REQUIRED COURSE FORM - University of South Florida · Web viewThe student will be able to explain the relationship between the legal system and the practice of medicine. The student

GENERAL INSTRUCTIONS FOR COMPLETING THE DATABASE

Each question in the database is preceded by the relevant LCME accreditation standard. In some cases two standards are closely related, and the questions are germane for documenting compliance with each of the two standards. Additional related information is sometimes contained in the responses to questions that deal with other standards; in those cases, cross-references to the additional information are included in italics. The cross-references are intended to help self-study groups and the survey team identify all relevant data for assessing compliance with standards.

For comprehensive instructions regarding database completion, please refer to the document “Background and Instructions for Completing the LCME Medical Education Database and Institutional Self-Study,” available on the LCME web site at: http://www.lcme.org/database.htm.

The school should maintain a master database that contains all of the information used for the self-study. When it becomes necessary to update database sections after the self-study report is complete but prior to the survey visit, the school should create a separate database containing the updated information only.

Most questions require a narrative answer or completion of a table; in some cases, it will be necessary to duplicate a blank table (for example, to summarize each of the school’s clinical teaching sites). Use as much space as necessary to answer each question completely, or to complete the tables.

Any supporting documents that are requested in the database (e.g., bylaws, organizational charts, policy documents) should be compiled in a separate (red) binder, divided by tabs for each section of the database; do not include such appended materials in the individual database sections.

The header on each page should indicate the most recent academic year for which information is available at the time of the self-study, not the academic year in which the database is being completed; in most cases, the year for which information is available will be academic year 2005-2006 for self-studies conducted in 2006-2007. When the requested data are for a different time period than that indicated in the header, the applicable time period should be included in the response to the question.

If database information is updated after completion of the self-study, the academic year listed in the header should be changed accordingly, and marked with the word “Update” in the header along with the year shown (e.g., “Update 2006-07”). Note that changing the header will affect all pages of a database section; therefore, a fresh (blank) copy of the database section should be used for updates.

If requested information is available from the school’s web site, make sure to print a copy of the web site information for the master database maintained by the school. Changes to such documents after completion of the self-study should be printed and stamped “Updated” to indicate that they have changed, and included in the updated database. In addition, database pages that list URLs of modified web pages should indicate that the web site information has been altered from the original data available to the self-study groups.

The database copies sent to the LCME Secretariat should include printed copies of any information referred to by website URL. The Secretariat is required to maintain complete print records of all database information.

Most of the Key Quantitative Indicators (Part A of each database section) can be completed using information contained in the Longitudinal Statistical Summary Report. This report is prepared annually by the AAMC Section for Institutional, Faculty, and Student Studies, and sent directly to the dean.

SPECIAL INSTRUCTIONS FOR REQUIRED COURSE AND CLERKSHIP FORMS

The required courses and clerkships should be organized by curriculum year and bound in a green binder. Schools that offer a formal decelerated curriculum operating on a different time scale (i.e., five years) should organize the required courses and clerkships according to their regular (not decelerated) academic schedule. Schools that offer medical education programs of more than four years should modify the database and course or clerkship forms correspondingly.

Duplicate course and clerkship forms as many times as necessary to describe all required courses and clerkships. Descriptions are not required for selective or elective courses.

It is not necessary to include every instructional objective for any course unless the objectives are relatively few in number (ten or less); the description of objectives, if not itemized, should include a concise summary of what students are expected to learn.

The summary of student feedback should indicate only major achievements or problems identified by students, not a list of all the comments provided by students. Other evaluation data to be provided in this question may include such items as AAMC Graduation Questionnaire data, performance on national examinations, or any other assessment data routinely available to the leadership of the course or clerkship.

If course forms are sent directly to course or clerkship directors for completion, make sure that the directors also complete the relevant lines on the summary tables contained in Part A of this section.

LCME Medical Education Database Required Courses and Clerkships 2

REQUIRED COURSES AND CLERKSHIPS

A. SUMMARY DATAB. REQUIRED COURSE FORM

C. REQUIRED CLERKSHIP FORM

Academic Year 2005-2006

PART A. SUMMARY DATA ON COURSES AND CLERKSHIPS

Complete the following tables for all required courses and clerkships:

A. METHODS OF INSTRUCTION

YEAR ONE

Formal instructional hours

Course Lecture LabSmall groups*

Patient contact Other† Total

Profession of Medicine 34.5 2 20 0 28 84.5

Ethics and Humanities 26 0 0 0 12 38

Molecular Medicine 130 18 0 0 41 189Physical Diagnosis I 38.5 0 0 0 74.50 113Colloquium I 18 0 0 0 14 32Imaging for Anatomy 17 0 0 0 26.5 43.5Anatomy 70.5 129 0 0 13.5 213Physiology 77.5 6 12 0 24.25 119.75Longitudinal Clinical Experience I

0 0 10 100 13 123

Medical Neuroscience 79 5 0 0 16.25 100.25Introduction to Behavior Medicine 52 0 11 0 4.75 67.75

TOTAL 543 160 53 100 267.75 1123.7548% 14% 5% 9% 24% 100%

* Includes case-based or problem solving sessions† Orientation, Web-based Learning, Student Presentation, Large Group (not lecture), Quizzes, Other



YEAR TWO

Formal instructional hours

Course Lecture LabSmall groups*


Clinical Diagnosis and Reasoning

55 0 0 0 5 60

Physical Diagnosis II 9 0 10 0 63.25 82.25Evidenced-Based Medicine 27 0 3 0 13.5 43.5Principles of Medical Immunology and Infectious Diseases

103 1 11 0 14 129

Pathology and Laboratory Medicine

124.5 23 0 0 40 187.5

Pharmacology 91.5 0 21 0 23.75 136.25Clinical Problem Solving 0 0 36 0 1 37Colloquium II 0 0 10 0 0 10Longitudinal Clinical Experience II

0 0 8 112 10 130

TOTAL 410 24 99 112 170.5 815.550% 3% 12% 14% 21% 100%

* Includes case-based or problem solving sessions† Orientation, Web-based Learning, Student Presentation, Large Group (not lecture), Other, Clinical

Practice, Quizzes



YEAR THREE

Clerkship Total wks

% Amb.

# Sites used* Typical hrs/wk formal

instruct.**

Quantified Criteria†

(Y/N)

Patient Log

(Y/N)

Primary Care and Special Populations

16 100 52/0 6-8 hrs/wk Y Y

Emergent and Urgent Care 4 100 1/3 6-7 hrs/wk Y YNewborn and Maternal Health

4 25 1/1 6-8 hrs/wk Y Y

Neuropsychiatry 8 25 5/0 8 hrs/wk Y YSurgical Care 8 25 4/0 8 hrs/wk Y YInpatient Medicine and Pediatrics

8 0 4/0 7 hrs/wk Y Y

*Include the number of sites used for inpatient teaching and the number of sites used for outpatient teaching in the clerkship in the following format: # inpatient/ # outpatient* *Sum of lectures, conferences, and teaching rounds; show the range of hours if there is significant variation across sites† Have quantified criteria for the number and kinds of patients been defined?

Course Lecture LabSmall groups

*


Introduction to Clerkships 24 4 1 0 19 48* Includes case-based or problem solving sessions† Describe: orientation, clinical skills development, web-based learning, large group exams

YEAR FOUR

Clerkship Total wks

% Amb.

# Sites used*

Typical hrs/wk formal

instruct.**

Quantified Criteria†

(Y/N)

Patient Log

(Y/N)

Critical Care 8 0 4 5 hrs/wk N^ YNeuroscience 4 10% 4/4 4-6 hrs/wk N^ Y

*Include the number of sites used for inpatient teaching and the number of sites used for outpatient teaching in the clerkship in the following format: # inpatient/ # outpatient* *Sum of lectures, conferences, and teaching rounds; show the range of hours if there is significant variation across sites† Have quantified criteria for the number and kinds of patients been defined?

^ Note: The fourth year required clerkships were in a state of transition during the 2005-06 academic year. As such, quantifiable criteria were not specified for the fourth year clerkships during the 2005-06 academic year. All fourth year clerkships in the 2006-07 academic year do have specified and quantifiable criteria for the number and kinds of patients.





B. METHODS OF EVALUATION

YEAR ONE

Contribute to Grade (Check all that apply)

Course# of Exams

Internal Exams

Lab or practical Exams

NBME Subject Exams

Faculty/ Resident Rating*

OSCE/SP Exam

Paper or Oral Pres.

Other†

Professions of Medicine

2 X X +++

Ethics and Humanities 2 X ++Molecular Medicine 4 X X XAnatomy 5 X X X 7 quizzesPhysiology 5 X X X 7 quizzesImaging for Anatomy 4 X X Physical Diagnosis I 9 X X X X Assessment

of a video-streamed history & physical

examLongitudinal Clinical Experience I

X X

Colloquium I Attendance required at

all sessions. Sign-in

required.Medical Neuroscience 3 X XIntroduction to Behavioral Medicine

3 X X X

* Include evaluations by faculty members or residents in clinical experiences and also in small group sessions (for example, a facilitator evaluation in small group or case-based teaching)† Describe the specifics in the report narrative

++ Ethics Case exercises; Humanities in-class assignments.+++Literature search assignment, Ethics case submission ,Physical exam stations checklists



YEAR TWO


Course# of Exams

Internal Exams

Lab or practical Exams

NBME Subject Exams

Faculty/ Resident Rating*

OSCE/SP Exam

Paper or Oral Pres.

Other†

Clinical Diagnosis Reasoning

7 X X

Physical Diagnosis II

9 X X X X X Must come to each skill session

Evidence-Based Medicine

8 X X X

Principles of Medical Immunology and Infectious Diseases

10 X X X Participation in small group

sessions contributes to

grade.Pathology and Laboratory Medicine

10 X X X

Pharmacology 10 X X X X X Clinical Problem Solving

X Case study participation & response to learning issues

Colloquium II Depend-ent on

individual small group

require-ments

Participation in all (~10

hours) small-group sessions

Longitudinal Clinical Experience II

X X X

* Include evaluations by faculty members or residents in clinical experiences and also in small group sessions (for example, a facilitator evaluation in small group or case-based teaching)† Describe the specifics in the report narrative



YEAR THREE


Course or ClerkshipNBME Subject Exams

Internal Exams

Oral Exam or Present

Faculty/ Resident Rating

OSCE/SP

Exams

Other*Clinical Skills

Observed (Y/N)†

Mid-Course

Feedback (Y/N)

Introduction to Clerkships^

X N N

Neuropsychiatry X X X X Y YPrimary Care and Special Populations

X X X X X Y Y

Newborn and Maternal Health

X X X X Y Y

Emergency and Urgent Care

X X Y Y

Inpatient Medicine and Pediatrics

X

2 NBME exams

X X X X X Y Y

Surgical Care X X X X X Y Y* Describe the specifics in the report narrative† Are all students observed performing core clinical skills? (yes or no)^ This is a two-week, pass/fail course to prepare students for their clerkships. No clinical skills are taught and since the course is only two-weeks long and not graded, mid-course feedback is not given.

YEAR FOUR++


Course or ClerkshipNBME Subject Exams

Internal Exams

Oral Exam or Present

Faculty/ Resident Rating

OSCE/SP

Exams

Other*Clinical Skills

Observed (Y/N)†

Mid-Course

Feedback (Y/N)

Integrated Neuroscience X X X N N

Critical Care X X

X X X Y N

++ The fourth year required clerkships were in a state of transition during the 2005-0 academic year. As such, clinical skills were not consistently observed nor was mid-course feedback routinely given. All fourth year clerkships in the 2006-07 academic year do consistently observe clinical skills and mid-course feedback is routinely given.



PART B. REQUIRED COURSE FORM

Course title: Profession of MedicineSponsoring departmentor unit: Office of Educational Affairs

Name of course director: Bryan Bognar

List all organizational units (e.g., physiology department, nursing school, library), including the lead department, with ongoing involvement in the course, and the number of instructional staff from each such unit:

Organizational UnitNumber of

Teaching Staff InvolvedPhysiology 2Pharmacology and Therapeutics 5Anatomy 7Pathology 3Med Micro and Immunology 1Library 1Psychiatry 2Biochemistry and Molecular Biology 1Family Medicine 4Internal Medicine 28DIO 17Neurology 10Surgery 14Pediatrics 1School of Physical Therapy 7Nursing 1Public Health 1Radiology 1College of Education 1

Course ObjectivesAre there written objectives for the course? (check)

Yes x No

Briefly summarize the objectives/content areas covered in the course.

The student will develop an appreciation for cultural differences and the contribution of diverse perspectives on understanding complex issues.

The student will understand the basic science principles of breast cancer, colon cancer, myocardial, and stroke; the scientific advancements made in those areas in past 20 years; and the evolution of clinical management of them.

The student will demonstrate respect for peers, student mentors and faculty. The student will describe the characteristics of appropriate physician behavior and explain the

concept of professionalism. The student will develop an intellectual curiosity toward medicine

LCME Medical Education Database 2004-05 Required Course Form 8


REQUIRED COURSE FORM (Continued)

Course title: Profession of Medicine

The student will develop a practice of life-long learning including research, reading, and inquiry. The student will understand the basic ethical principles and their application to the practice of

medicine The student will be able to describe the contributions of the humanities to the practice of

medicine. The student will be able to explain the relationship between the legal system and the practice of

medicine. The student will describe the elements of a medical history. The student will demonstrate a basic abdominal, cardiac, chest, and breast examination. The student will demonstrate basic life support techniques. The student will be able to explain how to critically read a medical article, as well as the basic

principles of evidence-based medicine.

Preparation for TeachingIf graduate students, postdoctoral fellows in the biomedical sciences, or residents teach in the course (as lecturers, small group facilitators, laboratory instructors), describe how they are informed about the course objectives and prepared for their teaching role.

Not applicable.

If the entire course is taught at more than one site (e.g., at geographically separate campuses), describe how faculty members at all sites are oriented to the objectives and grading system.

Not applicable.

Student EvaluationIf NBME subject (shelf) examinations are used, give the mean scores for the last three classes:

Not applicable.

Check all the formats that are used in examinations or other evaluations that students must take in order to pass the course:

x Multiple-choice, true/false, matching questions x Laboratory practical itemsFill-in, short answer questions Problem-solving exercises

x Essay questions or papers x PresentationsOral exams Preceptor ratingsOSCE or standardized patient exam x Other: literature search

Briefly describe any formative assessment activities (practice exams, quizzes, etc.)





There is a written exam/quiz given at the end of week 1 covering the materials presented in the first week of the course. There is a written exam at the end of the course.

Is there a narrative evaluation submitted in addition to the course grade? (check)

Course Outcomes/Evaluation

Comment on the adequacy of faculty and other resources to teach the course (e.g., educational space, computer hardware and software, support personnel).

As noted above, the Professions of Medicine course involves almost 20 academic units or departments in both the basic and clinical sciences. The faculty have consistently been adequate to teach the course. In addition, there is also adequate educational space including classrooms, small-group rooms, and clinical space for physical diagnosis skills sessions. The information technologies infrastructure is excellent.

Provide a summary of student feedback on the course (and any other available evaluation data) for the past two years. If the course is new or significantly revised, provide evaluation data for the new version of the course only. If problems have been identified by student evaluations or other data, describe how they are being addressed.

Academic Year: 05/06 05/06 04/05 04/05 03/04 03/04

Avg.Y1 courses

Avg.Y1 courses

Avg.Y1 courses

Scale: 1-Poor, 2-Fair, 3-Good, 4-VeryGood, 5-Excellent Questions: 1. Rate the course overall. 3.9 3.8 3.8 3.8 4 3.92. Structure and curricular design. 3.9 3.7 3.8 3.7 4.1 3.93. Course achieved goals and objectives. 3.9 3.8 4 3.9 4.1 3.95. Quality of lectures. 3.8 3.5 3.9 3.7 4.4 3.86. Clinical correlations. 3.8 NA 3.8 3.9 3.97. Quality of laboratory exercises 3.5 NA 3.7 NA 3.68. Quality of small group sessions. 3.5 3.5 3.8 3.7 3.7 3.59. Clinical relevance of the material presented. 4.2 4.0 4.4 4.0 4.4 4.110. Usefulness of Syllabus and handouts. 3.9 3.7 4 3.7 3.9 3.911. Exam effectiveness. 3.5 3.4 3.8 3.7 3.8 3.712. Clarity of exam questions. 3.0 3.3 3.8 3.6 4 3.713. Feedback regarding examinations. 3.0 3.5 3.5 3.7 3.6 3.8

LCME Medical Education Database 2004-05 Required Course Form

Yes No x

10




14. Appropriate workload for this course. 3.4 3.8 3.7 3.8 3.8 3.916. Director responsive to students' concerns. 4.3 3.9 4.5 4.1 4.3 4.017. Availability of faculty outside class. 4.2 3.9 4.3 4.1 4.4 4.118. Use of allotted course time. 3.9 3.7 3.8 3.7 3.9 3.819. Rate faculty's use of computers. 4.0 3.9 4.1 3.9 4.2 3.920. Usefulness of computers in the course. 4.0 3.8 4.2 3.8 4.1 3.821. Idea of integrating more computers. 3.5 3.3 3.8 3.4 3.6 3.6

Identify major successes in the course and problems to be overcome.

Successes: POM is an interdepartmental, interdisciplinary educational program that includes participation from 5 basic science and 6 clinical departments. There is also participation from faculty at the College of Public Health, College of Nursing, School of Physical Therapy and the Department of Interdisciplinary Oncology. Basic and clinical science concepts and faculty are effectively integrated into this course. In academic year 2005-2006, the DPT students joined the COM colleagues in all components of POM. The mentoring and social activities programmed into the course allow students an opportunity to more smoothly transition into the rigors of medical school.

Problems to overcome:

Coordination and communication between the large numbers of participants are a challenge. Small groups occasionally had a faculty member not show up. Some of the students requested that the course materials be printed in advance but since faculty often change their presentations (slides) at the last moment, the preprinted materials may not be relevant. When available, course materials were always posted well in advance. We may need to revisit printing materials for next year at a commercial vendor such as ProCopy.




Course title: AnatomySponsoring departmentor unit: Pathology and Cell Biology

Name of course director: Karl E. Muffly Ph.D.


Organizational Unit(List Department. If more than one, list as

Interdisciplinary.)Number of Teaching Staff

InvolvedAnatomy 8Pathology 2Obstetrics/Gynecology 1Orthopedics 1Surgery 2ENT 1

Course ObjectivesAre there written objectives for the course? (check)

Yes x No Briefly summarize the objectives/content areas covered in the course.

The student will understand and be able to discuss individual variations and abnormalities in human anatomical systems

The student will describe the bones, bony landmarks, and joints of the body, correlating each with muscle attachments

The student will describe the muscles of the body, identifying their innervation, vascular supply, and venous and lymphatic drainage.

The student will describe the fascias of the body. The student will understand and describe the components and functions of the cutaneous,

visceral, and somatic innervation of body. The student will understand the sympathetic and parasympathetic nervous system, their functions,

and their components. The student will describe the organs of the body and understand the cellular and tissue

components of those various organs. The student will understand how the structure of the organ relates to its function.

The student will understand the embryological development of the human and be able to correlate this to the normal adult structure and understand how defects in these processes may result in abnormalities.

The student will gain skills and knowledge through collaborative work with physical therapy students

The student will appreciate the different perspectives brought to a study of human anatomy by students studying physical therapy




Course title: Anatomy

The student will reflect on building scientific knowledge, evaluating intellectual growth about content like: the bones, the muscles, and the fascias of the body; and the components and functions of the cutaneous, visceral, and somatic innervation of body; and the sympathetic and parasympathetic nervous system; and the organs of the body.

The student will understand the issues of ethical treatment—including repatriation—of cadavers in medical science

The student will be able to identify and explain human anatomical systems The student will gain significant understanding and skills of dissecting techniques

Preparation for Teaching

If graduate students, postdoctoral fellows in the biomedical sciences, or residents teach in the course (as lecturers, small group facilitators, laboratory instructors), describe how they are informed about the course objectives and prepared for their teaching role.

No graduate students, postdoctoral fellows in the biomedical sciences, or residents teach this course.

If the entire course is taught at more than one site (e.g., at geographically separate campuses), describe how faculty members at all sites are oriented to the objectives and grading system.Not applicable.

Student Evaluation

If NBME subject (shelf) examinations are used, give the mean scores for the last three classes:

Year: 2004 2005 2006Score: 69.7 Not used* Not used*National Percentile

45

Norm Table Referenced

1997-98 NBME norm table

* NBME flexible blueprint exam given. Check all the formats that are used in examinations or other evaluations that students must take in order to pass the course:

x Multiple-choice, true/false, matching questions

x Laboratory practical items

x Fill-in, short answer questions Problem-solving exercisesEssay questions or papers PresentationsOral exams Preceptor ratingsOSCE or standardized patient exam x Other: computer –based learning activities






Quizzes are given for credit in the first block and thereafter, practice exams are available on line.


Yes x No



The number of anatomy faculty is currently adequate. We recently recruited an additional education-focused anatomist to further bolster the educational mission. The number of available, well-trained anatomist nationally is falling. This may create future problems.

The space available for the medical school class is adequate. By design, we bring DPT student and medical student into the lab together, split the class, and offer alternative learning approaches while half the class is in the lab.


Academic Year: 05/06 05/06 04/05 04/05

Avg.Y1 courses

Avg.Y1 courses

Scale: 1-Poor, 2-Fair, 3-Good, 4-VeryGood, 5-ExcellentQuestions:1. Rate the course overall. 3.5 3.8 3.2 3.82. Structure and curricular design. 3.2 3.7 2.9 3.73. Course achieved goals and objectives 3.4 3.8 3.2 3.95. Quality of lectures. 2.8 3.5 2.6 3.76. Clinical correlations. 3.4 3.8 3.1 3.87. Quality of laboratory exercises 3.7 3.5 3.6 3.78. Quality of small group sessions. 3.2 3.5 3.1 3.79. Clinical relevance of the material presented. 3.5 4.0 3.3 4.010. Usefulness of Syllabus and handouts. 3.2 3.7 2.8 3.7





11. Exam effectiveness. 2.9 3.4 2.8 3.712. Clarity of exam questions. 3.1 3.3 2.7 3.613. Feedback regarding examinations. 3.6 3.5 3.5 3.714. Appropriate workload for this course. 3.1 3.8 3.2 3.816. Director responsive to students' concerns 4.0 3.9 3.7 4.117. Availability of faculty outside class. 4.0 3.9 3.9 4.118. Use of allotted course time. 3.2 3.7 2.9 3.719. Rate faculty's use of computers. 3.8 3.9 3.5 3.920. Usefulness of computers in the course. 3.6 3.8 3.3 3.821. Idea of integrating more computers. 3.2 3.3 3.0 3.4


Students do well on the NBME subject exam and the USMLE Step 1 indicating they are adequately learning the material. We are increasing our offerings of online materials and alternative learning methodologies. We are always trying to improve the course and each year make changes based on faculty and student input and concerns. We will continue this in the future.




