University of Michigan Medical and Nursing School - Aequanimitas Yearbook (Ann Arbor, MI)

Page 11 text:

The New Curriculum M. Zanotti In spite of what the upperclassmen may say, the big change brought about by the new curriculum is not the 40'Zi cut in the basic sciences. In fact, physiology feels the cut is merely a slight of hand trick and that there has been no effective reduction in their material. On the other hand, anatomy, when queried about the new system, gives forth with a wry smile and politely but firmly refuses to even comment upon it. But one must under- stand the fact that anatomy has been getting the axe with every curriculum change since the days when medical school and hu- man anatomy were practically synonymous. It is my feeling that the biggest change has been the new posi- tion assumed by the clinical faculty. The idea of introducing fresh- men to clinical material from the very beginning was exciting to both students and staff, but at times awkward and frustrating. There were occasions, especially at first, when there existed a communication difficulty in lecturing to a group on the intrica- cies and complexities of a patient's disease when my classmates and I didn't know a prognosis from a prosthesis, to say nothing about our complete lack of knowledge of the human organism. Throughout all this, the faculty has been very patient and even empathetic with our naivetes, our hesitations and inadequacies, and our growing pains in general. At the same time, they have been supersensitive to our criticisms and recommendations as they are eager to see the new curriculum work and to correct any flaws while the system is still malleable. Perhaps the biggest initial benefit to the entering class is the fact that the big medical school course, gross anatomy, is now post- poned a semester. N0 one, including the dean's office, felt that they could say for sure how effective the curriculum change would be until they could see how we reacted to gross. As I write this, I have had only one week of the second semester, but one thing is certain: if nothing else, the first semester primed us for the sec- ond. We have had time to orient ourselves to a new environment and are now, hopefully, more readily adaptable to the lowering of the academic boom. Thus, I look forward to a relatively less traumatic experience with gross than tradition dictates. The new courses such as those covering auto accidents and sex were not only interesting, but also a realistic approach to prob- lems that we will encounter many times over in our careers. The substitution for some of the physiology and biochemistry labs of class demonstrations proved efficient and the latter were proba- bly of more teaching value than the individual experiments of past years. One of the best aspects of the new curriculum is the vertical core method of teaching. For example, while studying metabolic endocrinology in physiology, we were doing glucose tolerance tests in biochemistry and being presented with a patient suffering from diabetes mellitus in the clinical correlation course. Seeing an actual patient representing the sum total ofwhat we have been learning in the basic sciences is, I feel, the most important teach- ing tool of the new curriculum. Seeing the victim of disease drives home the educational message to the medical student more than any other didactic device. In summary, I feel that the curriculum change has'been all for the better and although there has been some elimination of course work, this was, I trust, extraneous material that may not be quite as useful as the material that has replaced it. When I re- flect back on the Hrst semester as a whole, the thing that stands out foremost in my mind is the attitude of the clinical faculty to- wards the freshmen. These are the men we identify with and one day hope to emulateg they have in turn established a certain esprit de corps, and it is this spirit which has in a very large way made the new curriculum a success for all of us. The above mentioned surveys were completed two years ago hy the present Iuniors and Seniors. The sur- vey data reveals a consistant variance of opinion be- tween the two classes: the then Sophomores were more unanimous in their dislike of existing institutions, no doubt rtjlecting growing apathy. Whether the new curriculum will prevent apathy is unknown, hut at least the current Freshmen have received it with ex- ul1erance!a good result. 7

Page 10 text:

