The purpose of this session was to discuss the interface between the responsibilities of academic deans (associate/assistant deans for medical education or curriculum), and medical education. The arrangements of medical school administrations were addressed along with the responsibilities and pressures facing academic deans. The key roles of the dean and curriculum committee at the interface were also addressed. The administrative schemes of medical schools varied and revealed the pivotal role of academic deans and the complexity of contemporary medical school administration. Although variable the same general structure was in place for most schools. The roles of academic deans include: working with the curriculum committee in the planning, implementation, and evaluation of the curriculum; course scheduling; medical student academic and professional counseling; orientation programs; planning and implementation of other functions of the medical school such as honors convocation and graduation; oversight of residency programs; faculty development; admissions; various legal issues; dealing with the press; public education programs; promotion of the medical school; working with course and clerkship directors; directing the Liaison Committee on Medical Education (LCME) accreditation process; working with chairpersons on curricular issues; managing office staff; and many other commitments. The pressures facing academic deans were also addressed. Many medical schools are facing budget crises. The monies from the clinical and research enterprise are being used to meet the basic daily monetary needs while funding for medical education is being reduced. In short, medical education is not a moneymaking enterprise. Along with reduced funding for medical education some academic deans are facing the problem of poor support form their Dean. Some academic deans feel that their dean does not appreciate the importance of teaching and teachers in the mission of their school. They feel that their dean does not have an understanding of what educational scholarship is. This is reflected by the lack of credibility of educational contributions of faculty in the promotion and tenure process. Academic deans also have to deal with the LCME accreditation process. This entails the monitoring of the curriculum to make sure that it is in compliance with all of the LCME standards, and if not to see that it is. This in turn requires that an academic dean be able to build consensus and inform the student body. The major focus of discussion however was the ineffectual process of curriculum improvement. The factors involved include departmental ownership of courses and clerkships; lack of faculty time commitment; poor faculty development, lack of support from the Dean; anti-change campaigns of chairpersons; the philosophy that education is not a scholarly pursuit, and the lack of “currency” of education in the promotion and tenure process. The major outcome of this session was that academic deans must be patient and work with the educators to put medical education at a value-level commensurate with that of the clinical and research enterprise. Medical educators must demonstrate to their deans, chairpersons, and faculty that medical education is a scholarly activity with application and measurable results like any other science. **** **** ****
|
||||||||||||||