Medical Curriculum Development is an Oxymoron

A few separate paragraphs I’ve tied together from Curriculum Development for Medical Education:

The difference between the ideal approach and the current approach represents a general needs assessment.

[A] curriculum can be written, starting with broad or general goals and then moving to specific, measurable objectives. Objectives may include cognitive (knowledge), affective (attitudinal), or psychomotor (skill and behavioral) objectives for the learner; process objectives related to the conduct of the curriculum; or even health, health care, or patient outcome objectives. The development of goals and objectives is critical because they help to determine curricular content and learning methods and help to focus the learner. They enable communication of what the curriculum is about to others and provide a basis for its evaluation. When resources are limited, prioritization of objectives can facilitate the rational allocation of those resources.

The first step in designing a curriculum is to identify and characterize the health care problem that will be addressed by the curriculum, how the problem is currently being addressed, and how it ideally should be addressed.

What percentage of core medical curricula simply exist, and then goals and objectives are grafted on after the fact to link up with the things that are already happening?

When is the last time any medical school went back to first principles? 1910?

Leave a Reply