Discussion Items

1. Minutes

Ms. Cameron reported that Dr. Distlehorst had asked that there be a clarification regarding the discussion about the Year 2 proposal process to note that Dr. Distlehorst had been unaware that discussions she, Dr. Kruse, Dr. Dorsey, and Dr. Borgia had had regarding the Year 2 proposal would be used to circumvent the Year 2 Committee process. Dr. Borgia made a motion, seconded by Dr. Williams, to approve the minutes as submitted. The motion passed unanimously.

2. Announcements

Dr. Resch announced the Internal Medicine/Medical Humanities Grand Rounds at 5 pm February 11 in the Wedeberg Conference Center.

3. Subcommittee Reports:

3.1 Educational Value Unit Task Force Update (Jerry Kruse, MD)

Dr. Kruse reported that Dr. Dorsey has charged the group to continue its efforts. The group is currently reviewing the data it has collected and will begin to meet regularly again in the near future.

3.2 Biotechnology, Genetics and Ethics (David Steward, MD)

Dr. Borgia reported that the group continues to review the SIUSOM curriculum and national recommendations for Genetics curricula and is currently developing a set of curriculum recommendations by year for submission to the EPC.

3.3 Faculty Development (Don Caspary, PhD)

The group has not met since the last EPC meeting.

3.4 Information Technology (IMPC/EPC Joint Subcommittee; David Resch, MD, Chair)

Dr. Resch reported that the Information Technology Subcommittee continues to meet regularly and has three areas for which it is ready to report and seek comment from EPC: Educational Technology Sessions, Assessment Software, and Oversight of the PDA Project.

The Educational Technology Sessions are meant to introduce topics to attendees so that they can familiarize themselves with concepts and terminology. The format for each session is:

· Brief description of the concept

· How the technology being presented relates to other media

· What the possibilities are

· What the limitations are

· How to learn more about the concept or a particular product

All sessions are held the last Wednesday of the month at noon. Most of the sessions will be held in the South Auditorium in Springfield and Lindegren 310 in Carbondale.

A proposed schedule was distributed for review by the EPC:

February 27, 2002

Electronic Education Delivery I

(BlackBoard, WebCT)

Carbondale: Lindegren 310

Springfield: Lindsey Conference Room

March 27, 2002

Database Software

(Access, Filemaker Pro, Informix, SQL)

Carbondale: Lindegren 310

Springfield: South Auditorium

April 24, 2002

Assessment Software

Carbondale: Lindegren 310

Springfield: South Auditorium

May 29, 2002

Electronic Education Delivery II

(NetMedia, Streaming Media, Real Player, etc.)

Carbondale: Lindegren 310

Springfield: South Auditorium

June 26, 2002

Decision Support Software

Carbondale: Lindegren 310

Springfield: South Auditorium

July 31, 2002

Electronic Medical Records

(including Voice Recognition)

Carbondale: Lindegren 310

Springfield: South Auditorium

August 28, 2002

Presentation Software

(Persuasion, PowerPoint)

Carbondale: Lindegren 310

Springfield: South Auditorium

September 25, 2002

Telehealth

Carbondale: Lindegren 310

Springfield: South Auditorium

October 30, 2002

Communication Software

(Eudora, Netscape, Outlook,
Webmail, AOL, Netscape)

Carbondale: Lindegren 310

Springfield: South Auditorium

November 27, 2002

Networking/Wireless Systems

(Internet Formatting, PDA Wireless Systems, Wireless Network)

Carbondale: Lindegren 310

Springfield: South Auditorium

December 18, 2002

Web Development/Publishing

(Dreamweaver, FrontPage, NetObjects)

Carbondale: Lindegren 310

Springfield: South Auditorium

Dr. Resch noted that the current state of information technology in the curriculum is course dependent, rather than an institutional approach. The February session will focus on educational delivery systems such as WebCT and BlackBoard, which might be of interest to course directors who wish to set up educational sites for their courses.

A summary of results of the Assessment Software Needs Assessment was distributed. Dr. Resch explained that the IT Subcommittee would like to distribute an RFP to vendors and then make a decision as to whether to proceed, based on availability of software that will meet the institution’s needs across the four-year undergraduate curriculum, graduate medical education, and continuing medical education. In response to a question as to what is currently available, Dr. Resch explained that most of the options listed on the software needs assessment were currently being met using multiple systems, a major component of which is the mainframe, which will not be available next year. Dr. Wade responded that the Year 1 assessment process was adequate and did not need assistance.

In response to a question regarding the software currently available for assessment, Dr. Resch explained that some of the early issues regarding question item and response length in CCX had been enhanced, but that the item analysis and reporting were still being done on the mainframe, which is being phased out. Dr. Lower reported that the CCX Committee has spent years developing the CCX software and is just reaching the point where longitudinal data can be reviewed, and had no interest in moving away from the software. Dr. Wade reiterated that he did not see an advantage in coordinating assessment across the curriculum.

PDA Project: At the request of a group of students, OEC requested and received funds from the institution to purchase and distribute Personal Digital Assistants to all students in the Classes of 2003, 2004 and 2005. The goals for the project were for students to be able to log clinical encounters with drop down menus that match to course and school of medicine objectives, access clinical information (e-pocrates, clinical consult, etc.), provide feedback on clinical encounters at the time of the encounter. provide feedback on curricular activities, access course documents (schedules, reference information, etc.), and have access to e-mail and calendars. Student response to the project has ranged from enthusiastic to caustic, mostly in relation to problems synchronizing or working with software packages that have proven unreliable. The planned primary use of logbooks in Y1, Y2, and Y3 was for logbooks to track patient encounters; however, this is not mandated, and web forms that write data to the same database are available so students can choose how they wish to enter the data. He noted that the issue of tech support is important and suggested that perhaps nurse educators could assist students as they worked with them on other projects. Data from the logbooks is already providing valuable. In Year 1, the logbook project was piloted with six students – the remainder of the students are using the PDAs only for reference. In Y2 and Y3, review of the data provides some valuable feedback regarding male-female and patient race demographics. Dr. Resch noted that, although student response to the project has not been overly enthusiastic, this is training students need for their future careers since licensing boards require data, and, as physicians, they are going to have to track every patient encounter and use tools such as PDAs in their daily practice to have current medical information at their fingertips.

Dr. Resch explained that the current project had been funded by the institution as a means of setting up infrastructure and investigating the viability of requiring students to matriculate with PDAs. Due to the current budget situation, no additional funding for the project is possible, and the IT Subcommittee recommends that students for the Class of 2006 matriculate with PDAs, which means that they will need to purchase them.

While there was consensus from the EPC regarding the proposal, it was suggested that the IT Subcommittee standardize on a platform to ensure adequate support of the project. Dr. Kruse will send a memo to Dr. Constance requesting that Student Affairs set the process in motion for the Class of 2006 to matriculate with PDAs.

EPC members asked for reports regarding student use of PDA software for the next meeting.

In follow-up to the discussion regarding support of the PDA project, the issue of the role of Information Services in supporting faculty needs was brought up. It was suggested that these issues were more appropriate for discussion by the Information Management Policy Council (IMPC). Dr. Caspary volunteered to take the issue to IMPC.

3.5 Program Evaluation (Beth Dawson, PhD, Chair)

Dr. Kruse reiterated his earlier announcement regarding the visit by Dr. Scott Obenshain on February 26-28, when he will review how well the curriculum as implemented matches the original curriculum recommendations. An external review by a Basic Science educator will also be conducted.

3.6 Educational Research (EPC, RPC and SCRIHS Joint Subcommittee, Edward Moticka, Chair)

The group has been impaneled but has not yet met.

4. Review of Four-Year Curriculum

4.1 Doctoring Streamer

Dr. Barnhart reported that the Doctoring Committee continues to focus is on integration across the four years of the curriculum. Dr. Wade reported an apparent misconception of how history and physical skills are being taught in Year 2. Dr. Barnhart explained the inaccuracy of the misconception. Dr. Kovach concurred and added that better communication among year and course directors could prevent these misconceptions.

4.2 Year 4 Curriculum

Dr. Lower reported that the Electives Catalog is nearly complete. Basic Science electives were reviewed to determine whether a minimum number of weeks should be required, and it appears that most students are taking at least two to four weeks of Basic Science electives. Feedback from the Class of 2002 CCX has been distributed to curriculum committees, and Dr. Lower will be meeting with each committee for discussion.

4.3 Year 3 Curriculum

Dr. Kovach reported that the Year 3 Curriculum Committee has been reviewing clinical experiences in Year 2 and student preparedness for clerkships and planning for the USMLE Step 2 mock boards in May.

4.4 Year 2 Curriculum

Dr. Borgia reported that the Year 2 Committee finalized its Student Progress document and forwarded it to the Student Progress Committee. Planning continues for Academic Year 2002-2003; Dr. Kruse called a meeting of the Y2 Nurse Educators to discuss their roles in the new curriculum and to review clinical experiences in Year 2. Dr. Borgia is meeting with prospective segment chairs to discuss how the curriculum will be implemented and will establish a subcommittee of the Y2 committee to deal with curriculum implementation. This will change Y2CC meetings from twice to once per month, with the subcommittee meeting taking the second Y2CC monthly meeting time. Dr. Kruse reported that tutors will be contacted as soon as possible and that he had strategized with nurse educators on how to recruit tutors to meet the needs of 12 simultaneous tutor groups.

4.5 Year 1 Curriculum

Dr. Wade reported that the curriculum is progressing smoothly. Mentored Professional Enrichment Experience applications are being submitted and reviewed. Fewer students are taking subject tests than last year. Dr. Borgia suggested that a Genetics subject exam be offered, as well, if one is available.

5. Next Educational Policy Council Meeting: Monday, March 18, 2002, 1:30 to 3 pm.

	Minutes