Dean Hultlvard discusses the evolution of a medical school in thejace of changing societal needs. A part if this evolution is the curriculum rejorm oyered the Freshmen this year. It is perhaps the higgest news in the medical school. james Thrall presents an account of the student s role in effecting the rejiirm. The Student Surveys james Thrall ln the spring of 1966, a group of interested students, in the then Sophomore Class of the Michigan Medical School, formed a committee whose basic purpose was to be the study of medi- cal education and the establishment of a dialogue with the faculty and administration concerning its work. The original committee divided itself into three main divisions. The hrst of these was to pursue the particular area of student-faculty relations and was charged with the responsibility for initiating contracts through which the hoped for dialogue might develop. The second was to communicate with other medical student bodies for the purpose of obtaining bases of comparison and general discovery of condi- tions elsewhere. The third basic division, which subsequently became the Student Evaluation Committee lSECJ, was charged with under- taking an extensive evaluation over the first two years of expe- rience in medical school, the evaluation to be based on a ques- tionnaire given to the freshman and sophomore classes. The basic motivations for this specific undertaking were two. First, with the prospect of a new curriculum at the school, it was obvious that people were not satished with the existing one. lt was felt that a thoughtful, well documented, accurate account of student feeling concerning the old curriculum would be valuable to the con- structors of the new one. Second, the fact that only the student body actually experiences the entire spectrum of existence in medical school, emphasized its uniqueness as a source ofinforma- tion concerning the more mundane, but in all cases quite real, problems embracing such things as finance, the very logistics, mental and physical, of arriving at the right place at the right time with the appropriate equipment, the input basis in plan- ning for elective and post graduation periods, and attitudes to- ward student government and the Honor Code. In due course, the proposed questionnaires were prepared, circulated and analysed by the SEC. The results obtained from the first year effort were widely distributed. Numerous presenta- tions were made by the SEC to a variety of both student and faculty organizations. An entire section dealing with the Honor Code was turned over to the Honor Council in toto. A series of articles appeared in the PAEON, authored by Theodore j. Gaensbauer, discussing the results with critical analysis of sev- eral areas. Many copies ofthe complete results for both freshman and sophomore years were used in the faculty curriculum dis- cussions in the spring in 1967. In its second and third years the SEC extended its coverage to the juniors and seniors, and continued to provide data concern- ing student opinion to administration, faculty, and other student groups. Indeed, sections of many of the questionnaires included material requested specihcally by departments and administra- tion. In the future, it is hoped that the SEC will be able to expand this aspect of its approach to help provide sufficient feedback to facilitate smooth initiation of the new curriculum and ensure its validity in the face of student expectations. In its Hrst year, the SEC was co-chaired by Theodore Gaens- bauer and james Thrall. Robert Hiatt assumed primary respon- sibility in the second year. The SEC gained the stature ofa faculty advisor when Doctor George Demuth became its consultant in the fall of I 967. The results ofthe surveys were complex, exhibiting di- vergence ofopinion among the students on specwe items. Yet there was definite agreement on the needjor clinical correlatirm of ltasic science material, -for closer contact with the gfacztlty, and-for modification of the lecture and honor systems. The upperclassmen's reaction to the 6 net: curriculum fluctuates hetteeen envy and, ironical- ly, an attitude of disparagement hecause the Freshmen are not enduring the hardship of the old curriculum. Peggy Zanotti gives the Freshman reaction to the changes.

Page 12 text:

Other changes at the Mecca include additions to the physical plant.- the Parkview Convalescent Home, the new medical science building, the Charles Stuart Mott Childrens Hospital, and the post-graduate edu- cation building. New department beads are Dr. Wil- liam Fry in General Surgery, Dr. Richard Harrell in Dermatology, and Dr. William Oliver in Pediatrics. At this writing no replacement bas been chosen for Dr. Reed Nesbit in Urology. On the University scene, it is the end ry' the sesquicen- tennial celebration and the beginning if Robben Flem- i ng's tenure as University president. The Vietnam war qualyies as the most immediately critical event afecting medical graduates and all Amer- icans. Everyone wants the conflict to be over, but no easy solution comes to mind. So this cancer with no easy cure, this Vietnam war, continues after seven years of pghting, after over 15,000 men killed, and after millions of dollars have been spent on it. The ter- rain in Vietnam and the tenacity of the enemy preclude the easy victory that was lsrael's over Egypt last sum- mer. At home, the war has draft-card burners and anti-war demonstrators. Ironically these doves oppose the war more militantbi than the hawks support it. The major questions appear to be whether the United States has any right to he in Vietnam at all, whether the South Vietnamese have the abiligy or desire to sus- tain a democratic society, and whether the altercation is an unrelated incident or another step in a Com- munist plan to control the world. A more basic ques- tion must also be considered: Do the economic and technical advances made in Russia justmf subjugation :ja people for pftyyears. Nationally, Lyndon johnson still reigns in this an elec- tion -year. No doubt he will survive the polls in Novem- ber. The Republicans offer such men as George Rom- ney, who has struck his colors as a politician, Richard Nixon, eager for another crisis: and Nelson Rocke- feller, unwilling to run and refusing to campaign, on which plajortn he is likely to snare the nomination. Another paradox at home is the presence of poverty in the face of tremendous prosperigi. The awareness if this inequity has fostered a similar awareness inf the distribution of' medical services in the United States. The result is a clamoring for total care fir all peoples, regardless of economic or geographic position. Walt Faggett, active in establishing and perpetuating the Student Health Organization, writes of these medical needs. Iohn Lipson, this -year's recipient ofthe Galen's Foreign Fellowship, demonstrates the universality rn' the problem. Methodist Mission Hospital, Ganta Liberia. Starting 40 years ago as a bush clinic, this hospital has grown into a modern medical unit, com- plete with laboratory and school of nursing. 8 wivz3f '4 Modern medical care is provided by American physicians. However the primary purpose of the hospital is to train the Liberians so that they may eventually be able to supply their own doctors and nurses.