Course title: Ethics and HumanitiesSponsoring departmentor unit: Internal Medicine

Name of course director: Robert Walker


Organizational Unit Number ofTeaching Staff Involved

Internal Medicine 4Physical Therapy 1

OB/GYN 1Family Medicine 1

Pediatrics 1College of Public Health 2

Surgery 1

Course Objectives

Are there written objectives for the course? (check)

Yes x No


Know the importance of involving the patient or family in therapeutic decision-making; the role and contribution of each team member in the care of the patient; the role of psychosocial factors in team interactions.

Recognize the importance of using interpersonal skills that enhance communication with the patient, the patient’s family, and other healthcare providers and consultants.

Demonstrate interpretive and observational skills in exploring topics in medicine and ethics via the humanities.

Respect patient’s informed choices, including the right to refuse treatment and patient autonomy. Recognize the importance of involving the patient in decision making. Analysis and Interpretation: determine application and use of narrative or story in medicine and

the value of communication skills. Social and personal complexities: recognize and tolerate ambiguities, nuances, complexities in

self and others. In general students will be able to recognize the value of soft data or story for understanding and

describing the full range of the human condition (strong, vulnerable, poor, afraid, articulate, bumbling, heterosexual, gay, light skinned, dark skinned, disabled, intersexual, powerless, arrogant, bullying, etc.).

Develop an attitude of teamwork and respect toward all members of the health care team. Recognize the need to encourage patients to adopt healthful lifestyles. Develop knowledge of issues that are applicable to clinical and real-life arenas, particularly to

end of life issues.REQUIRED COURSE FORM (Continued)



Course title: Ethics and Humanities

Demonstrate interpretive and observational skills in exploring topics in medicine and ethics via the humanities.

Display attitudes and professional behaviors appropriate for clinical practice. Be able to discuss the scope of issues included in "medical ethics". Know base values of the medical profession; the essentials of malpractice cases. Identify basic ethical principles that govern the practice of medicine Demonstrate key medical ethics concepts and nomenclature, e.g., informed consent, brain death,

autonomy, beneficence, advance directives, etc.; knowledge of selected landmark ethics/legal case

Distinguish between legal issues and ethical issues. Moral reasoning: gather data, identify problems, know legal parameters, form consensus



Not applicable.


Not applicable.

Student Evaluation


Not applicable.


x Multiple-choice, true/false, matching questions Laboratory practical itemsFill-in, short answer questions x Problem-solving exercises

x Essay questions or papers PresentationsOral exams x Preceptor ratingsOSCE or standardized patient exam Other (describe)


Students are given sample questions to practice prior to each ethics exam.

Is there a narrative evaluation submitted in addition to the course grade? (check)REQUIRED COURSE FORM (Continued)




Yes No x



Apart from Drs. Walker and Nixon, other faculty are volunteer. Resources are adequate, and now that there will be a centralized room-scheduling system, assigning small-group meeting space will be easier.


Academic Year: 05/06 05/06 04/05 04/05 03/04 03/04

Avg.Y1 courses

Avg.Y1 courses

Avg.Y1 courses

Scale: 1-Poor, 2-Fair, 3-Good, 4-VeryGood, 5-Excellent Questions: 1. Rate the course overall. 3.0 3.8 3.6 3.8 3.5 3.92. Structure and curricular design. 2.8 3.7 3.5 3.7 3.4 3.93. Course achieved goals and objectives. 3.0 3.8 3.7 3.9 3.5 3.95. Quality of lectures. 2.9 3.5 3.6 3.7 3.3 3.86. Clinical correlations. 3.4 3.8 NA 3.8 NA 3.97. Quality of laboratory exercises 3.0 3.5 NA 3.7 NA 3.68. Quality of small group sessions. 3.6 3.5 4.0 3.7 3.7 3.59. Clinical relevance of the material presented. 3.2 4.0 3.6 4.0 3.6 4.110. Usefulness of Syllabus and handouts. 3.1 3.7 3.3 3.7 3.5 3.911. Exam effectiveness. 2.6 3.4 3.3 3.7 3.1 3.712. Clarity of exam questions. 2.2 3.3 3.1 3.6 3.0 3.713. Feedback regarding examinations. 2.7 3.5 3.2 3.7 3.2 3.814. Appropriate workload for this course. 3.4 3.8 3.6 3.8 3.6 3.916. Director responsive to students' concerns. 3.5 3.9 3.9 4.1 3.7 4.017. Availability of faculty outside class. 3.3 3.9 3.8 4.1 3.7 4.118. Use of allotted course time. 3.0 3.7 3.5 3.7 3.3 3.8





19. Rate faculty's use of computers. 3.5 3.9 3.5 3.9 3.6 3.920. Usefulness of computers in the course. 3.3 3.8 3.4 3.8 3.4 3.821. Idea of integrating more computers. 3.0 3.3 3.1 3.4 3.1 3.6

2003: Students rated most of the items in the “good” - “very good” - “excellent” categories. The ethics case discussions and the On Doctoring book received the highest ratings. Receiving “very good” marks were the overall quality of the course, the course’s achievement of its goals and objectives, the clinical relevance of the material presented, the course director’s responsiveness to student concerns and questions, the faculty’s use of computer and other information technology in the presentation of the course, and the Tolstoy book. The preceptors and lecturers were rated either good to very good or very good to excellent. No items were ranked as “poor.”

Students identified a number of strengths; many found the small-group discussions in ethics to be the best part of the course; others enjoyed the ethics lectures and subject matter, which they found stimulated thought. Many regarded the ethics material as highly relevant to their future work as physicians. Other students valued the humanities perspective, with many finding the readings from On Doctoring to be a real strength. The course was thought to be a good complement to biochemistry, and contributed to a well-rounded medical education.

In terms of ethics, a few students would like to see a clearer distinction between what is legal and what is ethical. Some students thought the ethics material could have benefited from more entertainment value. There were some qualms about the ethics test question format – particularly questions with “all of the above” and “none of the above” options.

In the humanities component, there were quite a number of comments about the choice of some of Dr. Nixon’s materials. Some students wanted to see a clearer connection between the humanities and clinical medicine. A number of students would have liked to have had access to Dr. Nixon’s PowerPoints. Some thought she went too fast through the material, others thought she injected too much of her own opinion, and still others (as we see every year) just simply don’t like humanities. Other students defended Dr. Nixon, and her approach. As far as testing goes, some don’t want any test at all in humanities, while others suggest that the paired exam process Dr. Nixon used needs to be modified or abandoned.

2004: Students rated most of the items in the “good” - “very good” - “excellent” categories. The ethics case discussions and the On Doctoring book received the highest ratings. Receiving “very good” marks were the overall quality of the course, the course’s achievement of its goals and objectives, the clinical relevance of the material presented, the course director’s responsiveness to student concerns and questions, the faculty’s use of computer and other information technology in the presentation of the course, and the Tolstoy book. The preceptors and lecturers were rated either good to very good or very good to excellent. No items were ranked as “poor.” When students independently rated the quality of the ethics component and the humanities component, both were found to be “very good” with essentially the same average response (ethics 3.81; humanities 3.76).





Students identified a number of strengths; many found the small-group discussions in ethics to be the best part of the course; others enjoyed the ethics lectures and subject matter, which they found stimulated thought. Many regarded the ethics material as highly relevant to their future work as physicians. Other students valued the humanities perspective, with many finding the readings from On Doctoring to be a real strength.

In terms of ethics, a few students would like to see a clearer distinction between what is legal and what is ethical. Some students thought the ethics material was too grey. Others took issue with PowerPoint presentations. There were some qualms about the ethics test question format – particularly questions with “all of the above” and “none of the above” options. True/False questions were also an issue for some.

In the humanities component, some wanted more definition from Dr. Nixon’s presentations. Others perceived the humanities material as involving too much “busy work.” Still others wanted a clearer connection between the humanities and clinical life.

Each year we attempt to modulate our course to address specific concerns of the students. These can be found in our course reports attached.


One of the strengths of the course is our use of multiple clinical and outside faculty in both lectures and in the highly effective small-group case sessions. I find its major weakness is the shortness of the course. It is a challenge to cover the basic clinically-relevant ethics issues in such a short time. We are left to develop only a few areas in depth, while other areas can only be briefly touched upon.

The mix and interrelationship between ethics and humanities remains a good one. The humanities component of the course is unique and represents an important aspect of medical education that is often neglected in other medical schools. Though I believe Dr. Nixon’s efforts are, at times, misunderstood by students, overall the impact of the humanities is a good one, and she is regarded as an excellent teacher. It is important that students consider the effect of medicine on the lives of people, and reflect deeply about the physician-patient relationship, especially when social forces increasingly push us to regard ourselves not as professionals who enter into medical relationships, but as mere providers of services. I always leave the course with the feeling that, no matter how much or little students may recognize it at this early stage, we have contributed in a very positive way to their becoming good physicians.



Course title: Molecular MedicineSponsoring departmentor unit: Molecular Pharmacology and Physiology

Name of course director: Duane EichlerPART B. REQUIRED COURSE FORM



Teaching Staff InvolvedBiochemistry & Molecular Biology 11Anatomy 3Physiology 1Pediatrics 5Medical Microbiology & Immunology 1

Course Objectives


Yes x No


Understand cellular structure as it relates to function Recognize and distinguish features of basic tissues Relate gene structure and expression to phenotypic variability. Understand how metabolic pathways relate to tissue specific function. Relate nutrition to human health and disease. Integrate molecular, cellular and genetic concepts with other basic and clinical science subjects Understand the molecular analysis of inherited disease. Examine cellular principles that govern responses of cells and tissues to normal and abnormal

stimuli.



EXPECTATIONS AND REQUIREMENTS FOR THE TEACHING FACULTY

1. Course Syllabus, Lecture Dates, and Topical Outlines: Lecturers are required to update, correct and provide topical outline for assigned lectures to the course syllabus (Please see the draft of the




Course title: Molecular Medicine

Course Syllabus). Please make sure that the topical outline is truly reflective of the objectives for your lectures.

2. Course Supplements: Lecturers are required to provide their PowerPoint presentation for each lecture on disk to Helen Chen-Duncan, Program Assistant (MDC 3535, 974-9573; [email protected]). These must be completed by August 19, 2005. There will be no Supplement hardcopy provided this year. The electronic version will be posted on Blackboard.

Each lecture presentation shall be introduced with a Title, Objectives, Reading Assignment a Case Study, Figures with labels or legends, and a Summary that reflects the salient features of the lecture. The purpose of the CASE STUDY is to make relevant the context of the lecture material. The students find the SUMMARIES very useful guides in reviewing lecture material and identifying important items of the lecture.

3. Reading Assignments: Each lecturer shall provide a reading assignment from the textbooks required for the course. In the past, we have been very lenient relative to reading assignments. This year, students will be accountable for reading assignments. At least one exam question submitted by the lecture must cover material from the assigned reading. This, in part, places responsibility on the student to prepare and understand some of the material in this course on their own. Developing critical reading skills is fundamental to learning. Ultimately, we may be able to delegate the most fundamental as aspects of the course, such as amino acid structure and properties, and nucleic acid chemistry, to reading assignments, allowing the instructor to focus more on application of knowledge and relevance.

4. Exam Questions: All lecturers will turn in a minimum, on disk or by e-mail to Helen, FOUR NEW exam questions for each 2 hour lecture block as the primary lecturer. Please note the general format for the question items. Each question should focus on a MAJOR CONCEPT from the lecture topic, reflected either in the LECTURE OBJECTIVES or SUMMARY. Each item should assess APPLICATION OF KNOWLEDGE, not simply recall of an isolated fact.

The stem to each question WILL pose a CLEAR QUESTION, and it should be possible to arrive at an answer to this question with the options covered. All the options should be homogeneous. In other words, if the question concerns cell structure, all options should be structure related. PLEASE, WHEN POSSIBLE POSE EXAM QUESTIONS IN A CLINICAL CONTEXT WITH EITHER A BRIEF CASE DESCRIPTION OR A PARTICULAR PROBLEM AS THE STEM.

5. Lecture Integration and Coordination: Each lecturer is expected to take the responsibility to consider and coordinate lecture material with other members of the teaching faculty, taking into consideration the integration of biochemistry, cell biology and genetics. That will require your review of the course syllabus and schedule. Remember that the strength of this course rests on our ability to integrate knowledge. You are strongly encouraged to meet with other faculty in the course in order to know and refer back to their lecture material. PLEASE, it is very disconcerting when a lecturer makes a statement during lecture suggesting that they do not know whether an aspect of subject material has or will be addressed in this course.






Not applicable.

Student EvaluationIf NBME subject (shelf) examinations are used, give the mean scores for the last three classes:

Not applicable.


x Multiple-choice, true/false, matching questions x Laboratory practical itemsFill-in, short answer questions Problem-solving exercisesEssay questions or papers x PresentationsOral exams Preceptor ratingsOSCE or standardized patient exam Other (describe)



Yes No x



Faculty are invited to teach in Molecular Medicine based on their willingness to meet the expectations and requirements of the course.






Academic Year: 05/06 05/06 04/05 04/05 03/04 03/04

Avg.Y1 courses

Avg.Y1 courses

Avg.Y1 courses

Scale: 1-Poor, 2-Fair, 3-Good, 4-VeryGood, 5-Excellent Questions:

1. Rate the course overall. 3.8 3.84.03.8 4.1 3.9

2. Structure and curricular design. 3.7 3.7 3.9 3.7 3.9 3.93. Course achieved goals and objectives. 3.9 3.8 4.2 3.9 4.1 3.95. Quality of lectures. 3.6 3.5 4.0 3.7 3.9 3.86. Clinical correlations. 4.1 3.8 4.3 3.8 4.2 3.97. Quality of laboratory exercises 3.6 3.5 3.6 3.7 3.5 3.68. Quality of small group sessions. 3.1 3.5 3.4 3.7 3.1 3.59. Clinical relevance of the material presented. 4.1 4.0 4.1 4 4.1 4.110. Usefulness of Syllabus and handouts. na 3.7 3.8 3.7 4.0 3.911. Exam effectiveness. 3.3 3.4 3.7 3.7 3.4 3.712. Clarity of exam questions. 3.0 3.3 3.2 3.6 3.3 3.713. Feedback regarding examinations. 4.0 3.5 4.1 3.7 3.9 3.814. Appropriate workload for this course. 3.6 3.8 3.9 3.8 3.9 3.916. Director responsive to students' concerns. 4.1 3.9 4.5 4.1 4.5 4.017. Availability of faculty outside class. 4.0 3.9 4.2 4.1 4.4 4.118. Use of allotted course time. 3.8 3.7 3.7 3.7 3.7 3.819. Rate faculty's use of computers. 3.9 3.9 4.2 3.9 4.2 3.920. Usefulness of computers in the course. 3.9 3.8 4.0 3.8 4.0 3.821. Idea of integrating more computers. 3.3 3.3 3.6 3.4 3.7 3.6

Strengths of Molecular Medicine were its organization, clinical relevancy, supplements, quality of lectures, introduction of lectures with clear objectives and when possible clinical case studies, lecture summaries, and the quality and performance of exams (with the exception of the Final Exam). Group Presentations were an additional strength of this course providing a novel method to evaluate application of knowledge and promote self-learning.


Conceptually, this course was established using a clean slate, with an overall objective to provide medical students with a fundamental, integrated understanding of biochemical, biological and genetic principles basic to pathophysiological processes. For the most part, faculty invited to





participate in this course recognized the unique opportunity to work together and define, without boundaries, a curriculum that would integrate basic understanding with the modern practice of medicine.

1) The use of small-group presentations was judged to be particularly innovative, allowing the student to be a student teacher and to use knowledge gained from this course to understand a disease state. In most presentations, the students typically extended their understanding well beyond the basics taught in the course.

2) More than one student was assigned to a microscope so that learning was a group effort, and each student became an active participant in the learning process. Each laboratory exercise was introduced by a preview orientation in the lecture hall. In the laboratory, each exercise was completed by a small group.

3) Clinical Correlations featuring a physician and patient demonstrate how course materials translate to the care and treatment of a patient. (SEE GROUP PRESENTATIONS and CLINICAL CORRELATIONS attached)

4) Self-assessment exams were posted on Blackboard the week before an exam to allow students to assess their own performance on the material to be covered on the exam.

The most innovative aspect of BMS 6206, Molecular Medicine, is the fact that it does not represent simply a coordinated effort of several disciplines to deliver their course materials, but rather represents a unique curriculum that continues to evolve with integrated objectives, relevancy through application of knowledge, and teaching excellence.




Course title: PhysiologySponsoring departmentor unit: Department of Molecular Pharmacology and Physiology

Name of course director: Stanley Nazian



Teaching Staff InvolvedMolecular Pharmacology & Physiology 11

Internal Medicine 3

Course Objectives


Yes x No

Briefly summarize the objectives/content areas covered in the course. The student will acquire a scientific foundation for the continuing study of medicine by

understanding the basic functions of the human body and the factors that contribute to and maintain homeostasis.

Students will learn to teach each other and evaluate and arrive at an appropriate explanation of physiologic concepts within a team framework.

Students will learn to find and utilize resources other than faculty lectures or textbooks to arrive at appropriate evaluations of the physiologic basis of various clinical scenarios.

The student will be able to evaluate the physiological basis of clinical material.



No graduate or post-doctoral involvement at this time.


Not applicable.

Student Evaluation




Course title: Physiology


Year: 2003/04 2004/05 2005/06Score: 72.8 Not used* Not used*National Percentile

66


1992-93 and 1993-94 NBME norm table

* NMBE flexible blue print exam.


x Multiple-choice, true/false, matching questions Laboratory practical itemsFill-in, short answer questions Problem-solving exercisesEssay questions or papers PresentationsOral exams x Preceptor ratingsOSCE or standardized patient exam Other (describe)


Practice questions, typically consisting of questions from old examinations, are posted on line for student self-assessment.


Yes x No



Faculty resources are adequate. The number of available rooms that are appropriate for small group (10 students, 1 faculty facilitator) teaching and discussions does not seem to be fully adequate. With the implementation of a new, centralized room scheduling system and process, identifying rooms, however, should be easier.





Course title: Physiology

Academic Year: 05/06 05/06 04/05 04/05 03/04 03/04

Avg.Y1 courses

Avg.Y1 courses

Avg.Y1 courses

Scale: 1-Poor, 2-Fair, 3-Good, 4-VeryGood, 5-Excellent Questions: 1. Rate the course overall. 3.8 3.8 3.9 3.8 3.7 3.92. Structure and curricular design. 3.8 3.7 3.9 3.7 3.5 3.93. Course achieved goals and objectives. 3.8 3.8 3.9 3.9 3.6 3.95. Quality of lectures. 3.8 3.5 3.9 3.7 3.7 3.86. Clinical correlations. 3.9 3.8 3.9 3.8 3.6 3.97. Quality of laboratory exercises 3.4 3.5 3.0 3.7 2.9 3.68. Quality of small group sessions. 3.8 3.5 3.8 3.7 3.1 3.59. Clinical relevance of the material presented. 4.1 4.0 4.0 4.0 3.7 4.110. Usefulness of Syllabus and handouts. 4.0 3.7 4.0 3.7 3.7 3.911. Exam effectiveness. 3.4 3.4 3.7 3.7 3.5 3.712. Clarity of exam questions. 3.1 3.3 3.4 3.6 3.2 3.713. Feedback regarding examinations. 3.9 3.5 4.0 3.7 4.0 3.814. Appropriate workload for this course. 3.7 3.8 3.9 3.8 3.8 3.916. Director responsive to students' concerns. 3.5 3.9 3.8 4.1 3.3 4.017. Availability of faculty outside class. 3.9 3.9 4.0 4.1 3.9 4.118. Use of allotted course time. 3.8 3.7 3.9 3.7 3.5 3.819. Rate faculty's use of computers. 3.8 3.9 3.8 3.9 3.8 3.920. Usefulness of computers in the course. 3.6 3.8 3.7 3.8 3.6 3.821. Idea of integrating more computers. 3.2 3.3 3.1 3.4 3.1 3.6

Students have, in general, rated this course highly over the past 5 years. The only exception was a dip in the evaluations that occurred when the curriculum was changed so that Anatomy and Physiology were being taught side by side probably due to structural problems with the schedule the first year of the new curriculum and the unanticipated problems that always occur when a change of this magnitude takes place. On a scale of 1-5 (with 5 excellent and 1 poor) the students have rated the Overall Quality of this course as 3.69 (03/04) and 3.92 (04/05).


The major success has been the coordination of this course with Anatomy and Physical Diagnosis 1 that began with the 02/03 academic year. After some initial difficulties with structure and scheduling, this coordination improved steadily through the 03/04 and 04/05 academic years. Only minor tweaking remains to be done.




Course title: Physical Diagnosis ISponsoring departmentor unit: Family Medicine

Name of course director: Eric Coris



Teaching Staff InvolvedFamily Medicine (Lead Department) 8

Internal Medicine Department 24Neurology Department 2OB/GYN Department 3

Orthopedics 2Otolaryngology Department 4

Anatomy Department 1Athletic Training 2

School of Physical Therapy 6

Course Objectives


Yes x No

Briefly summarize the objectives/content areas covered in the course. The student will develop skills in clear communication with divergent groups of patients The student will identify and describe the anatomy of the human body. The student will describe the physiology of the organ systems that make up the human body. The student will identify and explain the function of proper equipment for examination of

different organs and areas of the body. The student will identify expected age and condition variations for pathologies within different

organ system. The student will learn to work with other medical students in the development of a differential

diagnosis The student will develop skills understanding systematic approaches to health care by working

collaboratively with students from the department of physical therapy




Course title: Physical Diagnosis I

The student will understand the concept of patient autonomy. The student will explain the divergent ways different family members are impacted by illness. The student will acquire the skills needed to facilitate life-long learning is regards to physical

diagnosis The student will understand herself both as a person and as a physician. The student will demonstrate an appreciation of the cultural differences in the way different

groups approach medicine The student will understand how socio-economic factors play a role in receiving medical care The student will collect pertinent history about the organ system, including PMH, FH, SH. The student will develop skills in the delivery of information about stressful procedures and of

bad news.



The course objectives and specific exam skills objectives are emailed to preceptors at least 1 week in advance of their teaching session. In this communication, the format of the small- group skills session is described, along with suggested methods (e.g. first demonstrate an exam technique, then ask each student in the group to perform it; encourage questions and a collaborative learning environment, etc.)


Not applicable.

Student Evaluation


Not applicable.






x Multiple-choice, true/false, matching questions x Laboratory practical itemsx Fill-in, short answer questions (lab manual) x Problem-solving exercises (Joint Cases)

Essay questions or papers PresentationsOral exams x Preceptor ratingsOSCE or standardized patient exam Other (describe)


Students study online material (narrated PowerPoint lectures) and then must pass an online quiz assessment. The online publisher material has practice quizzes for each chapter that may be taken multiple times and are not used in the calculation of course grades. The Course Director gives an exam review session prior to each block exam in Block B2. At the end of PDI, students are assigned to view a video-streamed example of a complete History and Physical Exam and to evaluate the strengths and weaknesses of it. This is a pass/fail assignment—all students who submit the assignment will pass. The objective of the assignment is to prepare them for the benchmark activity of PDII when each student conducts an H&P on a model patient and is graded on it.


Yes x No



Educational space: Classrooms are adequate. The Center for Advanced Clinical Learning is an excellent new facility for PD skills sessions and joint cases. The cardiovascular and pulmonary simulators are excellent teaching tools made available to us through the Center.

Teaching Tools: The female pelvic and male gu anatomical models we use are old and many are broken and need to be replaced.

Computer software that teaches doctor/patient communication skills is needed to enhance the practical skill-building activities. Personnel from the USF Department of Communication are willing to teach relevant aspects but at a high financial cost to the College of Medicine—we question if these services could be free of charge within the university system.





Faculty: Recruitment of faculty preceptors for small-group sessions continues to be a tremendous challenge, because of the frequent priority given to meeting clinic financial objectives of departments over teaching responsibilities. When there are not enough faculty physicians willing to teach, we resort to having 4th year medical students do the volunteer teaching of small groups.

Standardized Patients: The Center for Advanced Clinical Learning is responsible for providing adequate numbers of model patients for each small-group skills training session. This support has been inadequate in the past; too often sessions have to be combined or re-scheduled because there are not enough patients. Recruiting patients with relevant findings has also been inadequate.


Academic Year: 05/06 05/06 04/05 04/05 03/04 03/04

Avg.Y1 courses

Avg.Y1 courses

Avg.Y1 courses

Scale: 1-Poor, 2-Fair, 3-Good, 4-VeryGood, 5-Excellent Questions: 1. Rate the course overall. 3.7 3.8 3.6 3.8 3.8 3.92. Structure and curricular design. 3.4 3.7 3.2 3.7 3.6 3.93. Course achieved goals and objectives. 3.6 3.8 3.5 3.9 3.6 3.95. Quality of lectures. 3.4 3.5 3.5 3.7 3.7 3.86. Clinical correlations. 3.9 3.8 3.8 3.8 4.0 3.97. Quality of laboratory exercises 3.7 3.5 3.9 3.7 3.8 3.68. Quality of small group sessions. 3.4 3.5 3.8 3.7 3.8 3.59. Clinical relevance of the material presented. 4.1 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.1 4.110. Usefulness of Syllabus and handouts. 3.6 3.7 3.6 3.7 3.6 3.911. Exam effectiveness. 3.4 3.4 3.7 3.7 3.9 3.712. Clarity of exam questions. 3.4 3.3 3.6 3.6 3.8 3.713. Feedback regarding examinations. 4.3 3.5 3.5 3.7 4.0 3.814. Appropriate workload for this course. 3.8 3.8 3.6 3.8 4.0 3.916. Director responsive to students' concerns. 3.9 3.9 3.9 4.1 3.8 4.017. Availability of faculty outside class. 3.8 3.9 3.9 4.1 3.9 4.118. Use of allotted course time. 3.6 3.7 3.3 3.7 3.7 3.819. Rate faculty's use of computers. 4.0 3.9 3.8 3.9 4.0 3.920. Usefulness of computers in the course. 4.0 3.8 3.8 3.8 4.0 3.821. Idea of integrating more computers. 3.1 3.3 3.2 3.4 3.5 3.6





This course is a “hybrid” of primarily online lecture delivery combined with interactive small-group skills training. For the past several years, some students have voiced concern that Physical Diagnosis is the least appropriate course to be “online” and that they would prefer more classroom lectures and time to further practice exam skills in small groups. They have suggested that they could practice by using each other as patients for many of the exam skills sessions if more time were allocated in the schedule. Some students do not like the grading policy for participation in clinical skills sessions, because they feel it creates a competitive environment and there needs to be more standardization among the preceptors. (Preceptors evaluate individual students on a 25 point scale.)

How these concerns are being addressed: 1) The Course Director has added narration to the online PowerPoint lectures to ensure that they are user-friendly to maximize comprehension. Student request for more course time (classroom lectures) in the curriculum is beyond our control and is a decision made at the curriculum committee level.

2) Additional time for clinical skills practice is offered by allowing students to do volunteer visits to 2 Public Sector Medicine Program (PSMP) clinics where USF faculty preceptors attend. The timeframe for the volunteer visits is March through the summer months.

3) We have also addressed the concern by limiting small groups to no more than 4 students per preceptor so than each student gets more individual attention from the preceptor and time to practice the skills on the model patient. As to grading student participation in skills sessions and joint cases, there has been no policy change.

4) Preceptors are briefed prior to their session in an attempt to standardize their evaluation of student participation, but there is still variation among preceptors.

Overall, student feedback consistently indicates a desire for more structured class time with more interaction/face time with the instructor. Students want to see a live demonstration of an exam skill before being asked to practice it during a session where they are being graded for participation. They want to be able to ask questions of an instructor (e.g. rate the relative importance of different clinical techniques and symptoms). These concerns have been addressed within the parameters of online course delivery.


Successes: 1) Students recognize the relevance of physical exam skills that they learn in the course and value the small-group skills training sessions. They like and desire more time for these practice sessions. (Problem: limitation of total curriculum hours and allotment per course).

2) Students like contact with real patients who are invited to participate in 8 joint case activities throughout the year. They would like more time with each invited patient but this is a challenge due to the class size (147 students) and only 2 hours available for all rotations to meet with





patients. If we could offer a small compensation to these invited patients, it might cut down on the cancellation rate and result in more patients being available to interact with the students.

3) Students give excellent evaluation marks to the Course Director and comment positively on his teaching skills in the clinical sessions. They desire more contact time with him because of this. They like the fact that he offers “live” exam review sessions in the classroom prior to each Block B2 exam.

4) Although the online delivery of lectures in this course is valued by some students and disliked by others, it does instill the concept of self-directed learning and offers students the flexibility to manage their study time effectively.

Challenges:1) Lecture material needs refinement and additional audio/visual enhancement.2) Need more participation from faculty of other departments in order to decrease the size of small groups in skills training.




Course title: Imaging for AnatomySponsoring departmentor unit: Radiology

Name of course director: Junsung Choi, M.D.


Organizational Unit(List Department. If more than one, list as

Interdisciplinary.)Number of Teaching Staff

InvolvedRadiology 3

Course Objectives


Yes X No


The student will become familiar with conventional radiography and understand basics of how medical images are made.

The student will become familiar with different types of imaging techniques (radiography, CT, MRI, ultrasound, scintigraphy, angiography).

Students will obtain knowledge of and understand the relationships within:o Abdominal/Gastrointestinal radiology o Endocrine and Metabolic Imagingo Musculoskeletal Imagingo Head and Neck Imagingo Cardiopulmonary radiologyo Abdominal/Genitourinary radiology

The student will develop a basic understanding of medical imaging and its use related to patient care.

The student will basic understanding of which imaging modalities are useful in the diagnosis of disease states.

Student will demonstrate self-directed learning engagements into the issues of medical imaging. The student will develop an understanding of the ethical issues of patient autonomy in

conjunction of medical imaging, especially regarding the right to refuse treatment. The student will become informatively conversational on key medical issues affected by medical

imaging.

Preparation for TeachingIf graduate students, postdoctoral fellows in the biomedical sciences, or residents teach in the course (as lecturers, small group facilitators, laboratory instructors), describe how they are informed about the course objectives and prepared for their teaching role.




Course title: Imaging for Anatomy

Residents in diagnostic radiology occasionally teach during joint case conferences. The content of the material to be presented is provided in Power Point presentation format which is given and reviewed by the faculty with the resident prior to the conference as well as the joint case history/clinical scenario. Objectives for the conference are also reviewed with faculty to ensure that objectives for the conference are met.

If the entire course is taught at more than one site (e.g., at geographically separate campuses), describe how faculty members at all sites are oriented to the objectives and grading system.Not applicable.

Student Evaluation

If NBME subject (shelf) examinations are used, give the mean scores for the last three classes:Not applicable.


X Multiple-choice, true/false, matching questions X Laboratory practical itemsFill-in, short answer questions Problem-solving exercisesEssay questions or papers PresentationsOral exams Preceptor ratingsOSCE or standardized patient exam Other (describe)



Yes No X



Adequate.





Course title: Imaging for Anatomy

Academic Year: 05/06 05/06 04/05 04/05 03/04 03/04

Avg.Y1 courses

Avg.Y1 courses

Avg.Y1 courses

Scale: 1-Poor, 2-Fair, 3-Good, 4-VeryGood, 5-Excellent Questions: 1. Rate the course overall. 3.5 3.8 3.8 3.8 3.5 3.92. Structure and curricular design. 3.6 3.7 3.8 3.7 3.4 3.93. Course achieved goals and objectives. 3.6 3.8 3.9 3.9 3.5 3.95. Quality of lectures. 3.3 3.5 3.6 3.7 3.3 3.86. Clinical correlations. 3.3 3.8 3.7 3.8 3.5 3.97. Quality of laboratory exercises 3.1 3.5 NA 3.7 3.4 3.68. Quality of small group sessions. 2.9 3.5 3.4 3.7 3.4 3.59. Clinical relevance of the material presented. 3.8 4.0 3.9 4.0 3.7 4.110. Usefulness of Syllabus and handouts. 3.3 3.7 3.7 3.7 3.5 3.911. Exam effectiveness. 3.7 3.4 4.0 3.7 3.6 3.712. Clarity of exam questions. 3.7 3.3 4.2 3.6 3.7 3.713. Feedback regarding examinations 2.9 3.5 3.9 3.7 3.3 3.814. Appropriate workload for this course. 4.0 3.8 4.2 3.8 3.9 3.916. Director responsive to students' concerns. 3.4 3.9 3.9 4.1 3.3 4.017. Availability of faculty outside class. 3.3 3.9 3.8 4.1 3.3 4.118. Use of allotted course time. 3.5 3.7 3.8 3.7 3.6 3.819. Rate faculty's use of computers. 3.8 3.9 4.1 3.9 3.9 3.920. Usefulness of computers in the course. 3.8 3.8 4.0 3.8 3.9 3.821. Idea of integrating more computers. 3.5 3.3 3.6 3.4 3.6 3.6


Strengths of the course: The course allows student appreciation of clinical relevance of anatomy to medicine. Early exposure to imaging should increase their skills in understanding and ordering of the variety of available imaging studies to answer clinical/medical questions affecting anatomy and physiology.




Course title: Longitudinal Clinical Experience I Sponsoring departmentor unit: Office of Educational Affairs

Name of course director: Richard Hoffmann



Anesthesia 2 Dermatology 3

Family Medicine 1 Hematology/Oncology 6

Internal Medicine 33 Neurology 4

Neurosurgery 5 Obstetrics & Gynecology 2

Ophthalmology 4 Otolaryngology 3

Pediatrics 14 Psychiatry 3 Radiology 2 Surgery 25

Course Objectives


Yes x No


The competent LCE student demonstrates professional identity, professional responsibility and the attitude necessary to provide quality, humanistic and ethical care for an individual patient.

The competent LCE student demonstrates the ability to communicate effectively, orally, and in writing, with patients, their families, and with colleagues; demonstrates the ability to collaborate with others as team member and leader.

The competent LCE student demonstrates appreciation for cultural, psychosocial, and economic differences and the contribution of diverse perspectives on understanding of clinical issues.

The competent LCE student applies the acquisition of proper study skills, physical, examination skills, ethical standards and fosters attitudes such as a desire for knowledge that can ensure success in medical school and beyond.




Course title: Longitudinal Clinical Experience I

The competent LCE student uses resources appropriately to establish knowledge, skills and attitudes; for a clinical base; develops intellectual curiosity and self-motivation to promote self-learning of clinical knowledge; and demonstrates ability to describe strategies that can be used to keep up with current medical concepts and treatments.

The competent LCE student demonstrates application of basic science into clinical medicine through the ability to assimilate new knowledge as a self-directed learner and recalls common basic science concepts and application to clinical experiences.

The competent LCE student demonstrates the ability to competently perform basic physical and history taking procedures and recognize one’s own limitations in these skills.



Not applicable.


Not applicable.

Student Evaluation


Not applicable.


Multiple-choice, true/false, matching questions Laboratory practical itemsFill-in, short answer questions Problem-solving exercisesEssay questions or papers x PresentationsOral exams x Preceptor ratingsOSCE or standardized patient exam Other (describe)






No exams or quizzes are given in the course.


Yes x If provided bypreceptor

No



Adequate – teaching involves one preceptor, either a faculty member or community-based physician, per student; educational space, computer hardware and software, and support personnel are not applicable to LCE.


Academic Year: 05/06 05/06 04/05 04/05 03/04 03/04

Avg.Y1 courses

Avg.Y1 courses

Avg.Y1 courses

Scale: 1-Poor, 2-Fair, 3-Good, 4-VeryGood, 5-Excellent Questions: 1. Rate the course overall. 4.4 3.8 4.1 3.8 4.4 3.92. Structure and curricular design 4.2 3.7 4.1 3.7 4.2 3.93. Course achieved goals and objectives. 4.4 3.8 4.1 3.9 4.2 3.95. Quality of lectures. NA 3.5 NA 3.7 NA 3.86. Clinical correlations. NA 3.8 NA 3.8 NA 3.97. Quality of laboratory exercises NA 3.5 NA 3.7 NA 3.68. Quality of small group sessions. 4.1 3.5 4.0 3.7 3.9 3.59. Clinical relevance of the material presented. 4.4 4.0 4.1 4.0 4.4 4.110. Usefulness of Syllabus and handouts. 4.2 3.7 4.0 3.7 4.3 3.911. Exam effectiveness. NA 3.4 NA 3.7 NA 3.712. Clarity of exam questions. NA 3.3 NA 3.6 NA 3.713. Feedback regarding examinations NA 3.5 NA 3.7 NA 3.814. Appropriate workload for this course. 4.4 3.8 4.1 3.8 NA 3.9





16. Director responsive to students' concerns. 3.8 3.9 4.0 4.1 4.0 4.017. Availability of faculty outside class. NA 3.9 NA 4.1 NA 4.118. Use of allotted course time. NA 3.7 NA 3.7 NA 3.819. Rate faculty's use of computers. NA 3.9 NA 3.9 NA 3.920. Usefulness of computers in the course. NA 3.8 NA 3.8 NA 3.821. Idea of integrating more computers. NA 3.3 NA 3.4 NA 3.6

Student comments

“I think this course is one of the best parts of our curriculum. We get to put into practice and integrate the things we have learned on class in “the real world.”“Although I did not have an optimal LCE experience this year, I can tell that in theory LCE is a great course. The fact that we have access to clinical experience so early is phenomenal!!!”“It brought in practical aspects of medicine by allowing us to learn from cases. I just loved having the opportunity for so much patient care interaction I the first year. It’s a very educational course that also allows you to see the light at the end of the tunnel after all the hours of book learning.”“Excellent REAL WORLD experience. Definitely preparing us better for the day when we are in the room by ourselves and expected to interact with the patient.”“I was exposed to so many new things and felt like a real doctor when I saw patients by myself!”“Outstanding teacher, great doctor and mentor. This experience was priceless!!”“Availability to shadow several doctors and watch surgery and even perform some procedures.”


We have added 20+ private practice physicians from the Watson Clinic as preceptors in AY05-06. Ongoing concerns include increasing the number of primary care preceptors, recruiting more preceptors in Hillsborough County, and placing students with preceptors who provide maximal patient contact.




Course title: Clinical Diagnosis and ReasoningSponsoring departmentor unit: Office of Educational Affairs

Name of course director: Deanna Wathington



Internal Medicine 2Psychiatry 1

Surgery 2Radiology 2

Anesthesiology 1Neurology 1

Family Practice 1

Course Objectives


Yes x No

Briefly summarize the objectives/content areas covered in the course. The student will understand the importance of strong and continually improving doctor-patient

communication in the diagnostic and treatment process. The student will understand the terminology and components of diagnostic reasoning and clinical

problem solving. The student will demonstrate an ability to apply clinical reasoning strategies to generate a

differential diagnosis. The student will practice achieving diagnostic closure with reasonable certainty. The student will promote and incorporate a ‘best evidence’ approach to data, patient and family

interests, professional ethics, and insurance interests The student will develop a hypothesis generation, problem-solving strategy, and logical

sequencing into their clinical practice. The student will appreciate that clinical decision making and reasoning are patient based, not test

based paradigms. The student will understand that all physician/patient interactions and encounters begin with an

ethical base and understanding. The student will describe the pathophysiologic manifestations of diseases that affect organ

systems as covered in each block. The student will discuss the strategies which can be applied for effective clinical reasoning to

occur. The student will develop skills in laboratory/radiologic test selection and interpretation




Course title: Clinical Diagnosis and Reasoning



Not applicable


Not applicable.

Student Evaluation


NBME Introduction to Clinical Diagnosis exam given for the first time in Spring 2005.

Year: 2004 2005 2006Score: Not given 517.6 562.1National Percentile

60 76





x Multiple-choice, true/false, matching questions Laboratory practical itemsFill-in, short answer questions x Problem-solving exercisesEssay questions or papers PresentationsOral exams Preceptor ratingsOSCE or standardized patient exam Other (describe)


None.






Yes No x

Course Outcomes/EvaluationComment on the adequacy of faculty and other resources to teach the course (e.g., educational space, computer hardware and software, support personnel).

Resources are adequate.


Academic Year: 05/06 05/06 04/05 04/05 03/04 03/04

Avg. Y2 courses

Avg. Y2 courses

Avg. Y2 courses

Scale: 1-Poor, 2-Fair, 3-Good, 4-VeryGood, 5-Excellent

Questions: 1. Rate the course overall. 2.9 3.7 3.8 3.8 3.8 3.62. Structure and curricular design. 2.7 3.5 3.7 3.7 3.7 3.53. Course achieved goals and objectives. 2.9 3.6 3.7 3.7 3.8 3.65. Quality of lectures. 2.8 3.4 3.6 3.5 3.7 3.56. Clinical correlations. 3.2 3.5 3.9 3.8 3.9 3.67. Quality of laboratory exercises 2.9 3.4 3.8 3.7 3.9 3.58. Quality of small group sessions. 2.8 3.5 3.8 3.8 3.8 3.59. Clinical relevance of the material presented. 3.3 3.8 4.1 3.9 4.1 3.810. Usefulness of Syllabus and handouts. 2.8 3.5 3.8 3.7 3.8 3.711. Exam effectiveness. 3.3 3.5 4.0 3.7 4.0 3.612. Clarity of exam questions. 3.7 3.5 4.3 3.7 4.4 3.613. Feedback regarding examinations. 3.5 3.7 4.1 3.9 4.2 3.814. Appropriate workload for this course. 3.6 3.6 4.1 3.9 4.2 3.716. Director responsive to students' concerns. 3.6 3.9 4.4 4.0 4.6 3.917. Availability of faculty outside class. 3.5 3.8 4.3 4.0 4.5 4.018. Use of allotted course time. 2.9 3.5 3.8 3.6 3.9 3.619. Rate faculty's use of computers. 3.0 3.5 3.7 3.8 3.4 3.6





20. Usefulness of computers in the course. 3.0 3.5 3.8 3.8 3.6 3.6

21. Idea of integrating more computers. 2.9 3.2 3.6 3.4 3.3 3.2


Successes- Students performed above average nationally on NBME exams and are doing well in third year. Fourth year students also performed well on the CPX. Positive feedback received from students regarding the course. More attempts at integration with basic science especially pathology and MMI, thanks to their course directors.




Course title: Clinical Problem SolvingSponsoring departmentor unit: Molecular Pharmacology and Physiology

Name of course director: Greg Nicolosi



Teaching Staff InvolvedAnatomy 3

COPH 1DIO 9

Internal Medicine 8Med. Micro. 4Pathology 2Pediatrics 4

Physiology 4Psychiatry 1

Surgery 2

Course Objectives


Yes x No


The student will show respect for colleagues in all verbal exchanges and interactions The student will demonstrate cultural competency in formulating approaches to each case

scenario. The student will apply basic science and clinical concepts to the analysis of each case study. The student will develop analytical skills and information seeking skills in order to formulate a

differential diagnosis for each case study. The student will apply understanding to determine what additional information is needed to

narrow the diagnosis. The student will develop a therapeutic plan based on the best evidence available. The student will develop a diagnostic and treatment plan based on the principle that medicine is

the art of applied probabilities. The student will demonstrate cooperation and fairness in working as a member of the group. The student will demonstrate a willingness to share the workload and to produce a quality

response to learning issues that arise.




Course title: Clinical Problem Solving

The student will demonstrate an awareness and sensitivity to issues of patients’ rights, preservation of dignity, and respect for cultural values.

The student will develop abilities to self-evaluate participation and usefulness in regards to the group.

The student will demonstrate abilities in using available resources and providing accurate and succinct information consistent with the principles of evidence based medicine.

The student will demonstrate the ability to discern the ethical issues contained in the clinical case studies of these sessions.

The student will demonstrate the ability to extract an adequate case history and to determine, based on sound scientific reasoning, the medical procedures and lab data necessary to resolve the problems presented in the cases.



The course objectives are provided in the Facilitator’s Manual and discussed during the Facilitator’s Orientation Session. The role of the facilitator is detailed at this session and background on the problem-based learning approach is provided. The one clinical fellow used in this course is partnered with his mentor who is present with him at every session.


Not applicable.

Student Evaluation


Not applicable.








Students are evaluated on the basis of the quality of their participation in the 6 cases.


Yes x No



Rooms to hold small-group sessions are at a premium and it is a very time consuming process to try to locate and schedule them.

It is very difficult and tremendously time -consuming trying to get sufficient faculty for this course.

Course Coordinator is highly competent and has a terrific attitude but is responsible for staffing too many projects at the same time.

The library staff has been exceedingly helpful and highly effective in helping to prepare the case materials.


Academic Year: 05/06 05/06 04/05 04/05 03/04 03/04

Avg. Y2 courses

Avg. Y2 courses

Avg. Y2 courses


Questions: 1. Rate the course overall. 3.9 3.7 3.5 3.8 3.6 3.62. Structure and curricular design. 3.7 3.5 3.4 3.7 3.6 3.53. Course achieved goals and objectives. 3.8 3.6 3.4 3.7 3.6 3.65. Quality of lectures. NA 3.4 3.6 3.5 3.7 3.56. Clinical correlations. NA 3.5 NA 3.8 NA 3.67. Quality of laboratory exercises. NA 3.4 NA 3.7 NA 3.5





8. Quality of small group sessions. 4.0 3.5 NA 3.8 NA 3.59. Clinical relevance of the material presented. 4.1 3.8 3.9 3.9 3.9 3.810. Usefulness of Syllabus and handouts. 3.3 3.5 3.4 3.7 3.6 3.711. Exam effectiveness. NA 3.5 3.5 3.7 3.7 3.612. Clarity of exam questions. NA 3.5 3.6 3.7 3.8 3.613. Feedback regarding examinations. NA 3.7 3.5 3.9 3.8 3.814. Appropriate workload for this course. 3.5 3.6 3.6 3.9 3.6 3.716. Director responsive to students' concerns. 3.7 3.9 3.8 4.0 3.7 3.917. Availability of faculty outside class. 3.6 3.8 3.9 4.0 4.0 4.018. Use of allotted course time. 3.7 3.5 3.4 3.6 3.5 3.619. Rate faculty's use of computers. 3.2 3.5 3.5 3.8 3.4 3.620. Usefulness of computers in the course. 3.5 3.5 3.6 3.8 3.5 3.621. Idea of integrating more computers. 3.2 3.2 3.4 3.4 3.4 3.2


The course received excellent, enthusiastic evaluations by both faculty preceptors and students. The great majority agreed it fulfilled the course objectives. The main problem to be overcome will be to get more uniformity in the student evaluation process. While this issue was specifically dealt with during the orientation and again midway through the course, more work remains to be done. Various methods to accomplish this in a problem-based learning course are being explored.




Course title: Colloquium IISponsoring departmentor unit: Office of Educational Affairs

Name of course director: Marion Ridley



Teaching Staff InvolvedObstetric/Gynecology 7

Pediatrics 9Surgery 11

Ophthalmology 5Radiology 1

Internal Medicine 12Family Medicine 1

Neurology 5Molecular Medicine 1

Pathology 1Psychiatry & Behavioral Medicine 2

Ethics & Humanities 1Physical Therapy 1Otolaryngology 1

Course Objectives


Yes x No

Briefly summarize the objectives/content areas covered in the course. The student will explore the link between basic science and the clinical practice of medicine. The student will develop skills reading clinical medical literature. The student will develop skills in active learning and question building.



Not applicable.




Course title: Colloquium II


Not applicable.

Student Evaluation


Not applicable.


Multiple-choice, true/false, matching questions Laboratory practical itemsFill-in, short answer questions Problem-solving exercisesEssay questions or papers PresentationsOral exams Preceptor ratingsOSCE or standardized patient exam Other (describe)



Yes No x



Colloquium sessions for both the first- and second-year classes simultaneously do not allow for sufficient interaction between the students and faculty. The only facility that can accommodate both classes is the HSC auditorium which seats several hundred and is not well-suited to interaction between presenters and participants. A change in the format of Colloquium for the next academic year is planned with separate Colloquia for first- and second-year students.






Academic Year: 05/06 05/06 04/05 04/05 03/04

Avg. Y2 courses

Avg. Y2 courses

Not avail.

Scale: 1-Poor, 2-Fair, 3-Good, 4-VeryGood, 5-ExcellentQuestions: NA1. Rate the course overall. 3.9 3.7 3.2 3.8 2. Structure and curricular design. NA 3.5 3.2 3.7 3. Course achieved goals and objectives. 3.9 3.6 3.2 3.7 5. Quality of lectures. NA 3.4 3.1 3.5 6. Clinical correlations. NA 3.5 NA 3.8 7. Quality of laboratory exercises. NA 3.4 NA 3.7 8. Quality of small group sessions. NA 3.5 NA 3.8 9. Clinical relevance of the material presented. 4.2 3.8 3.3 3.9 10. Usefulness of Syllabus and handouts. NA 3.5 3.1 3.7 11. Exam effectiveness. NA 3.5 NA 3.7 12. Clarity of exam questions. NA 3.5 NA 3.7 13. Feedback regarding examinations. NA 3.7 NA 3.9 14. Appropriate workload for this course. NA 3.6 NA 3.9 16. Director responsive to students' concerns. NA 3.9 3.6 4.0 17. Availability of faculty outside class. NA 3.8 3.6 4.0 18. Use of allotted course time. NA 3.5 3.2 3.6 19. Rate faculty's use of computers. NA 3.5 3.6 3.8 20. Usefulness of computers in the course. NA 3.5 3.6 3.8 21. Idea of integrating more computers. NA 3.2 3.2 3.4


A major source of pride is the efforts and accomplishments by the faculty of the College of Medicine to integrate clinical medicine into the first two years of the curriculum. Colloquium is but one component of this effort and accomplishment but is unique in its opportunity to address clinical topics that are not included in the curriculum elsewhere or are of current importance because of recent advances or societal implications. It has also allowed exposure of the students to some of the less visible medical specialties such as assisted reproductive technology.

The greatest concern regarding Colloquium is in the competition for the time and attention of students during the first and second years. Since Colloquium is graded on a “satisfactory/unsatisfactory” basis, there is a tendency for it to be perceived as a less valuable or important component of the curriculum as compared to courses graded on the basis of examinations. Attendance at Colloquium often decreases





before major examinations. The goal of providing clinical medical perspective early in the curriculum can fade in the face a pending major examination. During the first year that Colloquium was offered in the curriculum, quizzes were given at the beginning of each session covering the previous session and the current session’s reading assignment. The unintended effect was to produce additional anxiety in the students and was abandoned at mid-year. In general, the students do take their responsibilities and commitments in Colloquium seriously and have generally rated most sessions as beneficial.

An additional concern is the difficulty of providing a meaningful educational experience for both first- and second-year students simultaneously. Unfortunately there is only one venue available in the Health Science Center that can accommodate the first- and second-year classes simultaneously—the HSC auditorium. The combined classes, however, fill less than half of this room which is not conducive to interaction with faculty or colleagues.




Course title: Longitudinal Clinical Experience IISponsoring departmentor unit: Office of Educational Affairs

Name of course director: Richard Hoffmann



Anesthesia 2 Dermatology 3

Family Medicine 1 Hematology/Oncology 6

Internal Medicine 33 Neurology 4

Neurosurgery 5 Obstetrics & Gynecology 2

Ophthalmology 4 Otolaryngology 3

Pediatrics 14 Psychiatry 3 Radiology 2 Surgery 25

Course Objectives


Yes x No


The competent LCE student demonstrates professional identity, professional responsibility and the attitude necessary to provide quality, humanistic and ethical care for an individual patient.

The competent LCE student demonstrates the ability to communicate effectively, orally, and in writing, with patients, their families, and with colleagues; demonstrates the ability to collaborate with others as team member and leader.

The competent LCE student demonstrates appreciation for cultural, psychosocial, and economic differences and the contribution of diverse perspectives on understanding of clinical issues.

The competent LCE student applies the acquisition of proper study skills, physical, examination skills, ethical standards and fosters attitudes such as a desire to thirst? for knowledge that can ensure success in medical school and beyond.

The competent LCE student uses resources appropriately to establish knowledge, skills and attitudes; for a clinical base; develops intellectual curiosity and self-motivation to




Course title: Longitudinal Clinical Experience II

promote self-learning of clinical knowledge; and demonstrates ability to describe strategies that can be used to keep up with current medical concepts and treatments.

The competent LCE student demonstrates application of basic science into clinical medicine through the ability to assimilate new knowledge as a self-directed learner and recalls common basic science concepts and application to clinical experiences.

The competent LCE student demonstrates the ability to competently perform basic physical and history taking procedures and recognize one’s own limitations in these skills.



Not applicable.


Not applicable.

Student Evaluation


Not applicable.




No exams or quizzes are given in the course.






Yes If provided bypreceptor

No



Adequate – teaching involves one preceptor, either a faculty member or community-based physician, per student; educational space, computer hardware and software, and support personnel are not applicable to LCE.


“I think this course is one of the best parts of our curriculum. We get to put into practice and integrate the things we have learned in class in ‘the real world’.”“Although I did not have an optimal LCE experience this year, I can tell that in theory LCE is a great course. The fact that we have access to clinical experience so early is phenomenal!!”“It brought in practical aspects of medicine by allowing us to learn from cases. I just loved having the opportunity for so much patient care interaction in the first year. It’s a very educational course that also allows you to see the light at the end of the tunnel after all the hours of book learning.”“Excellent REAL WORLD experience. Definitely preparing us better for the day when we are in the room by ourselves and expected to interact with the patient.”“I was exposed to so many new things and felt like a real doctor when I saw patients by myself!”“Outstanding teacher, great doctor and mentor. This experience was priceless!!”“Availability to shadow several doctors and watch surgery and even perform some procedures.”

Academic Year: 05/06 05/06 04/05 04/05 03/04 03/04

Avg. Y2 courses

Avg. Y2 courses

Avg. Y2 courses

Scale: 1-Poor, 2-Fair, 3-Good, 4-VeryGood, 5-Excellent Questions: 1. Rate the course overall. 4.0 3.7 4.3 3.8 3.9 3.62. Structure and curricular design. 3.9 3.5 4.2 3.7 3.7 3.53. Course achieved goals and objectives. 4.0 3.6 4.1 3.7 3.8 3.65. Quality of lectures. NA 3.4 NA 3.5 NA 3.5





6. Clinical correlations. NA 3.5 NA 3.8 NA 3.67. Quality of laboratory exercises NA 3.4 NA 3.7 NA 3.58. Quality of small group sessions. 4.0 3.5 3.7 3.8 3.6 3.59. Clinical relevance of the material presented. 4.1 3.8 4.3 3.9 4.0 3.810. Usefulness of Syllabus and handouts. 3.8 3.5 4.1 3.7 3.8 3.711. Exam effectiveness. NA 3.5 NA 3.7 NA 3.612. Clarity of exam questions. NA 3.5 NA 3.7 NA 3.613. Feedback regarding examinations. NA 3.7 NA 3.9 NA 3.814. Appropriate workload for this course. 3.8 3.6 4.1 3.9 3.7 3.716. Director responsive to students' concerns. 3.9 3.9 3.8 4.0 3.4 3.917. Availability of faculty outside class. NA 3.8 NA 4.0 NA 4.018. Use of allotted course time. NA 3.5 NA 3.6 NA 3.619. Rate faculty's use of computers. NA 3.5 NA 3.8 NA 3.620. Usefulness of computers in the course. NA 3.5 NA 3.8 NA 3.621. Idea of integrating more computers. NA 3.2 NA 3.4 NA 3.2


Have added 20+ private practice physicians from the Watson Clinic as preceptors in AY05-06. Ongoing concerns include increasing the number of primary care preceptors, recruiting more preceptors in Hillsborough county, and placing students with preceptors who provide maximal patient contact.




Course title: Pathology and Laboratory MedicineSponsoring departmentor unit: Pathology and Cell Biology

Name of course director: Donald Wheeler



Teaching Staff InvolvedUSF Pathology

Core faculty 3Volunteer faculty (Tampa General, ME office, VAMC, community hospitals)

31

USF Interdisciplinary Oncology (Pathology and other divisions)

24

Course Objectives


Yes x No

Briefly summarize the objectives/content areas covered in the course. The student will understand both inter-individual and intra-individual variability within a

pathophysiological context The student will describe the mechanisms, recognize the morphology, and discuss the functional

significance and clinical relevance of cell death, neoplasia, and hemostasis and thrombosis The student will describe the genetic basis and clinical presentation of genetic disorders,

particularly in the pediatric setting The student will synthesize, based on available clinical and laboratory data, strategies for the

differential diagnosis and follow-up of major disease states involving various organs/tissues The student will assimilate historical and laboratory data to generate and tailor a differential

diagnosis list based on Autopsy Conference Experiences The student will predict pathologic gross and microscopic autopsy findings based on the factored

differential diagnosis(es) The student will demonstrate professional and scholarly collaboration with other health care

professionals The student will understand the application and necessity of judicious use of cost-effective

laboratory tests for evaluating and monitoring disease states The student will recognize the professionalism required in the field of Medicine, including that

which applies to the autopsy The student will perform venipuncture, peripheral blood smear preparation, and ABO/Rh blood

typing




Course title: Pathology and Cell Biology

The student will present laboratory data in the evaluation and diagnosis of pathophysiological processes



Pathology residents act as instructors in the laboratory exercises of students in PLM which include case presentations and microscopic and gross pathology exercises. Residents receive copies of USF Cares school objectives at the beginning of each academic year. Other than a specific, topic-oriented pre-lab meeting for working with the students, no other materials and/or workshops are provided. Faculty observations and student-written evaluations are reviewed with each resident during their annual performance review with the Residency Director.


Not applicable.

Student Evaluation

If NBME subject (shelf) examinations are used, give the mean scores for the last three classes:From director

Year: 2004 2005 2006Score: 75.3 534/77.5 521/76National Percentile 6 67 62






x Multiple-choice, true/false, matching questions Laboratory practical itemsFill-in, short answer questions Problem-solving exercises

x Essay questions or papers PresentationsOral exams Preceptor ratingsOSCE or standardized patient exam Other (describe)





Briefly describe any formative assessment activities (practice exams, quizzes, etc.) Board type multiple-choice questions on assigned reading and materials covered in lectures and

laboratory sessions. Fill-in-the-blanks reports, based on case studies typically requiring evaluation of glass slides of

kodachromes. Essay questions on major topics of Pathology On-line quizzes and examinations Autopsy protocol and autopsy conference report


Yes x No



Combining the resources of the USF Department of Pathology (including those faculty with clinical appointments at Tampa General Hospital, Veterans Administration Medical Center, Hillsborough County Medical Examiner Office, and a variety of smaller area hospitals) and the Pathology Division of the USF Department of Interdisciplinary Oncology, results in a number of faculty with general and subspecialty expertise to provide a rich educational experience for students in the PLM course. Lecture and large and small group space is adequate. Computer hardware and software support is good, especially in light of the numerous venues in which students can get hardwire access to the USF network in lecture halls and labs. The PLM course has a full time support staff person with a Master of Education degree, and secretarial support is adequate for course needs.


Academic Year: 05/06 05/06 04/05 04/05 03/04 03/04

Avg. Y2 courses

Avg. Y2 courses

Avg. Y2 courses


Questions: 1. Rate the course overall. 3.9 3.7 4.0 3.8 4.2 3.62. Structure and curricular design. 3.9 3.5 3.9 3.7 4.1 3.53. Course achieved goals and objectives. 4.0 3.6 4.0 3.7 4.1 3.65. Quality of lectures. 3.7 3.4 3.8 3.5 3.7 3.5





6. Clinical correlations. 3.8 3.5 3.9 3.8 4.0 3.67. Quality of laboratory exercises 3.5 3.4 3.5 3.7 3.6 3.58. Quality of small group sessions. 3.4 3.5 3.6 3.8 3.7 3.59. Clinical relevance of the material presented. 4.0 3.8 4.2 3.9 4.2 3.810. Usefulness of Syllabus and handouts. 3.9 3.5 3.8 3.7 4.1 3.711. Exam effectiveness. 3.6 3.5 3.9 3.7 4.1 3.612. Clarity of exam questions. 3.4 3.5 3.7 3.7 4.0 3.613. Feedback regarding examinations. 3.9 3.7 3.9 3.9 4.0 3.814. Appropriate workload for this course. 3.5 3.6 3.8 3.9 4.0 3.716. Director responsive to students' concerns. 4.0 3.9 3.7 4.0 4.4 3.917. Availability of faculty outside class. 4.0 3.8 3.9 4.0 4.4 4.018. Use of allotted course time. 3.8 3.5 3.8 3.6 4.0 3.619. Rate faculty's use of computers. 3.9 3.5 3.9 3.8 3.9 3.620. Usefulness of computers in the course. 3.8 3.5 3.9 3.8 3.8 3.621. Idea of integrating more computers. 3.4 3.2 3.5 3.4 3.4 3.2

2003-2004 STUDENT COMMENTS REGARDING BMS 6600Perceived major strengths of the course after taking the NBPST: course structure and overall integrated curriculum design achievement of course goals and objectives student preparation for the National Board Subject and USMLE Step I exams responsiveness of the course directors and faculty to students concerns clinical relevance and correlation of the material presented quality of laboratory exercises and small group discussions as learning experiences overall effectiveness of laboratory instruction review sessions at the end of each block

Perceived areas of the PLM Course requiring improvement: uneven quality of some lectures and laboratories during the two-semester period inequalities in lectures and laboratories were noted, some due to the inexperience and

teaching styles of some faculty, as well as occasional language barrier problems attendance in the laboratories was addressed and it was suggested that attendance be taken students suggestion that required three papers based on the Student CPC’s be reduced to

balance time limitations on the students Autopsy Conferences as currently structured are not perceived as the most beneficial

educational tools





2004-2005 STUDENT COMMENTS REGARDING BMS 6600Perceived major strengths of the course after taking the USMLE Step I Exam include the following: course structure and overall integrated curriculum design achievement of course goals and objectives effective student preparation for the National Board and USMLE Step I exams responsiveness of course directors and faculty to students concerns clinical relevance and correlation of the material presented the Autopsy experience gross specimens use in the laboratories review sessions

Perceived areas of the PLM Course requiring improvement: uneven quality of some lectures and the structure of the laboratories during the two-semester

period inequalities in lectures and laboratories were noted, some due to the inexperience and

teaching styles of some faculty, as well as occasional language barrier problems more emphasis placed on General Pathology the lack of any structured lectures on systemic diseases (i.e. SLE, sarcoidosis) structure of the Student CPC unevenness in the quality of the Autopsy Conference experience between the two locations.


Major Successes:1. large, diverse faculty, representing almost all aspects of Pathology and Laboratory Medicine, who are

committed to medical student education2. successful use of multiple modes of instruction (lecture, traditional lab, group discussion, case

presentation, reviews)3. development of learning objectives for each lecture hour and laboratory4. substantial autopsy experience at Medical Examiner’s office for every student during the course5. solid performance of students on National Board exams6. using Blackboard™ as a curricular tool, not only for delivery of materials, but as a forum for asking

questions and for discussion of course-related topics7. use of faculty outside of traditional Pathology Faculty (Internal Medicine, Radiology, etc.) to enhance

integration

Problems to be overcome:1. variable quality of lecturers, handouts, and presentations and failure of faculty to update teaching

materials2. increased clinical service responsibilities of faculty, both core and volunteer3. better integration of PLM course material with other Year 2 courses, removing unplanned

redundancy4. need of increasing use of technology (e.g., assessment functions in Blackboard™, Virtual

Microscopy) and other types of learning (e.g., small-group, team-based learning, computer-based)




Course title: PharmacologySponsoring departmentor unit: Molecular Pharmacology and Physiology

Name of course director: Joseph Krzanowski



Teaching Staff InvolvedPharmacology & Molecular Therapeutics 15

Course Objectives


Yes x No


Students will understand the currently known differences in patient responses to drugs based on Pharmacogenomics, and ethnic tendencies, and be able to explain these to patients

Students will obtain team decision making skills Students will demonstrate knowledge of the mechanisms of action, side-effects, clinical

indications, and drug interactions of all major drug groups. Students will demonstrate knowledge of alternate drug choices Students will demonstrate knowledge of use of drugs as preventative measures as compared to

treatment choices Students will relate mechanisms of action to clinical applications Students will understand the use of multiple drugs in the treatment and prevention of disease Students will collaborate in small teams of 4-5 members to evaluate case scenarios and evaluate

drug options



Not applicable.




Course title: Pharmacology


Not applicable.

Student Evaluation


Year: 2004 2005 2006Score: 72.1 512.7/71.6 529.7/73.0National Percentile

64 58 65


1992-93, 1993-94 NBME norm table




x Multiple-choice, true/false, matching questions Laboratory practical itemsFill-in, short answer questions x Problem-solving exercisesEssay questions or papers x PresentationsOral exams Preceptor ratingsOSCE or standardized patient exam Other (describe)

Briefly describe any formative assessment activities (practice exams, quizzes, etc.)ExamsProblem Solving Sessions – require attendance and a written response which is evaluated, graded and retuned to students Meetings with faculty assigned to each student also constitutes an evaluation in terms of attitude and professional behavior


Yes x No







The faculty are experienced in the areas they teach and they are conscientious, responsive to student comments and generally have appropriate teaching support. The need for a support person for copying and secretarial type work would relieve faculty to interact more with students rather than perform office type work.


Academic Year: 05/06 05/06 04/05 04/05 03/04 03/04

Avg. Y2 courses

Avg. Y2 courses

Avg. Y2 courses


Questions: 1. Rate the course overall. 3.5 3.7 3.9 3.8 3.2 3.62. Structure and curricular design. 3.5 3.5 3.9 3.7 3.3 3.53. Course achieved goals and objectives. 3.6 3.6 4.0 3.7 3.3 3.65. Quality of lectures. 3.3 3.4 3.8 3.5 3.1 3.56. Clinical correlations. 3.4 3.5 3.8 3.8 3.4 3.67. Quality of laboratory exercises 3.3 3.4 3.9 3.7 3.2 3.58. Quality of small group sessions. 3.4 3.5 3.9 3.8 3.2 3.59. Clinical relevance of the material presented. 3.5 3.8 4.0 3.9 3.4 3.810. Usefulness of Syllabus and handouts. 3.5 3.5 3.8 3.7 3.4 3.711. Exam effectiveness. 3.4 3.5 3.8 3.7 3.1 3.612. Clarity of exam questions. 3.3 3.5 3.8 3.7 3.1 3.613. Feedback regarding examinations. 3.7 3.7 4.0 3.9 3.6 3.814. Appropriate workload for this course. 3.5 3.6 3.9 3.9 3.4 3.716. Director responsive to students' concerns. 3.5 3.9 4.0 4.0 3.5 3.917. Availability of faculty outside class. 3.7 3.8 4.1 4.0 3.8 4.018. Use of allotted course time. 3.5 3.5 3.9 3.6 3.4 3.6




Course title: Molecular Pharmacology and Physiology

19. Rate faculty's use of computers. 3.5 3.5 3.8 3.8 3.3 3.620. Usefulness of computers in the course. 3.4 3.5 3.8 3.8 3.3 3.621. Idea of integrating more computers. 3.2 3.2 3.5 3.4 3.0 3.2

Feed back is quite positive in general, however, there are varying opinions about various elements of the course. The following are comments directly from evaluation forms:

Overall, excellent. I think Pharm is the best of the second year courses in terms of consistently good lecturers (and I can say this with Pharm NOT being one of my best courses grade-wise!)

Pharmacology is not my favorite course, but I think that the professors do a good job with the dry subject matter. They usually try to bring in a lot of clinical information and not just read off a list of drugs and side effects

This class lacked clinical relevances. Pharm has been pretty consistent over the year. The lectures have been clear and well organized. Nothing to say here. Very good overall quality of the lecturers, probably better than any course

with respect to the fact that every lecturer is good. Moving the labs so they are not directly after some of the lectures would be good. A lot of the

labs I felt like were not reinforcing the info since I had not yet learned it in the first place The small group sessions were a great learning experience- there should be more of these Problem solving sessions are great learning experience. Faculty are aware of the need to separate the problem-solving sessions from the lectures and

attempt to do this whenever possible. I wish Pharm would integrate the Pharm better with the other courses. The test should include both the generic and trade names of the drugs...this would make it a lot

easier for us to learn the names we're going to have to get used to in practice. When I go to clinic, i feel all the information I learned in pharm is useless, b/c I don’t know the drugs (in clinic all they use is trade names)

The students routinely make this comment, however, board exams only use generic drug names and if learning trade names was required, the faculty predict a major revolt among the students.

The pharmacology course was extremely helpful I think that instead of making the beginning of the course Pharm heavy, it would be best to place

the drugs with the system they are most closely related to. The faculty have continually worked to distribute the material throughout the course but

pharmacology is “heavy” in cardiovascular and CNS, especially when taught in an organ system curriculum.

I believe some drugs could have been taught in previous blocks. I understand that we need a good background but I couldn't understand why NSAIDS, the most prescribed drugs, were talked about in the last block where it could have been taught during the same block as immunology.

Great class






See comments above.

In summary, the faculty have been diligent in revising materials, in developing problem solving sessions, in working on adult-learning issues and in incorporating clinical material where appropriate. The major success results from a consistent pattern of diligence and enthusiasm to teaching responsibility. The course is well organized and is consistent with national norms expected in the subject area. Problems are discussed and resolved when and where possible through open communication with students as a class or through the student liaison.



PART B. REQUIRED COURSE FORMCourse title: Physical Diagnosis IISponsoring departmentor unit: Department of Family Medicine

Name of course director: Richard Schrot



Teaching Staff InvolvedFamily Medicine (Lead Department) 9

Internal Medicine Department 19Neurology Department 1OB/GYN Department 8

Otolaryngology Department 3Anatomy Department 1

Dermatology Department 3Athletic Training 1

School of Physical Therapy 1

Course Objectives


Yes x No

Briefly summarize the objectives/content areas covered in the course. The student will experience and develop an understanding of patients of diverse backgrounds,

including: non US Citizens, non-English speakers, those without insurance, and those of low socio-economic status.

Students will develop sensitivity for the medically underserved. The student will identify and describe common and unique abnormalities of the anatomy of the

human body The student will describe abnormal physiology of the organ systems that make up the human

body. The student will identify and explain the function of proper equipment for examination of

different organs and areas of the body. The student will perform an accurate history taking and physical exam on multiple patients The student will identify expected age and condition variations for pathologies within different

organ system. The student will understand the role of the medical specialist within the health care team The student will assess vital signs critical historical information and physical exam findings for

each organ system.




Course title: Physical Diagnosis II

The student will develop skills understanding systematic approaches to health care by working collaboratively with students from the College of Nursing

The student will develop sensitivity and compassion for dealing with ‘difficult patient scenarios The student will demonstrate sensitivity and compassion while working with medically

underserved patients The student will demonstrate sensitivity and compassion while working with medically

underserved patients The student will understand herself both as a person and as a physician. The student will demonstrate an appreciation of the cultural differences in the way different

groups approach medicine, and will apply this to a developing skill in physician/patient communication

The student will collect pertinent history about the organ system, including PMH, FH, SH. The student will develop skills in the delivery of information about stressful procedures and of

bad news.

Organ system approach is used to teach history and physical diagnosis proficiency. Formal list of course objectives available upon request.



All preceptors are provided a written list of objectives for each organ system skill session along with a suggested format.


Not applicable

Student Evaluation


The first year we used the ICD exam was in 2005.





Year: 2004 2005 2006Score: Not used 517.6 562.1National Percentile 60 76Norm Table Referenced




x Multiple-choice, true/false, matching questions Laboratory practical itemsFill-in, short answer questions Problem-solving exercises

x Essay questions or papers Presentationsx Oral exams x Preceptor ratingsx OSCE or standardized patient exam x Other: Communication skills lab, self

assessment

Briefly describe any formative assessment activities (practice exams, quizzes, etc.)There are practice quizzes on the course blackboard site that students are encouraged to use. They may take the practice quizzes multiple times and these do not count toward their grade in the course. There is a practice quiz for each of 20+ online chapters covering organ systems.


Yes x No



The new Clinical Assessment Center is state-of-the art with 12 exam rooms. In addition, a conference room, a patient simulator demonstration room, and a room to view video-tapings are part of our facility. The course coordinator is an outstanding asset as is the Clinical Assessment Center. Course faculty from various departments including Family Medicine have been excellent and more willing to participate since the COM Dean has begun implementing the college-wide AIMS program in which revenue is generated for each department based on teaching hours provided.






Academic Year: 05/06 05/06 04/05 04/05 03/04 03/04

Avg. Y2 courses

Avg. Y2 courses

Avg. Y2 courses

Scale: 1-Poor, 2-Fair, 3-Good, 4-VeryGood, 5-Excellent Questions: 1. Rate the course overall. 4.0 3.7 3.6 3.8 3.5 3.62. Structure and curricular design. 4.0 3.5 3.5 3.7 3.4 3.53. Course achieved goals and objectives. 4.0 3.6 3.6 3.7 3.4 3.65. Quality of lectures. 3.9 3.4 3.5 3.5 3.2 3.56. Clinical correlations. 4.2 3.5 3.7 3.8 3.5 3.67. Quality of laboratory exercises 4.1 3.4 3.9 3.7 3.5 3.58. Quality of small group sessions. 4.1 3.5 3.9 3.8 3.6 3.59. Clinical relevance of the material presented. 4.3 3.8 3.9 3.9 3.8 3.810. Usefulness of Syllabus and handouts. 3.9 3.5 3.5 3.7 3.6 3.711. Exam effectiveness 3.9 3.5 3.4 3.7 3.6 3.612. Clarity of exam questions. 3.8 3.5 3.3 3.7 3.5 3.613. Feedback regarding examinations. 4.1 3.7 3.9 3.9 3.7 3.814. Appropriate workload for this course. 4.0 3.6 3.7 3.9 3.6 3.716. Director responsive to students' concerns. 4.3 3.9 4.2 4.0 3.9 3.917. Availability of faculty outside class. 4.2 3.8 4.2 4.0 3.8 4.018. Use of allotted course time. 4.0 3.5 3.7 3.6 3.6 3.619. Rate faculty's use of computers. 4.0 3.5 3.8 3.8 3.9 3.620. Usefulness of computers in the course. 4.0 3.5 3.8 3.8 3.9 3.621. Idea of integrating more computers. 3.4 3.2 3.3 3.4 3.2 3.2

Identify major successes in the course and problems to be overcome.I am in the middle of my 2nd yr as Course Director.

Major Successes: Improving the on-line didactic sessions, in part by adding a series of questions and answers. Providing a video-streamed lecture on line. Developing a format for demonstration of a proper complete history and physical exam in a “live

session” including student volunteer participation. Getting other departments to “buy into” participation as preceptors. For example, during the

dermatology session, all the preceptors were from the Dermatology Department. I





have attempted to get departmental chairs to become involved and then encourage the rest of their departments to participate.

Improvement in the quality of exam questions. Skills sessions were previously 2 hours in length and were spent with a group of 1 preceptor, 6

students and 1 surrogate patient. The new format is as follows:

1 st hour-----Same for all students (provides course continuity in groups of 12 or 24)

Activities include: Demonstration of history and exam in a patient with, for example, spinal

cord compression Demonstration by use of patient simulators Presentation of unknown cases by PowerPoint slides with teaching points

emphasized. Implementation of a program of voluntary student participation with

faculty guidance and assistance

2nd hour---------- Reduced number of students to 4 with each preceptor for hands- on session

Improved OSCE by meeting with preceptors several days before actual event and assigning stations at that time. The OSCE format was explained to students weeks before event

thus reducing apprehension on the day of the exam. Cooperated with College of Nursing in implementing OSCE program.

Improved video-taped history exercise. Implemented a program for “live” faculty observation and immediate feedback afterward. This reduced the backlog that had existed to provide feedback about this experience to students.

Implemented a program with the help of the Department of Communications for a video-taped session on communication skills for each student one-on-one. Faculty members played the role of a “difficult patient” and students used their skills to communicate. Immediate feedback was provided.

Worked with Office of Curriculum to allow one-half days on most Monday afternoons as “protected time” for skills sessions. Also worked with LCE course director to improve scheduling for skills sessions.

Improved the checklist for write-up assessments and video assessments with inputfrom Department of Family Medicine.




Course title: Principles of Medical Immunology & Infectious DiseasesSponsoring departmentor unit: Molecular Medicine

Name of course director: Susan Pross

List all organizational units (e.g., physiology department, nursing school, library) including the lead department, with ongoing involvement in the course, and the number of instructional staff from each such unit:


Teaching Staff InvolvedMolecular Pharmacology and Physiology Group Conferences – 21

Neurology 1Pediatrics 2

Internal Medicine – Allergy 2Internal Medicine – Infectious Disease 2

Bay Pine VA Infectious Disease 1LifeLink Transplant Immunology Laboratory 1

Ophthalmology 1Internal Medicine – Rheumatology 1

Family Medicine 1

Course Objectives


Yes x No

Briefly summarize the objectives/content areas covered in the course. The student will understand the principles of infectious and immunological processes and

apply them to the mechanisms of interactions which occur between microorganism and human beings.

The student will identify the signs and symptoms of diseases, disease epidemiology, and risk factors that increase disease incidence.

The student will understand the common properties of each class of microbe, distinguishing between genus and species.

The student will understand how physiologic and biochemical properties of microorganisms relate to the pathogenesis of infectious disease and its diagnosis and treatment.

The student will understand how functions and/or dysfunctions of the immune system provide clearer understanding of immunological diseases, such as allergy and autoimmunity, and how infectious agents modulate immunity.




Course title: Principles of Medical Immunology & Infectious Diseases

The student will develop an appreciation of the importance of learning through interactions with others.

The student will develop skills for consulting with peers and faculty as well as utilizing valuable resources available to them.

The student will be able to evaluate published scientific material and communicate a synopsis of it.

The student will be able to differentiate microorganisms from each other and understand how the identity and characteristics of an infectious agent determine the selection of appropriate treatments.

The student will be able to interpret staining procedures, especially the Gram stain, for bacterial identification



PMIID has graduate students helping our faculty in the small group conferences. They are given a copy of the course objectives and they participate in all preparation meetings with faculty and staff before each small group conference.


Not applicable.

Student Evaluation


Year: 2004 2005 2006Score: 74.6 72.4 Not used*National Percentile

53 42




* NBME flexible blueprint exam used.






x Multiple-choice, true/false, matching questions Laboratory practical itemsx Fill-in, short answer questions x Problem-solving exercisesx Essay questions or papers x Presentations

Oral exams x Preceptor ratingsOSCE or standardized patient exam Other (describe)


1. In several blocks of the course we provide a review of the material and offer practice exam questions. 2. In many lectures we give practice examination questions.


Yes x No



1. PMIID has an excellent faculty composed of core department members and supplemented with clinical faculty for clinical correlation lectures.

2. PMIID successfully makes use of our Ph.D. students to help faculty in small group conferences.3. Educational space is excellent in terms of the lecture room.4. Educational support is excellent via video streaming and audio taping.5. Educational space is adequate in terms of small-group conferences. The space is comfortable and

usable, however, finding the space and booking it is time-consuming at the beginning of the year. Also, some groups do not get a designated space for the entire course and have to shift from time to time.

6. Support personnel is adequate – we have staff assigned to help with the course.






Academic Year: 05/06 05/06 04/05 04/05 03/04 03/04Scale: 1-Poor, 2-Fair, 3-Good, 4-VeryGood, 5-Excellent

Questions: 1. Rate the course overall. 3.5 3.7 4.0 3.8 3.4 3.62. Structure and curricular design. 3.4 3.5 4.0 3.7 3.4 3.53. Course achieved goals and objectives. 3.5 3.6 4.0 3.7 3.3 3.65. Quality of lectures. 3.3 3.4 3.8 3.5 3.4 3.56. Clinical correlations. 3.5 3.5 3.9 3.8 3.5 3.67. Quality of laboratory exercises 3.1 3.4 3.6 3.7 3.4 3.58. Quality of small group sessions. 3.2 3.5 3.7 3.8 3.3 3.59. Clinical relevance of the material presented. 3.6 3.8 4.0 3.9 3.5 3.810. Usefulness of Syllabus and handouts. 3.6 3.5 4.0 3.7 3.7 3.711. Exam effectiveness. 3.5 3.5 4.0 3.7 3.6 3.612. Clarity of exam questions. 3.5 3.5 4.0 3.7 3.7 3.613. Feedback regarding examinations. 3.7 3.7 4.1 3.9 3.8 3.814. Appropriate workload for this course. 3.5 3.6 4.0 3.9 3.7 3.716. Director responsive to students' concerns. 4.1 3.9 4.2 4.0 4.0 3.917. Availability of faculty outside class. 3.9 3.8 4.3 4.0 4.0 4.018. Use of allotted course time. 3.5 3.5 3.9 3.6 3.4 3.619. Rate faculty's use of computers. 3.5 3.5 3.9 3.8 3.4 3.620. Usefulness of computers in the course. 3.5 3.5 3.9 3.8 3.3 3.621. Idea of integrating more computers. 3.2 3.2 3.5 3.4 3.1 3.2

2003-2004 Strengths of course – studentsThe students thought the course handbook, organization, and lectures were for the most part excellent. There were rave reviews about some lecturers and comments about need for improvement with others. The students, as a rule, appreciated the small group conferences as well as the laboratory experience. They felt that they learned the material well, and that the test questions reflected their knowledge.

Final Student Evaluations (received after the Shelf examination) included the following: “course was well organized’, “the immunology block was fantastic”, “many clinical correlates”, “all the instructors were very well versed in their respective areas” “enjoyed [specific names of lecturers] clinical lectures”, “the style and type of material presented and questions on the tests prepared us





well for the Boards”, “professors were responsive to our questions and concerns”, “expectations and materials were very clearly presented throughout the year”, “some of the best PowerPoints we’ve had”, the website, the faculty, and the exam questions were on the money”, “everyone was very nice and receptive to questions”, “this was one of my favorite courses”, “the lab was interesting”

Weakness of course – studentsThe students thought that they were presented with too much detailed material in Block II. This was a core principle block in which the foundations of bacteria and viruses were introduced. The students felt that the level of detail demanded, especially in light of heavily detailed material in pharmacology, was burdensome. They also felt that some of the visuals in the course handbook could be enlarged for easier reading.

Final Student Evaluation (received after the Shelf examination) - the major concerns about the course were voiced in the final student evaluation. The issue most repeated was the lack of correlation of self examination material with the course. Some comments included “More than half of the exam covered topics that we were never taught, will never be taught, and will never have to know…”, “I was very unhappy with my self exam percentile”, “I did not feel adequately prepared for the self”, “I did not feel prepared by the course for the boards”, “immunology needs to be extended beyond the first 2 blocks”. In addition, comments concerning a lack of focus as the academic year moved on were expressed. Specifically, “I felt that there was a lot of repetition. We did bacterial infections by organ system and I felt it would have been more helpful to do bacterial infections by bacteria”, “The course starts out very strong but as it progresses it becomes too scattered, repetitive, and disorganized”.

In order to address the weaknesses, we did the following in preparation for the 2004-2005 year:

1. The structure of Blocks I and II was revised to make sure that mainly core material is presented.

2. Some of the necessary detail will be put later in the course within the organ-based structure. 3. Both points 1 and 2 were done in collaboration with other Year 2 courses to maintain the

organizational structure.4. PowerPoint printouts were clearer and obtained from outside lecturers earlier so that they can

be posted in a timely manner.5. Objectives and overviews were listed at the front of each lecture. 6. Exam questions were more tightly related to the objectives. 7. Small Group Conferences were updated.

PMIID 2004-2005

Comments 2004-2005a. Strengths of the Course:

The students thought the course handbook, organization, and lectures were very good. There were rave reviews about some lecturers and comments about need for improvement with some others. The students identified which lecturers they considered excellent and





which needed improvement. Students appreciated when some lecturers improved through the year. Students felt that their needs and interests were accommodated during the year. The students, as a rule, appreciated the small group conferences as well as the laboratory experience. The students felt that they learned the material well, and that the test questions reflected their knowledge. The students felt that the Course Director and most of the lecturers did an excellent job in terms of teaching as well as being available. Specific student comments follow: “I loved the guest lecturers” – and the students listed whom they thought were great. “Lab material was good reinforcement” “Felt prepared for Step 1”“I want to applaud --- “– in response to a given professor improving. “Microbiology section was the strongest” “Lab and small groups reinforced important concepts” “[Course director] and most of the faculty seemed to care about us and our education and that is priceless. “Thank you”, “Great course.” I felt extremely well prepared for the boards” “organized” “faculty response to student concerns” “The two best things – the faculty and POPS” “well-organized” “small groups were very helpful” “expectations and exam questions were generally straight forward” “Faculty is excellent” “Small group activities” “great class”

b. Weaknesses of the Course: Some students felt that there was too much detail at the beginning of the course. These students thought that they were presented with new concepts in immunology that took time to really understand and quite a bit of information in the microbiology block, also hard to learn in a short time. Some students also felt that too much of their grade was determined in the early blocks of the course. In addition to these comments, expressed by a number of students, there were additional individual suggestions for course improvement. There were comments about the need for 1.) improvement of lectures, lecturers, and small groups; 2.) use of larger PowerPoints in the manual, 3.) incorporation of lecture reviews, and 4.) assessment of the value of the laboratory. Specific comments follow: “came into the course with NO knowledge of immunology”, “PowerPoints need to be better organized”, “presentation of bacteria needs to be more systematic and less system based”, “there needs to be better organization [of the course]”, “first test of the year covered too much and counted for too much of our grade”, “immunology should be spread out throughout the year”, “reduce the overall hours of the MS II curriculum”, “POPS and small groups could be eliminated”, “immunology was presented in a confusing way ---- too much detail”, “revisit immunology after the first block”, “need more information on the less common bugs”, “review at the end of the year”, “requirement for small group presentations was not a useful learning tool”, “less lecture time, more small group activities”, “better textbooks need to be assigned.”

Recommendations that we are incorporating 2005-2006:1. Small-Group Conferences will be updated. 2. The shelf examination will be designed by the department and the NBME to make sure

the questions are relevant to our course and to the field.






Major successes of the course include:1. A comprehensive presentation of medical immunology and medical microbiology taught

in an organ system model2. Excellent integration with the other disciplines of Year 2. Specifically, we integrate with

Pathology, Pharmacology, PD, and CDR.3. Successful completion of the course by the vast majority of the students as measured by:

i. end of year course gradesii. performance on the Boards

4. Excellent overall course evaluations by the studentsProblems to overcome:

a. Need to continue to develop more joint conferences to support curricular integrationb. Need to get more small group rooms so that students have a designated destination for

the entire course c. Need to have the ability for all students to be able to access the server at one time.



PART C. REQUIRED CLERKSHIP FORM

Clerkship title: Emergent and Urgent CareSponsoring departmentor unit:

Department of Emergency Medicine, Division of Internal Medicine

Name of clerkship director: Tracy Sanson, MD, FACEP

Rotations

List the required rotations that are part of the clerkship, and the average amount of time spent in each (if there are variations across sites, provide a range).

4 weeks

Clerkship Objectives

Are there written objectives for the clerkship?

Yes x No

Briefly describe or summarize the objectives for the clerkship. Are they taken from or based on objectives established by national organizations, or developed internally?

Developed internally: The student will appraise literacy level of patients and others in an effort to improve

communication. The student will demonstrate positive and effective physician/patient rapport. The student will be able to enlist the support and cooperation of the patient's family. The student will utilize intuitive communication skills. The student will be a team player. The student will understand the Emergency physician’s role as a member and coordinator of a

healthcare delivery team The student will understand the utilization of emergency medical services and resources as part of

the healthcare system The student will develop rapport with the various people/factors involved in the patient care

process, such as: patient, family, staff, consultants (medical and non-medical), and insurance companies.

The student will practice quality cost-effective healthcare. The student will understand the Emergency physician’s role in the community and society The student will maintain a professional appearance. The student will utilize supervision and feedback effectively. The student will recognize social and economic factors that affect patient care. The student will participate in discussions regarding health care for underserved patients and

special needs for ED patient populations. The student will facilitate professional educational growth by reading current journal publications

and utilizing information technology.

REQUIRED CLERKSHIP FORM (Continued)

LCME Medical Education Database 2004-05 Required Clerkship Form 80


Clerkship title: Emergent and Urgent Care

The student will demonstrate self-directed learning and educate others involved in patient care when appropriate.

The student will develop an understanding of literature review and evidence-based research procedures.

The student will complete responsibilities reliably. The student will demonstrate respect, empathy, and integrity The student will demonstrate understanding of ethical principles of autonomy, beneficence,

informed consent, and confidentiality. The student will understand the relationship between basic and clinical sciences and apply to their

Emergency Medicine patients. The student will employ viable treatment plans within the confines of clinical data, and reflect

urgent interventions when required, within the socioeconomic capability of the patient and/or family.

The student will perform a wide range of procedures common to the practice of Emergency Medicine, understanding the anatomy, physiology, and pathophysiology as well as the indications, contraindications, and complications of those procedures

The student will use effective written, verbal, and nonverbal language.

Describe the process used to specify the number and kind of patients and the clinical settings needed to meet the clerkship objectives. At what point during the clerkship are individual students’ clinical experiences reviewed to assure that objectives are being met, and who conducts that review?

The USF COM has just completed a college-wide reform process for Years 3 and 4. Part of the development of each clerkship was the identification of common diagnoses, symptoms, and syndromes. The goals and objectives for the clerkship determined the number and kind of patients and the clinical setting. The Year 3 and Year 4 Oversight Committee (a sub-committee of the Committee on Curriculum) monitors the number and variety of patient encounters. Any change to the list of required encounters must be made only after consultation with this Oversight Committee.

The COM has a required electronic logbook and the associated database tracks all student experiences. This provides the ability to identify experiences and monitor them in real-time to assure compliance and adequacy of the student clinical experience. Weekly reports are generated to assess compliance with specific logbook requirements and assess students’ progress toward attaining specific diagnoses and skills within a clerkship. The Office of Educational Affairs, the Associate Dean for UME, the clerkship director and the Associate Dean for Student Affairs facilitate monitoring this data and clerkship directors assure the adequacy of the experiences.


If resident physicians teach in the clerkship or otherwise supervise medical students, how are they informed about the clerkship objectives and prepared for their teaching role?





Residents are an integral part of our teaching team. To help prepare them for their medical education responsibilities, all PGY1 residents attend an initial orientation session sponsored by GME and co-presented by the Associate Dean for Undergraduate Medical Education. PGY2+ residents attend a similar session also co-presented by the Associate Dean for Undergraduate Medical Education. Each of these sessions specifies the COM educational objectives and addresses how to teach and evaluate medical students. This program has been in place for three years. Students are also reminded about two key resources: one, the Ombudsman in GME and two, a 360 degree, on-line reporting tool.

In addition, on a semi-annual basis, all residency program directors fill out an evaluation of residents. This evaluation includes two items dealing with the teaching and evaluation skills of residents.

Individual clerkships and departments also help prepare residents in a variety of ways. For example, in this clerkship, residents are included in the distribution of educational materials on teaching techniques, feedback processes, and the review of the rotation educational objectives. The list below is a representative sample of materials shared:

SAEM (Society for Academic Emergent Medicine) MEDICAL STUDENT EDUCATORS’ HANDBOOKSAEM Undergraduate Education CommitteeTeaching Techniques in the Clinical Setting“The Emergent Medicine Perspective”

SAEM (Society for Academic Emergent Medicine) MEDICAL STUDENT EDUCATORS’ HANDBOOKFaculty Development Chapter Steven A. McLaughlin, MD

Clinical Teaching of Medical Students in the ED (PowerPoint presentation)David A. Wald, DO, FACOEP, FAAEMDirector of Undergraduate Education Department of Emergent MedicineTemple University School of Medicine

Medical professionalism and the generation gapLawrence G. Smith, MDMount Sinai School of MedicineThe American Journal of Medicine, Vol 118, No 4, April 2005

Resources for Medical Student Web Resources

The R.I.M.E. Evaluation Framework. A Vocabulary of Professional Progress

How are faculty members across instructional sites oriented to the clerkship objectives and the evaluation system?





All required courses/clerkships at USF COM are single sections with a single faculty leader. While some of the clerkships use different clinical sites, they are not duplicate versions of clerkships housed within different institutions, but rather a single clerkship, guided by the same single clerkship director. The course director communicates electronically or in person, with all faculty, the course-specific objectives and the system for grading and evaluating students. Each course uses a single evaluation system for all faculty who work with students. Forms used to collect evaluation from faculty have been created for college-wide use to include the college-wide objectives to ensure linkage between the educational objectives and the system of evaluations. This system is established on both summative evaluation forms and midterm evaluation forms used by clerkships.

Methods for Evaluating Clerk Performance

What methods are used in the clerkship to evaluate students’ core clinical skills?How do you ensure that such evaluation occurs for all students?

Structured interviewingSelf-awareness assessmentPresentation of Clinical CasesObservation of oral presentationsReview of written clinical portfoliosSelf-awareness assessmentStandardized written examination

List all contributors to the final clinical evaluation of the clerk (full-time faculty, volunteer attending physicians, resident physicians, others).

Attending and resident physicians complete a clinical evaluation for the individual student with whom they have worked during each clinical shift and students are evaluated after their oral case presentation.

If NBME subject (shelf) examinations are used, give mean scores for the last three years.

Not applicable.

Is a narrative evaluation of student performance submitted in addition to the clerkship grade?

Yes x No





Clerkship Outcomes/Evaluation

Comment on the adequacy of faculty (full-time, part-time, and volunteer), patients, and other resources for this clerkship.

Excellent Emergency Medicine Board Certified or Pediatric attending coverage. Ideal emergency department acuity mix with excellent learning opportunities. This diverse patient population covers all ages with a good blend of cultural and socioecominc groups, including insured and indigent patients.

Provide a summary of student feedback on the clerkship (and any other evaluation data) for the past two years. Note any recent changes in the clerkship. If problems have been identified by the evaluations, describe how these are being addressed.

New clerkship as of 05/06 academic year.

Questions

05-06 Emergent Urgent

05-06 Avg. all Y3

courses1. Overall Learning Experience 4.3 3.92. Orientation 4.0 3.83. Structure and Curricular Design 4.0 3.44. Curricular Design Help Keep Up With Studies 3.6 3.45. Conferences (not rounds) for Students 3.7 3.56. Extent that Attendings Participated 4.0 3.97. Rate Rounds with Attendings/Residents 3.7 3.58. Extent Workload Facilitated Knowledge & Skills 3.1 3.19. Time Allotted for Reading & Library/Computer Research 3.7 3.310. Computer Use for Instruction, Patient Care, etc. 4.3 3.911. Use of Computers by Faculty and/or Students 3.9 3.512. Please Rate Textbook 1 3.7 3.513. Please Rate Textbook 2 3.6 3.414. Please Rate Textbook 3 3.9 3.715. Usefulness of Feedback on History & Physicals 3.7 3.416. Encouraged to Take Active Role in Patient Evaluations 4.3 4.017. Appropriateness of Supervision & Instruction 4.3 4.018. Breadth of Experience with Disease Processes 4.1 3.719. Efforts to Make Student Feel a Part of the Clerkship 4.2 3.920. Responsiveness of Director to Students' Concerns 4.3 4.121. Constructive Feedback 4.0 3.6





22. Opportunity to Discuss Evaluation with Evaluators 3.8 3.423. Appropriateness of Grading Breakdown 3.7 3.524. Extent Attending Physicians Participated 4.0 3.8

Identify major successes and challenges still to be overcome..Successes: This new rotation has been well received by the students. We initiated a hands on emersion clerkship. This clerkship includes 5 didactic days, which include labs with mannequins/models, simulator, cadaver and ultrasound, the student is an integral part of the team caring for their ED patient.

Challenges: ED crowding: solution- moving into new emergency department in ~ April 2008.



PART C. REQUIRED CLERKSHIP FORMClerkship title: Integrated Inpatient Internal Medicine/Pediatrics ClerkshipSponsoring departmentor unit: Internal Medicine and Pediatrics

Name of clerkship director: Maria L. Cannarozzi, M.D.

Rotations


The clerkship is eight weeks in duration. This hospital-based clerkship takes place in three hospital institutions. There is also a formal didactic component to the course. Students spend four weeks on internal medicine inpatient ward service and four weeks on inpatient pediatric ward service. Students are expected to be part of the ward team and take in-house calls with their ward team over the course of the clerkship.



Yes x No


Developed internally:

The student will synthesize and assimilate feedback and supervision effectively. The student will engage in empathetic and compassionate interactions with patients.

The student will integrate effective communication skills with patients and their families regarding issues of care, diagnosis, prognosis, and related issues

The student will enlist support and cooperation of the patient’s family The student will develop an understanding of integrated IM-Pediatric topics and will integrate

clinical correlations to basic sciences as appropriate. The student will create appropriate differential diagnoses for patients. The student will understand the potential effects of medications, tests, or other treatments given

to patients. The student will understand physical, psychosocial, economic, developmental, and cultural

factors when interacting with patients. The student will be able to order appropriate tests to help narrow the differential diagnosis. The student will be able to incorporate physical exam findings and test results in order to

formulate a diagnosis and treatment plan. The student will be able to create an appropriate treatment plan for the patient, taking into

account psychosocial, familial, and cost factors.



REQUIRED CLERKSHIP FORM (Continued)Clerkship title: Integrated Inpatient Internal Medicine/Pediatrics Clerkship

The student will develop the ability to interact effectively with other health care professionals and will integrate the concept of interdisciplinary care for selected patients.

The student will demonstrate the ability to communicate effectively with medical consultants in the care of patients.

The student will obtain and demonstrate a working knowledge of available resources within the hospital and health care system in which he/she works.

The student will maintain regular attendance. The student will maintain a professional appearance. The student will provide reliable and compassionate care for his or her hospitalized patients. The student will develop appropriate doctor/patient/family relationships. The student will participate in discussions regarding health care for underserved patients,

advocacy for patients, and special needs for both IM and pediatric patient populations. The student will be a self-directed learner and educate others involved in patient care on

appropriate issues. The student will demonstrate the ability to apply principles of inpatient care to clinical case-based

situation in a “real time” standardized patient setting. The student will develop an understanding of literature reviews and evidence-based research. The student will show evidence of personal growth and professional development through the

course of the clerkship. The student will actively participate in discussions regarding ethical medical care. The student will be able to conduct an accurate history and physical examination of both an IM

and pediatric patient. The student will be able to conduct an appropriate problem-based physical exam. The student will be able to present patient information in both a written and spoken format in a

clear, concise, organized and thorough fashion. The student will observe and when appropriate participate in procedures performed on patients

under their care. The student will competently interpret radiographic modalities, pulmonary function tests,

laboratory tests, and basic acid-base disturbances. The student will communicate with hospital consultants as appropriate. The student will consistently provide ethical care to his or her patients.


The list of required diagnoses for this clerkship was developed in several ways. First, most common diagnoses within the hospital setting were identified by core clerkship development committee members, including internists, pediatricians, third and fourth year students. These diagnoses were evaluated by committee members as to which would be most appropriate for learning purposes. These lists were compared with recommended types of patients to be seen within various teaching bodies of IM and pediatrics (i.e. SGIM and COMSEP, respectively) so that no appropriate diagnoses were overlooked. The final list of required diagnoses was established after consultation with our ambulatory clerkship director, so that all appropriate diagnoses were covered somewhere between the two clerkships in which these specialties reside.






Residents are assisted in developing awareness of the curriculum and enhancing their teaching and evaluation skills in the following ways:

1. Internal medicine residents attend a one day seminar in teaching and evaluation methods at the end of their intern year. This is an ongoing effort of the Department of Internal Medicine.

2. Pediatric residents receive instruction in student evaluation and curriculum objectives during required noon conferences held at both hospital sites during the academic year.

3. Incoming interns are instructed and advised of curriculum goals and objectives during their residency orientation upon commencement of residency and periodically throughout.

4. Clerkship objectives are electronically mailed to internal medicine and pediatric residents during the course of the clerkship year.

5. Feedback is given both globally and individually to residents regarding their student evaluations. Particular areas of concern regarding ability to evaluate students effectively are addressed appropriately on an individual basis.

6. Hospital site directors are encouraged to reiterate clerkship goals/objectives/policies as well as the importance of thoughtful student evaluation at the beginning of each calendar month to residents starting ward rotations at each hospital site.

7. Faculty members are encouraged to speak directly with residents regarding their evaluation techniques and insights into student performance. Thoughtful discussion of evaluation method(s) is especially encouraged.

8. Student feedback regarding their evaluations, either during or after completion of the clerkship, is addressed individually directly with the course director. If necessary, the involved resident or attending physician is directly contacted to verify student concerns.

9. The clerkship director periodically visits each hospital site to speak to residents regarding clerkship objectives/expectations for students and for residents as educators, importance of ongoing feedback/careful evaluation and to address any questions or concerns.





The clerkship syllabus contains institutional learning objectives as well as course-specific learning objectives. Medical students on the rotation have access to an electronic copy of the course syllabus at the beginning of the clerkship. Instructional staff and academic leadership of the medical school have continuous access to the electronic syllabus. Institutional and course-specific objectives are distributed via electronic mail to involved community faculty, resident physicians and any other parties involved in teaching of the course. At the beginning of each academic year, the updated electronic syllabus is sent electronically to all faculty.


What methods are used in the clerkship to evaluate students’ core clinical skills? How do you ensure that such evaluation occurs for all students?

Students’ core clinical skills are evaluated by several methods:

1. Direct observation by resident or attending physicians 2. Evaluation of student history and physical documentation3. Evaluation of oral patient presentations on rounds4. CPX examination – clinical knowledge evaluation and standardized patient evaluation of

professionalism and communication skills5. Clinical skills examination – clinical knowledge of specific subject areas, i.e. CXR and PFT

interpretation, peripheral blood smear, body fluid and electrolyte/acid-base interpretation6. Ongoing evaluations of students’ professionalism by the students themselves, residents and

faculty as well as standardized patients

All students must successfully complete each of these components in order to successfully complete the clerkship.


Attending and resident physicians complete final clinical evaluations for individual students with whom they have worked over the course of the clerkship. Students are also evaluated by standardized patients (SPs) during end-of-clerkship CPX examination.





Internal Medicine Exam

Year: 2004* 2005* 2006Score: 77 77 76National Percentile

66 66 62





* Performance in prior clerkship model

Pediatrics Exam

Year: 2004* 2005* 2006Score: 75.9 77.6 75.5National Percentile

664 72 62






Is a narrative evaluation of student performance submitted in addition to the clerkship grade?Yes x No



Within this clerkship, the overall quality of the teaching faculty is excellent. We have an abundance of general internists who are very willing and capable of teaching subject areas without difficulty. These physicians have taken ‘ownership’ of their topics and or ward responsibilities and have consistently received positive feedback from students thus far. Over the initial year of the clerkship, we have worked to obtain the same level of consistency and ‘ownership’ with the involved pediatric faculty. Overall, we have been significantly successful in reaching this level of excellence and involvement as the faculty has become more familiar with and comfortable with the goals and structure of the course and new curriculum overall. During the first year of the clerkship, there were some concerns related to quality of site-based case conferences. This issue has been addressed by reassigning conference preceptors and by developing lists of topics to be covered at these conferences. We continue in our efforts to




develop and improve our small conferences and will continue to do so, so that students will have consistent and appropriate small group didactic hospital-based sessions. Patient volume has not been a problem, particularly on the internal medicine side of the rotation. Student responsibility for patients is limited within reason in both number of patients to be admitted on call and followed on the wards, in order to keep patient load/volumes reasonable. Occasionally, within the pediatric venue, less than ideal patient volume has posed a problem with exposure to required diagnoses. This is due to the seasonal nature of inpatient pediatrics. In an ongoing fashion, we are working to get an idea of what might be a reasonable solution for this problem/revising required diagnoses to be seen, if appropriate. Additionally, we provide simulated pediatric patient exposures in the form of CLIPP cases developed from the Council on Medical Student Education Program. There are12 CLIPP cases are assigned to this clerkship. The assigned cases simulate inpatient pediatric experiences that are important to the students’ learning. The cases are meant to complement actual patient experiences and provide exposure to cases the students may not see otherwise. An example would be a case of meningiococcemia, which while not a very common hospital admission, is important for medical students to know about.

We would like to provide more study guides/question books for student use in the clerkship. We are also working to put in place a comprehensive, computer-based pediatric review, similar to the internal medicine review that is already in place in the clerkship at this time.


This clerkship is in the first year of its inception in its current model.

Academic Year: 05/06 05/06 04/05 04/05

Internal Medicine became Inpatient Med/Peds Inpat/Peds Avg.Y3

coursesInt

MedAvg.Y3 courses

Scale: 1-Poor, 2-Fair, 3-Good, 4-VeryGood, 5-Excellent Questions:

1. Overall Learning Experience 3.6 3.9 4.4 4.12. Orientation 3.8 3.8 4.3 4.03. Structure and Curricular Design 2.8 3.4 4.2 4.04. Curricular Design Help Keep Up With Studies 2.9 3.4 4.2 3.85. Conferences (not rounds) for Students 3.5 3.5 4.0 3.76. Extent that Attendings Participated 3.8 3.9 4.4 4.07. Rate Rounds with Attendings/Residents 3.5 3.5 4.0 3.78. Extent Workload Facilitated Knowledge & Skills 3.2 3.1 3.3 3.19. Time Allotted for Reading & Lib/Computer Research 2.7 3.3 3.0 3.310. Computer Use for Instruction, Patient Care, etc. 4.2 3.9 4.2 3.811. Use of Computers by Faculty and/or Students 3.6 3.5 4.0 3.612. Please Rate Textbook 1 3.3 3.5 3.6 3.0




Clerkship title: Integrated Inpatient Internal Medicine/Pediatrics Clerkship

13. Please Rate Textbook 2 2.9 3.4 4.4 3.314. Please Rate Textbook 3 0.0 3.7 4.5 3.715. Usefulness of Feedback on History & Physicals 3.5 3.4 3.7 2.616. Encouraged to Take Active Role in Pt Evaluations 4.0 4.0 4.3 3.117. Appropriateness of Supervision & Instruction 3.8 4.0 4.1 3.918. Breadth of Experience with Disease Processes 3.6 3.7 4.3 3.519. Efforts to Make Student Feel a Part of the Clerkship 3.9 3.9 4.5 3.320. Responsiveness of Director to Students' Concerns 4.1 4.1 4.7 4.021. Constructive Feedback 3.6 3.6 4.3 3.122. Opportunity to Discuss Evaluation with Evaluators 3.6 3.4 4.3 2.623. Appropriateness of Grading Breakdown 3.2 3.5 3.9 3.324. Extent Attending Physicians Participated 3.6 3.8 4.3 3.425. Eval Form Provided Fair & Useful Evaluation = Yes 0.9 0.9 0.9 1.026. Evaluation Administered with Confidentiality = Yes 0.9 0.9 1.0 1.0

Academic Year: 04/05 04/05 03/04 03/04Pediatrics Clerkship became Inp Med/Peds Peds Avg.Y3

coursesPeds Avg.Y3

coursesScale: 1-Poor, 2-Fair, 3-Good, 4-VeryGood, 5-Excellent

Questions: 1. Overall Learning Experience 4.3 4.1 4.5 4.12. Orientation 4.0 4.0 4.4 4.13. Structure and Curricular Design 4.0 4.0 4.4 4.04. Curricular Design Help Keep Up With Studies 3.6 3.8 4.2 3.85. Conferences (not rounds) for Students 3.7 3.7 4.1 3.86. Extent that Attendings Participated 4.0 4.0 4.3 4.07. Rate Rounds with Attendings/Residents 3.7 3.7 4.2 3.78. Extent Workload Facilitated Knowledge & Skills 3.1 3.1 3.1 3.19. Time Allotted for Reading & Library/Computer Research 3.6 3.3 3.7 3.310. Computer Use for Instruction, Patient Care, etc. 4.3 3.8 3.7 3.711. Use of Computers by Faculty and/or Students 3.9 3.6 3.6 3.412. Please Rate Textbook 1 3.6 3.0 3.8 3.713. Please Rate Textbook 2 3.6 3.3 3.9 2.914. Please Rate Textbook 3 3.9 3.7 1.015. Usefulness of Feedback on History & Physicals 3.6 2.6 3.7 3.516. Encouraged to Take Active Role in Patient Evaluations 4.4 3.1 4.4 4.117. Appropriateness of Supervision & Instruction 4.3 3.9 4.3 4.118. Breadth of Experience with Disease Processes 4.1 3.5 4.2 4.0





19. Efforts to Make Student Feel a Part of the Clerkship 4.3 3.3 4.6 4.220. Responsiveness of Director to Students' Concerns 4.2 4.0 4.6 4.421. Constructive Feedback 3.9 3.1 4.1 3.822. Opportunity to Discuss Evaluation with Evaluators 3.8 2.6 3.7 3.523. Appropriateness of Grading Breakdown 3.7 3.3 4.1 3.724. Extent Attending Physicians Participated 4.0 3.4 4.1 3.9

Again, this clerkship is in the first year of its inception, as it is strcutured now.

Thus far, few students have had major issues to discuss. The primary concerns we hear are related to the following issues:

1. Length of rotation – almost all students feel this rotation should be more than eight weeks in length. This problem is magnified by the fact that the majority of the last clerkship week is spent in testing. The USF COM Committee on Curriculum, the Year Three Oversight Committee, and student representatives reviewed this recommendation in late spring of 2005 and voted to keep the current format and re-address in the late fall of 2006.

2. Consistency/quality of case-based-conferences (CBCs) across hospital sites. We have send out ‘speaker’s notes’ and lists of topics for conference speakers to cover in order to help provide more complete and consistent conferences. We also plan to meet in person to discuss this issue which is a major concern for the students.

3. Students prefer not to take two NBME subject examinations in one day. We have changed the examination schedule of the last week of the clerkship so that the NBME subject examinations in Medicine and Pediatrics are now given on subsequent days, instead of both on the same day.

4. Students initially felt that having extra conferences after quiz and quiz review on Friday afternoons was too much and that they were unable to maintain focus. We have eliminated post-quiz conferences and have integrated more teaching into quiz review sessions. We ask that both IM and pediatric facilitators stay for the entire quiz review so that comparisons and contrasts between adult and pediatric populations can be made during the quiz reviews.

5. Some students feel in-house overnight call is excessive and does not allow time to study. We continue to evaluate this and have eliminated call on nights prior to quizzes.

Identify major successes and challenges still to be overcome.

SUCCESSES:

A strong experience in both internal medicine and pediatrics with qualified faculty who are, for the most part, excellent teachers and are recognized by students as such.

Strong didactic component, emphasizing and helping to highlight the most important topics in the vast arenas of adult and pediatric inpatient medicine.




Highly sophisticated learning in the form of weekly themes, case-based conferences and patient care experiences.

Challenging quiz program, encouraging self-study and providing a framework for weekly study, as well as preparing students for NBME format questions. Clinical skills curriculum (clinical skills module) and clinical skills examination, which are unique to this clerkship. This curriculum and examination teaches and tests clinical skills which are not unique to IM and pediatrics, but are used in most other fields of medicine as well.

End-of-clerkship CPX examination – challenging, fun (?) and beneficial to students – students and faculty learn a great deal from simulated interactions. Students are able to put into practice what they have cumulatively learned during their entire third year of medical school.

Providing an experience that has been received almost universally by third year students as highly valuable and something they would like to have more of in their third year of medical school.

CHALLENGES:

Working with a large number of students involves extensive coordination as well as meticulous organization and communication between hospital sites, clerkship coordinators, hospital site directors and clinical preceptors. During the initial year of the clerkship, many of the organizational challenges were overcome, however, ongoing communication remains the cornerstone of this successful multi-site clerkship.

Initially very challenging, the retrieval of effective evaluations from a large number of faculty at multiple institutions has been more streamlined this year. Additionally, ongoing communication with faculty regarding quality and importance of thoughtful evaluation has proven to be very successful in allowing students to receive careful end of clerkship evaluations. Faculty have proven to be very diligent in providing effective mid-term feedback as well, which is documented twice during the clerkship.

Ensuring quality and consistency among all hospital sites is an ongoing issue that will be continually addressed in order to ensure the best educational experience for all of our students. We feel we have made significant improvements in this area, but will not “leave it as is.” Instead we will continue to look at it critically.

Ongoing quality improvement in case-based conferences, quiz questions, quiz reviews, etc. is a task that is and will be ongoing as long as the course is in existence.

Ensuring that all faculty and residents involved in the clerkship are familiar with the clerkship goals and objectives is an ongoing responsibility which we are addressing via email communication as well as education of residents in noon and morning conferences. We have seen significant growth and understanding of our educators/evaluators over the past year. Additionally, we are continually working to improve the student evaluation capabilities of all evaluators in the clerkship. Both of these areas we feel to be very important to continue to develop and promote throughout the lifetime of the clerkship





Keeping students’ morale up during a difficult and challenging clerkship is seen as important so that students enjoy learning and consider the fields of internal medicine and pediatrics when choosing their careers in medicine.




Clerkship title: Newborn and Maternal HealthSponsoring departmentor unit: Pediatrics, OB/GYN,

Name of clerkship director: James C Mayer Jr, MD

RotationsList the required rotations that are part of the clerkship, and the average amount of time spent in each (if there are variations across sites, provide a range).

One week Labor and Delivery DaysOne week labor and Delivery NightsOne week ambulatory ante partum obstetricsOne week in the newborn nursery

Clerkship ObjectivesAre there written objectives for the clerkship?

Yes x No


Developed internally and in accordance with Association of Professor of Gynecology and Obstetrics recommendations:

The student will develop the ability to observe and present communication skills with the patient care team, patients, patients’ families, and other staff.

The student will develop an understanding of common obstetrical, gynecological and newborn diagnoses.

The student will perform a complete history and physical exam on the obstetrical, gynecological and newborn patient.

The student will formulate, provide, and adjust an assessment and plan of care for the obstetrical, gynecological and newborn patient.

The student will develop an ability to synthesize information obtained from history, physical exam, and other appropriate diagnostic testing.

The student will develop and be able to share a fund of knowledge in the various treatments of common obstetrical, gynecological and newborn diagnosis.

The student will demonstrate the ability to assess the effectiveness of the patient’s care and amend as necessary.

The student will demonstrate a continuing effective communication with faculty, residents, and staff.

The student will demonstrate a genuine concern for the care of the patient and make the needs of the patient and family a top priority.

The student will be mindful of patient rights, privacy, and autonomy, especially in regard to the moral and ethical values of the patient.




Clerkship title: Maternal/Newborn

The student will maintain a professional behavior, including attendance and appearance during all patient and patient care team interactions.

The student strives to maintain high standards of competence. The student will demonstrate a good use of a variety of resources (seek detailed information from

journals, Medline, and primary sources). The student must manifest an active participation in didactics and small group sessions. The student will show a desire and ability to share knowledge with peers, patients, and staff. The student will understand the need for independent study and self-directed learning. The student will be mindful of patient rights, privacy, and autonomy, especially in regard to the

moral and ethical values of the patient. The student will understand the principle of beneficence and keep the best interest of the patient

in the forefront. The student will take accurate and complete histories on the obstetrical, gynecological, and

newborn patient. The student will perform appropriate physical exams on the obstetrical, gynecological, and

newborn patient. The student will demonstrate excellent technical abilities in various clinical procedures (suturing,

starting IVs, and placing urinary catheters).






Residents are an integral part of our teaching team. To help prepare them for their medical education responsibilities, all PGY1 residents attend an initial orientation session sponsored by GME and co-presented by the Associate Dean for Undergraduate Medical Education. PGY2+ residents attend a similar





session also co-presented by the Associate Dean for Undergraduate Medical Education. Each of these sessions specifies the COM educational objectives and addresses how to teach and evaluate medical students. This program has been in place for three years. Students are also reminded about two key resources: one, the Ombudsman in GME and two, a 360 degree, on-line reporting tool.


Individual clerkships and departments also help prepare residents in a variety of ways. For example, in this clerkship, residents are included in the distribution of educational materials on teaching techniques, feedback processes, and the review of educational objectives. The list below is a representative sample of materials shared:





Monitor log book achievements of anticipate diagnosis encountersEvaluations by attending and resident thru direct observation of clinical skills and oral presentationsClinical skills procedure logMid clerkship review with Clerkship DirectorDepartmental oral and/or CPX examinationDepartmental written examination


Full time facultySubspecialty fellowsResident physiciansMidwivesTGH house staff






YearScore

Not applicable. Examination is Departmental derived from by members of the obstetrical unit on the Ob/Gyn Department Education committee and the Department of Pediatrics.


Yes No X



There are adequate numbers of full time faculty in the maternal section to evaluate the students. The USF COM faculty work closely with the students in all aspects and at all sites that student education occurs for the Maternal/ Newborn clerkship.

This has been a great success. Uniting Obstetrics and Newborn has not only been a wonderful experience for the students, but has also increased communication with the two services. The educational model provides for a continuum across prenatal care, ante partum, labor and delivery, post partum, newborn nursery, and NICU. Relevant issues across preventative health, normal gestation and newborn care and common pathological disorders are integrated.






Academic Year: 05/06 05/06 04/05 04/05

New/Mat Avg.Y3 courses

OB/GYN Avg.Y3 courses

Scale: 1-Poor, 2-Fair, 3-Good, 4-VeryGood, 5-Excellent Questions: 1. Overall Learning Experience 4.3 3.9 4.0 4.12. Orientation 4.3 3.8 4.0 4.03. Structure and Curricular Design 4.1 3.4 3.7 4.04. Curricular Design Help Keep Up With Studies 4.0 3.4 3.4 3.85. Conferences (not rounds) for Students 4.1 3.5 3.6 3.76. Extent that Attendings Participated 3.8 3.9 3.4 4.07. Rate Rounds with Attendings/Residents 3.5 3.5 3.6 3.78. Extent Workload Facilitated Knowledge & Skills 3.1 3.1 3.1 3.19. Time Allotted for Reading & Library/Computer Research 3.6 3.3 3.1 3.310. Computer Use for Instruction, Patient Care, etc. 3.6 3.9 3.5 3.811. Use of Computers by Faculty and/or Students 3.4 3.5 3.3 3.612. Please Rate Textbook 1 4.0 3.5 3.2 3.013. Please Rate Textbook 2 2.8 3.4 NA 3.314. Please Rate Textbook 3 4.1 3.7 NA 3.715. Usefulness of Feedback on History & Physicals 3.4 3.4 3.3 2.616. Encouraged to Take Active Role in Patient Evaluations 3.9 4.0 3.6 3.117. Appropriateness of Supervision & Instruction 4.1 4.0 3.9 3.918. Breadth of Experience with Disease Processes 3.9 3.7 3.9 3.519. Efforts to Make Student Feel a Part of the Clerkship 4.0 3.9 3.6 3.320. Responsiveness of Director to Students' Concerns 4.2 4.1 4.1 4.021. Constructive Feedback 3.5 3.6 3.5 3.122. Opportunity to Discuss Evaluation with Evaluators 3.2 3.4 3.0 2.623. Appropriateness of Grading Breakdown 3.8 3.5 3.7 3.324. Extent Attending Physicians Participated 3.6 3.8 3.3 3.4


This has been a great success. Uniting Obstetrics and Newborn has not only been a wonderful experience for the students, but has also increased communication with the two services. The educational model provides for a continuum across prenatal care, ante partum, labor and delivery, post partum, newborn nursery, and NICU. Relevant issues across preventative health, normal gestation and newborn care and common pathological disorders are integrated.




Clerkship title: NeuropsychiatrySponsoring departmentor unit: Psychiatry and Neurology

Name of clerkship director: Saundra Stock and Rossitza Chichkova

Rotations


Inpatient psychiatry – one monthConsultation psychiatry – 2 weeksNeurology – 2 weeks



Yes x No


Developed internally: The student will demonstrate the ability to establish physician/patient rapport. The student will convey an understanding of each patient's unique story and their experience with

the disease state and health care system. The student will enlist the support and cooperation of the patient's family. The student will describe the anatomical and physical basis for the neurological exam. The student will understand the pharmacological effects of psychotropic medications. The student will use the clinical database to localize and understand neurological lesions at the

following levels: Cerebral hemisphere, posterior fossa, spinal cord, nerve root/plexus, peripheral nerve, neuromuscular junction and muscle.

The student will demonstrate knowledge of common psychiatric and neurological diseases especially those diagnoses that the student is required to see.

The student will be able to order appropriate tests to narrow the differential diagnosis. The student will be able to incorporate assessment results into the diagnostic formulation. The student will be proficient in the work up for delirium or alteration of mental status. The student will be able to select an appropriate regimen of care including selection of

pharmacologic and non-pharmacological treatment options using knowledge of disease course and prevention.

The student will collaborate effectively with other professionals and staff members. The student will understand components of health care that uniquely affect access to care for

psychiatric and neurological illnesses including the Baker Act laws that govern involuntary psychiatric evaluations in Florida.

The student will maintain regular attendance and a professional appearance. The student will reliably attend to the care of his/her patients.



REQUIRED CLERKSHIP FORM (Continued)Clerkship title: Neuropsychiatry

The student will be aware of the interaction of the physician and the patient and its influence on patient management decisions.

The student will pursue independent learning of topics related to Neuropsychiatry. The student will request feedback about their performance and strive to incorporate the feedback

into their clinical activities. The student will assess a patient's capacity to make medical decisions on their own behalf. The student will know the decision making hierarchy that applies to patient care in the state of

Florida. The student will gather historical information regarding neurological and psychiatric symptoms,

accurately characterizing the onset and duration of these symptoms. The student will conduct a Mini Mental Status Exam and complete neurological exam. The student will convey these findings in a clear, logical and organized fashion both through

verbal and written means.






Residents are an integral part of our teaching team. To help prepare them for their medical education responsibilities, all PGY1 residents attend an initial orientation session sponsored by GME and co-presented by the Associate Dean for Undergraduate Medical Education. PGY2+ residents attend a similar session also co-presented by the Associate Dean for Undergraduate Medical Education. Each of these sessions specifies the COM educational objectives and addresses how to teach and evaluate medical students. This program has been in place for three years. Students are also reminded about two key resources: one, the Ombudsman in GME and two, a 360 degree, on-line reporting tool. In addition, on a semi-annual basis, all residency program directors fill out an evaluation of residents. This evaluation includes two items dealing with the teaching and evaluation skills of residents.




Individual clerkships and departments also help prepare residents in a variety of ways. For example, in this clerkship, residents are included in the distribution of educational materials on teaching techniques, feedback processes, and the review of the educational objectives. The list below is a representative sample of materials shared:

The USF CARES course specific objectives Feedback forms for interviewing, clinical decision making, psychiatry consults and neurology

H&Ps Evaluation forms that the residents will be asked to complete





Observed interviewing Presentation of Clinical CasesObservation of oral presentationsSelf-awareness assessmentStandardized written examinationClinical Practice ExerciseWriting of H&P or consult reportReview and presentation of a relevant paper from the literature

Faculty are required to complete a form specifically about interviewing and case presentations. Faculty complete a form to evaluate written documentation for a psychiatry consultation and a neurologyhistory and physical. All students take the NBME for psychiatry and neurology. All students take the clinical practice exercise at the end of the clerkship.




List all contributors to the final clinical evaluation of the clerk (full-time faculty, volunteer attending physicians, resident physicians, others). Each student receives grades from 4 faculty members (both core and voluntary) for inpatient psychiatry and neurology, consultation psychiatry, outpatient psychiatry and neurology. They also receive evaluations from residents for the inpatient and consultation services.


Not applicable.Psychiatry Exam


63 63 58






Neurology Exam

Year: 2004 2005 2006*Score: Not given Not given 69.8National Percentile

49



* Performance of third year students with two weeks of neurology


Yes x No






We utilize three different hospital sites for the rotation and have adequate number of faculty (core and volunteer) to accomplish the teaching mission. The hospital sites have a good mix of patient diagnoses with the VA hospitals having a greater percentage of male patients as compared to females. Efforts are taken to have the students rotate to a variety of sites during the clerkship to ensure a mix of patient demographics that they are exposed to. We have dedicated clerkship coordinators for psychiatry and neurology to help administer that clerkship.


New clerkship model started 2005-06.

Academic Year: 05/06 05/06

Neuropsych Avg.Y3


Questions: 1. Overall Learning Experience 3.9 3.92. Orientation 3.8 3.83. Structure and Curricular Design 3.5 3.44. Curricular Design Help Keep Up With Studies 3.6 3.45. Conferences (not rounds) for Students 3.6 3.56. Extent that Attendings Participated 4.1 3.9

7. Rate Rounds with Attendings/Residents 3.7 3.58. Extent Workload Facilitated Knowledge & Skills 3.1 3.19. Time Allotted for Reading & Library/Computer Research 3.7 3.310. Computer Use for Instruction, Patient Care, etc. 3.9 3.911. Use of Computers by Faculty and/or Students 3.4 3.512. Please Rate Textbook 1 3.4 3.513. Please Rate Textbook 2 3.8 3.414. Please Rate Textbook 3 3.4 3.715. Usefulness of Feedback on History & Physicals 3.5 3.416. Encouraged to Take Active Role in Patient Evaluations 4.0 4.017. Appropriateness of Supervision & Instruction 3.8 4.018. Breadth of Experience with Disease Processes 3.7 3.719. Efforts to Make Student Feel a Part of the Clerkship 4.1 3.920. Responsiveness of Director to Students' Concerns 4.1 4.121. Constructive Feedback 3.9 3.622. Opportunity to Discuss Evaluation with Evaluators 3.7 3.423. Appropriateness of Grading Breakdown 3.6 3.524. Extent Attending Physicians Participated 3.9 3.8




Previous clerkship model evaluationAcademic Year: 04/05 04/05 03/04 03/04

Psych Avg.Y3

coursesPsych Avg.Y3


Questions: 1. Overall Learning Experience 4.0 4.1 4.2 4.1 2. Orientation 3.8 4.0 4.2 4.1 3. Structure and Curricular Design 3.3 4.0 4.1 4.0 4. Curricular Design Help Keep Up With Studies 3.3 3.8 4.1 3.8 5. Conferences (not rounds) for Students 3.3 3.7 3.9 3.8 6. Extent that Attendings Participated 4.0 4.0 4.1 4.0 7. Rate Rounds with Attendings/Residents 3.8 3.7 3.7 3.7 8. Extent Workload Facilitated Knowledge & Skills 3.1 3.1 3.1 3.1 9. Time Allotted for Reading & Library/Computer Research 3.5 3.3 3.8 3.3 10. Computer Use for Instruction, Patient Care, etc. 3.9 3.8 3.7 3.7 11. Use of Computers by Faculty and/or Students 3.4 3.6 3.3 3.4 12. Please Rate Textbook 1 3.5 3.0 4.2 3.7 13. Please Rate Textbook 2 3.9 3.3 4.0 2.9 14. Please Rate Textbook 3 3.0 3.7 NA 1.0 15. Usefulness of Feedback on History & Physicals 3.5 2.6 3.6 3.5 16. Encouraged to Take Active Role in Patient Evaluations 4.2 3.1 4.1 4.1 17. Appropriateness of Supervision & Instruction 3.8 3.9 3.9 4.1 18. Breadth of Experience with Disease Processes 3.8 3.5 3.9 4.0 19. Efforts to Make Student Feel a Part of the Clerkship 4.2 3.3 4.3 4.2 20. Responsiveness of Director to Students' Concerns 4.2 4.0 4.5 4.4 21. Constructive Feedback 4.0 3.1 3.9 3.8 22. Opportunity to Discuss Evaluation with Evaluators 3.7 2.6 3.7 3.5 23. Appropriateness of Grading Breakdown 3.6 3.3 3.8 3.7 24. Extent Attending Physicians Participated 3.8 3.4 4.0 3.9





We have successfully integrated psychiatry and neurology into an 8 week block. The clerkship experiences are broad and we are continuing to refine the mixture of clinical exposure to optimize the student involvement and learning. The combination of inpatient and outpatient sites provides a wide variety of patient problems common for practitioners in these specialties; however, limited time in each setting can stifle student autonomy. We continue to work to structure high quality by evaluating and reformulating our rotations.




Clerkship title: Primary Care and Special PopulationsSponsoring departmentor unit: Pediatrics, Family Medicine, Internal Medicine, OB/GYN

Name of clerkship director: Kira Zwygart

RotationsList the required rotations that are part of the clerkship, and the average amount of time spent in each (if there are variations across sites, provide a range).

The students spend 4 months in primary care. Each month they focus on a different “special population” – women’s health, patients with disabilities and men’s health, geriatrics, and adolescent medicine. During the entire rotation, they spend a majority of the time in the USF medical clinics, with time in some community preceptors’ offices as well.



Yes x No


Developed internally: The student will establish physician/patient rapport and relate to patients empathetically. The student will enlist the support and cooperation of the patient’s family. The student will understand the common conditions seen in primary care and apply that in the

creation of appropriate differential diagnoses. The student will understand the potential effects of medications, tests, or other treatments

recommended to patients. The student will understand how the physical, psychosocial, economic, developmental, and

cultural factors affect the management plan for a patient. The student will be able to order appropriate tests to narrow the differential diagnosis. The student will be able to incorporate physical exam findings and test results to formulate an

effective diagnosis and treatment plan. The student will be able to create an effective treatment plan while taking into account the

psychosocial, familial, and cost factors of the patient. The student will provide preventative care for patients, recommending appropriate procedures to

promote wellness. The student will participate in discussion regarding the various specialties involved in primary

care. The student will work effectively with other professionals and staff members. The student will participate in the business symposium and understand the concept of quality

improvement. The student will actively participate in discussions regarding health care for underserved patients,

advocacy for patients, and special needs for particular patient populations. The student will provide reliable and compassionate care for patients.

LCME Medical Education Database 2004-05 Required Clerkship Form

108



Clerkship title: Primary Care and Special Populations

The student will maintain regular attendance and professional appearance. The student will accept and react to supervision and feedback effectively. The student will pursue the independent study of topics related to primary care. The student will consistently provide ethical care to patients. The student will participate in discussions regarding ethical medical care. The student will gather and critically review pertinent historical information of the patient. The student will conduct an appropriate complete physical exam and a problem-based physical

exam. The student will prepare concise, logical, and thorough written presentation of a patient’s history

and physical exam. The student will perform a complete pelvic exam, including a speculum and bimanual exam. The student will perform a complete prostate exam. The student will perform appropriate physical exams on patients with disabilities.






All residents participate in an Orientation provided by the GME office that covers how adults learn, teaching and evaluation strategies, and competency based education. The residents are informed that there are specific expectations (competencies) and objectives (measurable outcomes) for the student rotations and they should be aware of the objectives for the students on each rotation. Specific clerkship objectives are shared, at a minimum, with resident physicians via the course syllabus that contains the clerkship objectives. To help enhance success of resident physicians in their teaching role, there are a wide variety of faculty development offerings available to all USF College of Medicine faculty – including resident physicians. The USF main campus houses the Center for 21st Century Teaching REQUIRED CLERKSHIP FORM (Continued)




Excellence. The Center was established to promote personal reflection and scholarly dialogue on the art, science and craft of university teaching. The Center sponsors publications, workshops, and research which critically examine and promote instructional excellence. In addition, the Center offers opportunities for individuals to improve their teaching effectiveness using classroom visitations and student feedback. In addition to the Center for 21st Century Teaching Excellence, the Office of Educational Affairs, within the College of Medicine, offers a variety of faculty enhancement workshops each year and individual clerkships and departments also provide faculty development activities related to teaching and evaluation skills.


Faculty at various sites are given the course syllabus, which outlines both of these items. Outside preceptors are also given separate introduction sheets outlining our goals and a short evaluation form for the students they work with. Each course uses a single evaluation system for all faculty who work with all students. Evaluation forms contain program wide competency and objective ratings as well as clerkship-specific ratings to ensure linkage between the educational objectives and the system of evaluations. This system is established on both summative evaluation forms and midterm evaluation forms used by clerkship.



Presentation of Clinical CasesObservation of oral presentationsReview of written clinical encountersClinical skills examination with standardized patientsStructured observed exam for breast and pelvic examinationsStandardized written examination

All students participate in all of the above methods.


Full-time faculty and voluntary faculty contribute to the final evaluation.

While students are on the women’s health portion of the clerkship, they sometimes work with residents in the gyn clinics. The residents will then complete an evaluation, which is reviewed by





the attending physician. The attending physician will incorporate the information given from the residents into his final evaluation.

If NBME subject examinations are used, give mean scores for the last three years.

Family Medicine Exam


59 68 75






Is a narrative evaluation of student performance submitted in addition to the clerkship grade?Yes x No



Overall, the number of faculty was adequate. If we were lacking in faculty in on particular days, the students would be reassigned to the USF clinics or a different private voluntary preceptor. Therefore, students would still have a good clinical experience, although not always with the specialty initially planned for. More geriatric and adolescent preceptors as well as more voluntary faculty from AHEC (area health education centers) would enhance the students’ learning experiences.

As for patients, we started the year with 2 new pediatric faculty and 2 new geriatric faculty. Their patient populations have taken a long time to build up, so the number of patients seen with these faculty members was lower than elsewhere. When students were assigned to these newer physicians, we tried to increase their clinical exposure to the mentioned patient populations elsewhere in the clerkship (with private voluntary preceptors), so that they would still be learning about these population types.






Academic Year: 05/06 05/06 04/05 04/05

PC/SP Pops

Avg.Y3 courses

Fam Med

Avg.Y3 courses

Scale: 1-Poor, 2-Fair, 3-Good, 4-VeryGood, 5-Excellent Questions: 1. Overall Learning Experience 3.2 3.9 4.2 4.12. Orientation 3.3 3.8 4.1 4.03. Structure and Curricular Design 2.6 3.4 4.1 4.04. Curricular Design Help Keep Up With Studies 2.8 3.4 3.7 3.85. Conferences (not rounds) for Students 3.1 3.5 3.8 3.76. Extent that Attendings Participated 3.9 3.9 4.5 4.07. Rate Rounds with Attendings/Residents 3.3 3.5 3.9 3.78. Extent Workload Facilitated Knowledge & Skills 3.0 3.1 3.1 3.19. Time Allotted for Reading & Library/Computer Research 3.5 3.3 3.5 3.310. Computer Use for Instruction, Patient Care, etc. 4.0 3.9 3.6 3.811. Use of Computers by Faculty and/or Students 3.4 3.5 3.6 3.612. Please Rate Textbook 1 3.0 3.5 3.1 3.013. Please Rate Textbook 2 2.9 3.4 NA 3.314. Please Rate Textbook 3 3.8 3.7 NA 3.715. Usefulness of Feedback on History & Physicals 3.3 3.4 3.8 2.616. Encouraged to Take Active Role in Patient Evaluations 4.0 4.0 4.5 3.117. Appropriateness of Supervision & Instruction 3.9 4.0 4.4 3.918. Breadth of Experience with Disease Processes 3.4 3.7 4.2 3.519. Efforts to Make Student Feel a Part of the Clerkship 3.8 3.9 4.5 3.320. Responsiveness of Director to Students' Concerns 3.9 4.1 4.5 4.021. Constructive Feedback 3.6 3.6 4.3 3.122. Opportunity to Discuss Evaluation with Evaluators 3.3 3.4 4.0 2.623. Appropriateness of Grading Breakdown 3.2 3.5 3.8 3.324. Extent Attending Physicians Participated 3.9 3.8 4.4 3.4


More voluntary faculty, particularly from AHEC (which provides a lot of care for the underserved) and adolescent physicians, would enhance this clerkship. We continue to recruit new high-quality voluntary faculty, and are finding other specialists who care for adolescent patients to compensate for faculty losses.

Our successes have been the very high scores on the Family Medicine NBME exam, our disabilities module, and our concept of continuity of care. For the disabilities portion of the clerkship, we have utilized patient panels and student-led outreach to various local sites. Students have improved their comfort level caring for patients with disabilities. In terms of continuity of care, because students are with us over a longer period of time, they develop stronger mentoring relationships with faculty and also have the opportunity to see patients several times over the 4 months. In this way they can see if the treatments they have recommended are working well for the patients.





Challenges – after the first year of any program, challenges are expected. We made quite a few adjustments throughout the year for the greatest challenges we encountered. The number of interactive didactics has increased compared to last year, and we will continue to work in this direction and to further encourage self-directed learning. To help students during this long clerkship, we have added some new activities in the second half of the course to encourage principles of evidence-based medicine, self-directed learning, and peer teaching. We will see if we are able to make these steps this year.




Clerkship title: Surgical CareSponsoring departmentor unit: Department of Surgery

Name of clerkship director: Steven B. Goldin, M.D., Ph.D.

Rotations


Each student will do a 4-week general surgery rotation on one of the following services: TGH Gold-A, TGH Gold-B, TGH Blue/Green, James Haley VA-1, Bay Pines General Surgery Service or Moffitt Cancer Center GI Service. The remaining 4 weeks will consist of a 2-week rotation on a subspecialty service and 2 weeks on the Gynecology Service. Subspecialty choices include cardiothoracic, pediatric surgery, plastics, ENT, orthopedics, transplant, trauma, and vascular.



Yes x No


Developed internally: The student will reliably attend to the care of patients. The student will develop skills of empathetic and honest communication. The student will demonstrate understanding of common surgical problems, including the

etiology, pathogenesis, and diagnostic study of the disease. The student will develop an understanding of surgical treatment, including the familiarity with

various surgical procedures, expected outcomes, and complications; The student will take accurate medical histories containing all relevant information. The student will order appropriate tests to help narrow the differential diagnosis. The student will incorporate assessment results into diagnostic formulation based on history and

physical findings. The student will formulate possible biological, psychological, and social factors relating to the

etiology of the illness or symptoms. The student will be proficient in the work up for surgical and gynecological diseases. The student will plan an appropriate regimen of care. The student will be familiar with institutional resources and effectively utilize institutional

resources. The student will collaborate effectively with other professionals and staff members. The student will maintain regular attendance. The student will maintain a professional appearance. The student will bring tools expected for the rotation to clinical sites.



REQUIRED CLERKSHIP FORM (Continued)Clerkship title: Surgical Care Clerkship

The student will be able to utilize supervision and feedback effectively. The student will pursue independent study of topics related to Surgery and Gynecology. The student will assess a patient's capacity to make medical decisions on his/her own behalf. The student will know the decision making hierarchy that applies to patient care in the state of

Florida. The student will gather historical information from patients regarding their illness. The student will conduct a focused and reliable physical exam.






Residents are an integral part of our teaching team. To help prepare them for their medical education responsibilities, all PGY1 residents attend an initial orientation session sponsored by GME and co-presented by the Associate Dean for Undergraduate Medical Education. PGY2+ residents attend a similar session also co-presented by the Associate Dean for Undergraduate Medical Education. Each of these sessions specifies the COM educational objectives and addresses how to teach and evaluate medical students. This program has been in place for three years.





Individual clerkships and departments also help prepare residents in a variety of ways. For example, in this clerkship, residents are included in the distribution of educational materials on teaching techniques, feedback processes, and the review rotation educational objectives. The list below is a representative sample of materials shared:




What methods are used in the clerkship to evaluate students’ core clinical skills? How do you ensure that such evaluation occurs for all students?Each student is evaluated by the preceptor of their respective rotation. Evaluations are collected by the Clerkship Coordinator. The clinical performance percentage of the students final grade comes from the evaluations (50%: general surgery rotation; 25%: sub-specialty rotation; 25%: gynecology rotation).

For example: Weekly quizzesStructured interviewing during rounds, in the clinic and operating roomSelf-awareness assessmentPresentation of Clinical CasesObservation of oral presentationsReview of written clinical portfoliosStandardized written examination


Attending and resident physicians complete final clinical evaluations for individual students with whom they have worked over the course of the clerkship. Students are also evaluated by standardized patients (SPs) during end-of-clerkship CPX examination.





Year: 2004 2005 2006Score: 72 74 73National Percentile 61 68 65






Yes x No



Students work with full-time faculty within the Departments of Surgery, Gynecology & Obstetrics and Otolaryngology at The Tampa General Hospital, Moffitt Cancer Center, James A. Haley Veterans Administration Hospital and the Bay Pines Veterans Administration Hospital. Those faculty who are not full-time within the departments have voluntary or courtesy appointments.


Academic Year: 05/06 05/06 04/05 04/05 Surgical

Care Avg.Y3 courses

Surgery Avg.Y3 courses

Scale: 1-Poor, 2-Fair, 3-Good, 4-VeryGood, 5-Excellent Questions: 1. Overall Learning Experience 3.9 3.9 3.9 4.12. Orientation 3.8 3.8 3.8 4.03. Structure and Curricular Design 3.4 3.4 3.4 4.04. Curricular Design Help Keep Up With Studies 3.3 3.4 3.3 3.8




5. Conferences (not rounds) for Students 3.3 3.5 3.3 3.76. Extent that Attendings Participated 3.6 3.9 3.6 4.07. Rate Rounds with Attendings/Residents 3.3 3.5 3.3 3.78. Extent Workload Facilitated Knowledge & Skills 3.3 3.1 3.2 3.19. Time Allotted for Reading & Library/Computer Research 2.9 3.3 2.9 3.310. Computer Use for Instruction, Patient Care, etc. 3.7 3.9 3.7 3.811. Use of Computers by Faculty and/or Students 3.3 3.5 3.3 3.612. Please Rate Textbook 1 3.5 3.5 3.4 3.013. Please Rate Textbook 2 3.3 3.4 3.2 3.314. Please Rate Textbook 3 3.3 3.7 3.1 3.715. Usefulness of Feedback on History & Physicals 2.9 3.4 2.9 2.616. Encouraged to Take Active Role in Patient Evaluations 3.6 4.0 3.5 3.117. Appropriateness of Supervision & Instruction 3.9 4.0 3.9 3.918. Breadth of Experience with Disease Processes 3.6 3.7 3.6 3.519. Efforts to Make Student Feel a Part of the Clerkship 3.8 3.9 3.8 3.320. Responsiveness of Director to Students' Concerns 3.9 4.1 3.9 4.021. Constructive Feedback 3.4 3.6 3.4 3.122. Opportunity to Discuss Evaluation with Evaluators 2.7 3.4 2.7 2.623. Appropriateness of Grading Breakdown 3.2 3.5 3.2 3.324. Extent Attending Physicians Participated 3.6 3.8 3.6 3.4


Major Successes of the Clerkship:

The Course and the weekly quizzes are posted on Blackboard. Successful implementation of weekly quizzes, standardized patients (OSCE’s), clinical skills assessments, mid-term evaluations.

Major Challenge:

Prefer more time to adequately cover general surgery and the sub-specialties.




Clerkship title: Critical CareSponsoring departmentor unit: Anesthesiology

Name of clerkship director: Elamin M. Elamin

Rotations


Each student will spend three or four weeks in two of the following critical care rotations: Anesthesia ICU Trauma ICU CCU – Cardiology Neonatal ICU Pediatric ICU St. Joseph’s Pediatric ICU TGH Neuro ICU Medical ICU Surgical ICU VA Pulmonary Moffitt

Students will be assigned rotations on basis of preference, but will not be allowed to repeat rotations, or be assigned to two rotations of similar specialized patient population, i.e., pediatrics and neonatal rotations, in sequential months. Students who request CCU may spend 3-4 weeks in CCU, but ALL student have training in acute cardiac events during this clerkship.

Average time spent in the ICU for the first clinical rotation is four days per week for three consecutive weeks. Average time spent in the ICU for the second clinical rotation is six days a week for four consecutive weeks. Students will be functioning as acting interns for the second clinical rotation. Students are expected to be present for clinical rounds, will be assigned specific patients to evaluate and follow, and will be expected to participate in discussions of clinical evaluation and management. Work days may vary between rotations from six to ten hours. Clinical faculties are encouraged to limit student work days to eight hours to allow sufficient non-clinical time to review course materials.



Yes X No


Developed internally: Demonstrate respect for patients and a commitment to involve patients as participants in their

health care. Respect patient’s informed choices, including the right to refuse treatment and patient autonomy




Clerkship title: Critical Care

Understand fundamental principles of ACLS and ATLS. Develop an awareness of interrelatedness between various disciplines. Understand pathophysiology, complications, and management of multiple organ system failure. Understand physiology of respiration and pathophysiology of acute and chronic respiratory

failure. Understand principles of mechanical ventilatory support. Select proper medications and treatment options. Understand risks and benefits of procedures recommended. Select diagnostic studies with greatest likelihood of useful results. Modify treatment based on new data. Monitor a patient’s response to treatment, including potential adverse effects. Understand the basis for developing a comprehensive and accurate differential diagnosis. Enhance understanding of the role of critical care units in overall health care of patients. Appreciate prioritization of care (triage) as used in critical care medicine. Appreciate resources that can help commence planning for necessary care following discharge

from ICU, including social work services and ancillary hospital services. Call for appropriate consultation with regard to specialized medical disciplines of cardiology,

neurology, radiology, orthopedics, obstetrics and pain management. Demonstrate understanding of psychosocial impact of health and illness of patients and families Demonstrate increasing skill in talking with patients and families about prognosis, delivering bad

news, and discussing end-of-life decisions Demonstrate discretion when discussing patient related information. Respect patient privacy. Respect the rights of patients, colleagues, and other health professionals, and safeguard patient

confidences and privacy. Make relevant information available to patients, colleagues, and the public, obtain consultation,

and use the talents of other health professionals when indicated. Present a new patient’s case, chronologically developing the present illness. Present an established patient’s case, focusing on treatment plans. Present a differential diagnosis for each problem observed. Record a new patient evaluation for each clinical situation.



The COM has a required electronic logbook and the associated database tracks all student experiences. This provides the ability to identify experiences and monitor them in real-time to assure compliance and REQUIRED CLERKSHIP FORM (Continued)




adequacy of the student clinical experience. Weekly reports are generated to assess compliance with specific logbook requirements and assess students’ progress toward attaining specific diagnoses and skills within a clerkship. The Office of Educational Affairs, the Associate Dean for UME, the clerkship director and the Associate Dean for Student Affairs facilitate monitoring this data and clerkship directors assure the adequacy of the experiences.





Individual clerkships and departments also help prepare residents in a variety of ways. For example, in this clerkship, residents are included in the distribution of educational materials on teaching techniques, feedback processes, and the review of the educational objectives. Please complete the following sentence. The list below is a representative sample of materials shared:

Residents are instructed to evaluate students in six key areas of Critical Care Medicine:

1. Knowledge & Learning SkillsUnderstands basic & key concepts of critical care medicine. Recognizes & corrects gaps in knowledge & learns from experience. Is innovative, adaptable, eager & responsive to directions. Accepts personal responsibility.

2. Medical JudgmentRecognizes necessity for evaluating each patient. Demonstrates capacity to select appropriate ICU techniques & therapy. Recognizes & responds appropriately to changes in patient’s condition. Demonstrates capacity to integrate clinical data & derive an effective plan. Knows when to request assistance.

3. Clinical / Technical SkillsHistory & physical exams. General therapy. Appropriate care plan. Technical skills. Accuracy & thoroughness documentation.

4. Daily PerformanceOrganized with management plans & alternatives, responsive to events as they occur. Exhibits knowledge about special considerations & ICU emergencies. Appropriate timely management of critical events.





Remains calm, but able to work with appropriate speed. Selects & adequately interprets invasive hemodynamic monitors. 5. Personal Characteristics & ProfessionalismDemonstrates respect, compassion, integrity, honesty; responsible behavior; committed to self-assessment; willingly acknowledges errors; always considers needs of patients, families, colleagues; appropriately adaptable and flexible.

6. Overall clinical competence on this Rotation





Standardized written examinations are administered in two phases at the end of the rotation. A 12 question ECG Competency Evaluation is administered and reviewed by Dr. O’Brien. A 48 question multiple choice written examination is then administered to all students, covering all criteria covered in didactic lectures. Written examination currently accounts for Two clinical evaluations of the six major criteria of clinical competence are completed on every student for each clinical rotation. The standardized form outlines the criteria exactly as above, and allows a five point evaluation scale for each. That scale is:

Exceptional = 4Good = 3Above Average= 2Satisfactory = 1Unsatisfactory = 0


The full residency class of each of the following USF Departments may rotate through the Intensive Care units where Critical Care Medicine students are assigned. Those units are:

Anesthesia ICU REQUIRED CLERKSHIP FORM (Continued)




Trauma ICU CCU – Cardiology Neonatal ICU Pediatric ICU St. Joseph’s Pediatric ICU TGH Neuro ICU Medical ICU Surgical ICU VA Pulmonary Moffitt

Each student receives two clinical evaluations per rotation, one from a resident physician assigned as that student’s clinical supervisor, and one by the attending physician of the rotation.

If NBME subject (shelf) examinations are used, give mean scores for the last three years.Not applicable


Yes x No



With the current increase in class size, ICU resources for education in the Critical Care Clerkship are being stretched to the fullest. Class size has increased from an average of 20 students per rotation, to 25 students. These students must be assigned to 10 ICU’s for their clinical rotations, two of which have requested to only receive one student per rotation. This means the remainder of the rotations must take approximately three students each. Some ICU’s are only assigned one or two resident physicians, which will make the supervisory element of the course more difficult.Additionally, lecture time has been constrained to Mondays of the first month of the course. This has forced deletion of several former elements of the course, including the Evidence Based Medicine CAT presentations, and the simulator based training sessions. Lack of support for a full or part time educational faculty member to devote time to the simulation sessions has also curtailed that element.






USF COMCritical Care Evaluation Data

Crit Care

Avg Yr 4

ClrkshCrit Care

Avg Yr 4

Clrksh05/06 05/06 04/05 04/05

1. Rate the overall learning experience of this clerkship 3.8 3.6 3.5 3.32. Rate the appropriateness of orientation of this clerkship, including information about course/clerkship requirements. 3.5 3.5 3.5 3.43. Rate the structure and curricular design of the clerkship. 3.2 3.3 3.3 3.24. Rate how well the curricular design helped you keep up with your studies. 3.2 3.3 3.2 3.25. Rate the conferences (i.e. not rounds) that were specifically for students as a learning experience. 3.1 3.2 3.0 3.16. Rate the extent that attending physicians participated in your educational experience during this clerkship. 3.9 3.9 3.6 3.87. Rate the Rounds with attendings/residents in this clerkship as a learning experience. 3.9 3.9 3.5 3.68. Rate the extent to which the workload facilitated your acquisition of appropriate knowledge and skills. 3.0 3.0 2.9 2.99. Rate the appropriateness of time allotted for reading and library/computer research. 3.6 3.8 3.5 3.710. Did you use the computer for either instruction, patient care, or literature searching? 4.0 4.0 4.0 3.7

11. Rate the use of computers, and other information technology, by faculty and/or students as a component of this clerkship (not including hospital lab, x-ray, or retrieval systems). 3.7 3.6 3.7 3.512. If you used the following textbook, please rate it: Textbook #1 3.3 3.513. If you used the following textbook, please rate it: Textbook #2 3.5 3.114. If you used the following textbook, please rate it: Textbook #3 3.4 3.215. Rate the usefulness of feedback received on history and physicals that you did. 3.4 3.4 2.9 3.016. Rate the extent to which you were encouraged to take an active role in patient evaluations. 3.9 3.8 3.5 3.417. Rate the appropriateness of supervision and instruction while performing procedures during this clerkship. 4.0 3.7 3.9 3.718. Rate the breadth of experience gained with disease processes in this clerkship. 3.7 3.7 3.5 3.419. Rate the efforts to make you feel a part of this clerkship. 3.9 3.9 3.5 3.520. Rate how responsive the clerkship director was to students' concerns and questions related to this clerkship. 4.1 4.1 4.3 4.2





21. Rate the constructive feedback received regarding your participation from the faculty with whom you worked. 3.7 3.6 3.3 3.422. Rate the opportunity given to discuss your evaluation with the individual(s) evaluating you for this clerkship. 3.8 3.4 3.1 3.023. Rate the appropriateness of the breakdown (tests, assignments, evaluations) for the clerkship grading. 3.7 3.7 3.6 3.524. Rate the extent that attending physicians participated in your educational experience during this clerkship. 3.9 3.8 3.5 3.7


One of the major challenges and at the same achievement during the last academic year (2005-2006) was to maintain the CCM clerkship at the highest stander among the other fourth year clerkships. With the determination and dedication of faculty and staff, the clerkship is expected to continue to grow and improve in the coming years.




Clerkship title: Integrated Clinical NeuroscienceSponsoring departmentor unit: Neurology

Name of clerkship director: Michael Hoffmann

Rotations


4 week rotations in inpatient and outpatient settings. Students were divided between 4 sites, TGH, VAH, Bay Pines and MCC, for inpatient rotation. Outpatient clinics were located at USF Clinic, Movement Disorders at HMT, James Haley VA and Bay Pines.



Yes x No


Developed internally: Student will develop empathy, respect and understanding for patients with neurological disease. Student will develop empathy, respect and understanding for families and caregivers within the

patient’s realm of care giving. Student will interpret neurological tests and develop an appropriate treatment plan for the patients

under Attending and Resident guidance. Student will work in a team setting with Residents, Attendings, and other inter-departments to

best evaluate treatment strategies for complete patient care. Student will develop empathy, respect and understanding for patients with neurological disease. Student will develop a depth of knowledge and proficiency in treating neurological emergencies

and develop a working knowledge of outpatient neurological disease. Student will develop proficiency in performing the neurological examination and obtaining a

meaningful history in a neurological patient.






Clerkship title: Integrated Clinical Neuroscience






Individual clerkships and departments also help prepare residents in a variety of ways. For example, in this clerkship, residents are included in the distribution of educational materials on teaching techniques, feedback processes, and the review of the educational objectives. Please complete the following sentence. The list below is a representative sample of materials shared:

Student schedulesEvaluation FormsCourse syllabusOrientation information









Structured interviewingSelf-awareness assessmentPresentation of Clinical Cases (as requested)Observation of patient care in an outpatient settingSelf-awareness assessmentStandardized written examination


Attending faculty at inpatient facilities assignedOutpatient Faculty Residents assigned to inpatient facilitiesVoluntary FacultyCourse DirectorCourse Coordinator


Year: 2004 2005 2006Score: 75.5 74.2 74.5National Percentile

72 66 67


2001-02 NBME norm reference table




Yes x No



The course had adequate Faculty however, with the transition of the new Med III NeuroPsychiatry Clerkship careful coordination was required to assure success of both.






USF COMCritical Care Evaluation Data

Neurosci Avg Yr 4 Clrksh

Neurosci Avg Yr 4 Clrksh

05/06 05/06 04/05 04/051. Rate the overall learning experience of this clerkship 3.5 3.6 3.1 3.32. Rate the appropriateness of orientation of this clerkship, including information about course/clerkship requirements. 3.4 3.5 3.3 3.43. Rate the structure and curricular design of the clerkship. 3.3 3.3 3.1 3.24. Rate how well the curricular design helped you keep up with your studies. 3.4 3.3 3.2 3.25. Rate the conferences (i.e. not rounds) that were specifically for students as a learning experience. 3.2 3.2 3.2 3.16. Rate the extent that attending physicians participated in your educational experience during this clerkship. 3.9 3.9 3.9 3.87. Rate the Rounds with attendings/residents in this clerkship as a learning experience. 3.8 3.9 3.7 3.68. Rate the extent to which the workload facilitated your acquisition of appropriate knowledge and skills. 2.9 3.0 2.8 2.99. Rate the appropriateness of time allotted for reading and library/computer research. 3.9 3.8 3.8 3.710. Did you use the computer for either instruction, patient care, or literature searching? 4.0 4.0 3.4 3.711. Rate the use of computers, and other information technology, by faculty and/or students as a component of this clerkship (not including hospital lab, x-ray, or retrieval systems). 3.5 3.6 3.3 3.512. If you used the following textbook, please rate it: Textbook #1 3.3 3.3 3.5 3.513. If you used the following textbook, please rate it: Textbook #2 3.5 3.5 3.1 3.114. If you used the following textbook, please rate it: Textbook #3 3.4 3.4 3.2 3.215. Rate the usefulness of feedback received on history and physicals that you did. 3.4 3.4 3.2 3.0





16. Rate the extent to which you were encouraged to take an active role in patient evaluations. 3.6 3.8 3.2 3.417. Rate the appropriateness of supervision and instruction while performing procedures during this clerkship. 3.5 3.7 3.4 3.718. Rate the breadth of experience gained with disease processes in this clerkship. 3.6 3.7 3.3 3.419. Rate the efforts to make you feel a part of this clerkship. 3.9 3.9 3.5 3.520. Rate how responsive the clerkship director was to students' concerns and questions related to this clerkship. 4.0 4.1 4.2 4.221. Rate the constructive feedback received regarding your participation from the faculty with whom you worked. 3.5 3.6 3.5 3.422. Rate the opportunity given to discuss your evaluation with the individual(s) evaluating you for this clerkship. 3.0 3.4 3.0 3.023. Rate the appropriateness of the breakdown (tests, assignments, evaluations) for the clerkship grading. 3.7 3.7 3.4 3.524. Rate the extent that attending physicians participated in your educational experience during this clerkship. 3.8 3.8 3.9 3.7


This was the last year for the Neuroscience BCC 8191 course.


Documents

REQUIRED COURSE FORM - University of South Florida · Web viewThe student will be able to explain the relationship between the legal system and the practice of medicine. The student