why integrate !!!
DESCRIPTION
Dr K M Cheema presents on integration of curriculumTRANSCRIPT
Why integrate?Dr. Khalid Mahmood Cheema
FCPS,FRCS,MS
Objectives
Comprehend the concept of integration.
Appreciate the significance of integrated curriculum.
Outline• What is integration?
• Shortcomings of traditional curriculum.
• What is integrated curriculum?
• Comparison between traditional & integrated curriculum.
• