rural locations. This review aimed to explore, analyse and synthesise evidence relating to the effectiveness of longitudinal placements, for medical students in particular to determine which aspects are most critical to successful outcomes.Method: Extensive search of the literature resulted in 1679 papers and abstracts being considered, with 53 papers ultimately being included for review. The review group coded these 53 papers according to standard BEME review guidelines. Specific information extracted included: data relating to effectiveness, the location of the study, number of students involved, format, length and description of placement, the learning outcomes, research design, the impact level for evaluation and the main evaluation methods and findings. We applied a realist approach to consider what works well for whom and under what circumstances.Findings: The early LICs were all community-based immersion programs, situated in general practice and predominantly in rural settings. More recent LIC innovations were situated in tertiary-level specialist ambulatory care in urban settings. Not all placements were integrated across medical disciplines but were longitudinal in relation to location, patient base and/or supervision. Twenty-four papers focussed on one of four programs from different viewpoints. Most evaluations were student opinion (survey, interview, focus group) and/or student assessment results. Placements varied from one half day per week for six months through to full time immersion for more than 12 months.The predominant mechanism relating to factors influencing effectiveness was continuity of one or more of: patient care, supervision and mentorship, peer group and location. The success of LICs and participation satisfaction depended on the preparation of both students and clinical supervisors, and the level of support each received from their academic institutions.Conclusion: Longitudinal placements, including longitudinal integrated placements, are gaining in popularity as an alternative to traditional block rotations. Although relatively few established LICs currently exist, medical schools may look for ways to incorporate some of the principles of LICs more generally in their clinical education programmes. Further research is required to ascertain the optimum length of time for placements depending on the defined learning outcomes and timing within the programme, which students are most likely to benefit and the effects of context such as location and type of integration.

Prior studies suggest that students on a longitudinal integrated clerkship (LIC) have comparable academic performance to those on a rotation-based clerkship (RBC); however, most of these studies did not adjust for preclerkship academic performance. The objective of this study was to compare the academic performance of LIC and RBC students matched on prior academic performance over a three-year period. Each LIC student in the University of Calgary classes of 2009, 2010, and 2011 (n = 34) was matched with four RBC students (n = 136) of similar prior academic performance. Knowledge and clinical skills performance between the streams was compared. Knowledge was evaluated by internal summative examinations and the Medical Council of Canada Part 1 licensing exam. Clinical skills were evaluated via in-training evaluation report (ITERs) and performance on the clerkship objective structured clinical examination (OSCE). Meta-analysis was used to compare knowledge evaluations and clinical performance for all core clerkship disciplines, and pooled effect sizes from the fixed-effect models were reported. Meta-analyses showed no statistically significant heterogeneity. There were no differences between LIC and RBC students on knowledge evaluations (pooled effect size 0.019; 95% confidence interval [-0.155, 0.152], P = .8), ITERs (pooled effect size -0.015 [-0.157, 0.127], P = .8), or mean OSCE ratings (67.9 [SD = 4.6] versus 68.6 [SD = 5.8], P = .5). After matching on prior academic performance, LIC and RBC students at one school had comparable performance on summative evaluations of knowledge, clinical performance, and clinical skills over three years.

Curriculum Management and Governance Structure ♦ The Curriculum Oversight Committee is the standing committee responsible for the overall curriculum. ♦ Four other curriculum committees (First Year, Second Year, Required Clerkship, Elective Clerkship), composed of course directors, clerkship directors, administrators, and students, provide year-specific discussion and advice on the curriculum (Figure 1).FIGURE 1:: Management of the Curriculum Office of Education ♦ The Curriculum Office within Academic Affairs has primary responsibility for overseeing and managing the curriculum. ♦ The Division of Medical Education and Evaluation within the Department of Medical Education and Biomedical Informatics (MEBI) supports the medical education program in a number of ways. MEBI was founded in 1967 as a division to help medical school faculty improve the teaching and learning process. The division achieved departmental status in 1989. ♦ The department's Division of Medical Education and Evaluation employs nine full-time faculty members and two part-time faculty; many clinician–educators have affiliate appointments in the department. MEBI faculty hold many leadership roles in the School of Medicine. These include representatives on every curriculum committee, Year 1 Curriculum Committee chair, School of Medicine Director of Evaluation, Teaching Scholars Program codirectors, OSCE program codirector, Medical Information for Decision Making course chair, and Institute for Simulation and Interprofessional Studies codirector. ♦ The department's mandate has broadened to provide instruction to faculty and students, conduct faculty development workshops, assist with and implement performance-based teaching and evaluation, and train medical education researchers and educators through the Teaching Scholars Program conduct research into teaching and learning in a variety of settings provide professional services for health sciences faculty, including course evaluation and test design and scoring develop innovations in biomedical and health informatics Financial Management of Educational Programs ♦ The diversity in the revenue base of the School of Medicine has helped the School respond to the current global financial crisis. ♦ The School's sources of revenue remain stable. However, the relative proportion of total revenue derived from each source is changing over time: Although state revenues and spending will continue to be constrained and the School of Medicine's state funds were cut in Fiscal Year 2010, the state revenue in support of a recent medical school class expansion will continue to be phased in until fully funded in 2013. The University and the School of Medicine completed a seven-year capital campaign in FY 2008. UW Medicine exceeded its capital campaign goal of $1 billion; the pledges of endowment and gifts supporting faculty, students, and programs will be realized over the next few years. The School is in a good position to continue to realize above-average growth in research programs that are integral to its educational programs. The hiring of faculty who are leaders in biomedical sciences and clinical practice and who are active in biomedical research is an important source of the School's success and high quality. The clinical programs recorded continued growth and positive financial performance in Fiscal Year 2009. Rapid systemwide process improvements to reduce costs, eliminate redundant services, and improve overall efficiency in conjunction with effective strategic planning increased key patient volumes and revenues. Revenues are transferred from the practice plans and hospitals to support the teaching, research, and patient care activities of the School of Medicine. ♦ Both the University and the School of Medicine provided bridge funding to support the academic programs. ♦ UW Medicine, the health system in which the School of Medicine is one of seven entities, is executing a comprehensive strategic plan to improve performance, implement new programs, consolidate programs to reduce costs and increase efficiency, and develop business plans around the larger strategic initiatives. The implementation of the strategic plan will achieve desired growth in the system and inform future decisions around resource allocation in the face of ongoing financial turmoil. Valuing Teaching ♦ The Colleges program, although technically not a teaching academy, has created an effective learning community of medical school teachers: Started in 2001, the Colleges' program consists of 37 faculty educators who function as a cohesive learning community, administrative unit, and cadre of teachers and mentors within the School of Medicine. The Colleges oversee a four-year integrated curriculum of clinical skills and professionalism; teach the Introduction of Clinical Medicine II course throughout the second year through weekly bedside teaching sessions with consistent, small student groups; and provide a consistent faculty mentor for all students throughout their medical school career. Faculty from diverse specialties are selected through a competitive process and devote a minimum of 0.25 FTE to the Colleges; selection criteria include clinical, teaching, and mentoring excellence. Faculty conduct and receive considerable faculty development in addition to direct involvement in curriculum development, teaching, and mentoring activities. ♦ The Teaching Scholars, a nine-month faculty development program, has developed a cadre of faculty educators who continue to work together on educational projects, workshops, and curriculum development after they have completed the formal program. To date, 168 faculty from more than 20 clinical specialties, including nursing, physician assistants, pharmacy, and dentistry, have participated in the program. Many have been promoted and/or gone on to leadership positions at UW and elsewhere. ♦ The UW Medicine Faculty Appointments and Promotions Guide, which augments departmental criteria and the University Faculty Code, states that “to foster innovation and creativity, flexibility is encouraged in how contributions to scholarship, teaching, and service are evaluated and weighted.” The guide describes the scholarship of teaching as an important type of scholarship; teaching contributions listed as scholarship include curriculum development, materials for in-house use, educational software or video, educational information on the Internet, and new methods to evaluate the success of educational programs and the progress of trainees. ♦ Virtually all promotion packets now include a teaching portfolio that documents and highlights the faculty member's educational contributions. ♦ Evaluation of the scholarship of teaching is elicited through solicited evaluations from outside reviews at the time of promotion, including users of the information (faculty, trainees, students, and so on) and/or publication in peer-reviewed journals and presentation at scientific meetings. Curriculum Renewal Process ♦ The UW School of Medicine launched a comprehensive review of the medical school curriculum in 1998. The review was completed in 2001 and implementation of the resulting plan began in 2001-02. ♦ The guiding principles of the charge by the Dean specified that the review should include a balanced, thorough examination of course content examine teaching methods employed, emphasizing the introduction and use of contemporary information technology assure continuity and internal integrity within the curriculum, with strong themes introduced in first year and followed throughout the four years develop clear lines of responsibility and authority for the administration and management of the curriculum and its component parts develop a new approach to teach core clinical skills and professionalism ♦ The curriculum review process was organized into three phases: Phase I assessed the current curriculum, identifying strengths, weaknesses, and opportunities for enhancement; Phase II developed recommended changes to address areas of concern in Phase I; and Phase III developed specific implementation plans for the recommendations. Changes to the first and second years as a result of the curriculum review included addition of an evidence-based medicine and critical thinking first-year course that has evolved into Medical Information for Decision Making greater emphasis on small-group versus lecture-based teaching addition of the Colleges program, in which a cohort of dedicated clinical faculty teach bedside clinical skills to small groups of assigned students throughout the second year and continue to mentor those students throughout their medical school education Major additions to the third and fourth clinical years included: a required 4-week Neurology Clerkship, a required four-week surgical selective, and expansion of the Chronic Care/Rehabilitation Medicine Clerkship from two to four weeks, with focus on chronic care, rehabilitation medicine, geriatrics, pain management, and palliative care. The medical student research requirement was restructured into an Independent Investigative Inquiry, with expanded options for completing the requirement, including data gathering/hypothesis-driven inquiry; critical review of literature; experience-driven inquiry; and a special simulation-based experience. The curriculum management system was restructured to implement year-specific curriculum committees and a curriculum oversight committee. Learning Outcomes/Competencies ♦ The University of Washington School of Medicine learning objectives are available at: http://uwmedicine.washington.edu/Education/MD-Program/Current-Students/Curriculum/Pages/default.aspx. New Topics in the Curriculum Since 2000 ♦ Patient safety is included in the following courses: Medical Information for Decision-Making (first year), Capstone I-Transition to Clerkships (second year), Medicine Health and Society (second year), courses in the Institute for Simulation and Interprofessional Studies (ISIS) (courses available in all years) ♦ Quality improvement is included in the following courses: Medical Information for Decision Making (first year), Medicine, Health and Society (second year), Introduction to Clinical Medicine II (second year), ISIS (all years) ♦ Team-based learning is included in the following courses: Capstone I-Transition to Clerkships (second year), Problem-based Learning (second year), Chronic Care Clerkship (fourth year), Emergency Medicine Clerkship (fourth year), ISIS (all years) ♦ Simulations/training in new surgical techniques are included in the following: Capstone I-Transition to Clerkships (second year), Capstone II-Transition to Residency (fourth year). Started in 2005, ISIS was founded to improve the cost, patient safety, and quality of medicine by improving the education system for health professionals. ISIS trains students, residents, and fellows in psychomotor skills, interprofessional and communication, crisis management, and team building. Currently, ISIS is one of the few simulation centers nationally with a focus on collaborative research and is the nation's only simulation center that has begun to quantify utilization. Future plans focus on integrating education and research to deliver patient safety and quality outcomes and further integrating simulation into education. ISIS currently has 16 courses in which medical students can participate, including basics of airway management, emergency medicine procedures and resuscitation, thoracentesis, suturing and wound management for medical students, fundamentals of laparoscopic surgery, and others. Areas of Increased Emphasis Since 2002 ♦ Cultural competency (incorporated into many courses and programs, including Introduction to Clinical Medicine I and II, Healthcare for the Underserved, and through longitudinal pathway programs that students may undertake: Hispanic Health Pathway, Indian Health Pathway, Global Health Pathway, and Underserved Pathway). ♦ Evidence-based medicine (including the required first-year course Medical Information for Decision-Making). ♦ Bedside clinical-skills teaching, especially through the Colleges program in Introduction to Clinical Medicine II. ♦ Professionalism and ethics (incorporated into multiple courses, including Introduction to Clinical Medicine I and II; Cases in Clinical Ethics; and others). ♦ Medical humanities (incorporated into a number of courses, including Mind, Body and Pen: Writing and the Art of Becoming a Physician; Thinking Visually: How to Observe in Depth). ♦ Global health (incorporated into courses offered through the Department of Global Health, including Introduction to Global Health, Multidisciplinary Perspectives in Global Health, Global Health Challenges, and others). ♦ Successful transitions between training stages (incorporated into Capstone I-Transition to Clerkships and Capstone II-Transition to Residency). ♦ Chronic care, including increased attention to end-of-life care (incorporated into the expanded Chronic Care Clerkship that offers rehabilitation medicine, palliative care, pain management, and geriatrics core options; Respectful Death: Exploring Interdisciplinary End-of-Life Care; and other courses). Changes in Pedagogy ♦ Increased emphasis on small-group learning; success is measured through student course evaluations and faculty course evaluations. ♦ New emphasis on alternative learning technologies—Podcasts, Mediasite, common learning resources across regional sites; success is measured through student and faculty course evaluations. ♦ Increased emphasis on bedside teaching of basic skills; success is measured through annual surveys, exit interviews, student performance, attitude surveys, and other methods. ♦ Provision of transitional instruction between classroom and clerkships and medical school and residency; success is measured by surveys at the completion of transition experiences/courses. ♦ Increased emphasis on vertical integration of medical skills; success is measured by regular discussions between College Faculty with clerkship directors. ♦ Increased emphasis on professionalism; success is measured by end-of-year student surveys, student course evaluations, and exit interviews. ♦ Increased emphasis on mentoring and incorporating mentoring into the educational process through the Colleges; success is measured by student surveys and exit interviews. ♦ Increased emphasis on student and faculty learning communities through the Colleges program; success is measured by student surveys, exit interviews, and faculty surveys. ♦ Increased focus on interprofessional collaboration and teamwork; success is measured through multiple ISIS evaluation mechanisms. Changes in Assessment ♦ Clarification of and emphasis on evaluation of professionalism/professional behavior in education and practice. ♦ Limited utilization of web-based testing in basic science and clinical courses. ♦ Use of NBME subject examinations in clerkships. ♦ Increased centralization and standardization of student evaluation of courses and clerkships across all teaching sites. Clinical Experiences ♦ As the regional allopathic medical school for more than one quarter of the land mass of the United States, the UW School of Medicine relies on approximately 200 clinical training sites throughout the five-state WWAMI region (Washington, Wyoming, Alaska, Montana, and Idaho) for ensuring that the students have exposure to an appropriate mix of clinical teaching settings. ♦ The main teaching hospitals and clinics in Seattle are the University of Washington Medical Center, Harborview Medical Center, UW Physicians Neighborhood Clinics, Seattle Children's Hospital, and the VA Puget Sound Health Care System; Northwest Hospital and Regional Medical Center joined UW Medicine in 2010. ♦ These sites are supplemented in the WWAMI region with major, well-established hospital teaching sites in Boise, Idaho, Anchorage, Alaska, Billings and Missoula, Montana, and Spokane, Washington, and smaller hospitals and clinics in towns and cities across the WWAMI region. ♦ The clinical instruction is rated very highly by medical students and is regarded as the greatest strength of the curriculum; the individual clerkships receive exceptional overall ratings, in particular for teaching and patient care interactions. ♦ Because students complete their clerkships across five states with multiple clinical instructors, collecting and providing grades and feedback on clinical performance can take long periods of time; new electronic resources are strongly mitigating this time lag. ♦ The logistics of travel to and housing and services at clinical sites throughout the five-state region can be challenging, especially for students with families; the school and individual clerkships attempt to reduce this challenge as much as possible by providing housing at distant sites. ♦ Residents do not teach students in all regional clinical sites; this introduces both challenges and opportunities. Residents are a good source of constant teaching for students and introduce different levels and types of instruction; where residents are not available for teaching, students have a unique opportunity to work directly and closely with attending physicians, particularly in small rural sites. Regional Campuses ♦ The University of Washington School of Medicine's WWAMI (Washington, Wyoming, Alaska, Montana, Idaho) program utilizes six regional campuses, in addition to the main campus in Seattle, for the first year of medical school: Montana State University—Bozeman, Montana University of Alaska at Anchorage—Anchorage, Alaska University of Idaho—Moscow, Idaho University of Wyoming—Laramie, Wyoming Washington State University—Pullman, Washington Washington State University Riverpoint Campus—Spokane, Washington (started in 2008, adding 20 medical students per class to the School of Medicine) Highlights of the Program/School The Colleges program provides students with a combination of strong, standardized bedside clinical-skills training in the second year in small-group settings, sustained mentoring from a College faculty member throughout students' education, and community and connectedness in the context of a large medical school. As the medical school for the five WWAMI states, the UW School of Medicine's regional program is truly unique; the strong partnership that has developed among universities across these states, including legislatures, academic and community physicians, and health care professionals, is a model of collaboration, resource sharing, and cost efficiency. The School of Medicine focuses on and has relative success in addressing the need for primary care and health care for underserved regions while maintaining a strong research program. In its efforts to increase and enhance primary care and health care for the underserved, the School has developed unique programs, such as the Targeted Rural Underserved Track (TRUST), the WWAMI Rural Integrated Training Experience (WRITE), and the Rural/Underserved Opportunities Program (R/UOP) programs, in which students spend from weeks and months to entire years in rural and underserved communities learning medicine. The Department of Global Health, founded in 2007 as a joint department within the schools of Medicine and Public Health, builds and expands on long-standing strengths in infectious diseases. Students have multiple options for courses and international experiences. Additional educational opportunities are provided through the Institute for Health Metrics and Evaluation, established in 2007. It is a research center that measures the world's pressing health issues and provides scientific evaluations of health system and program performance for guiding health policy and accelerating global health progress.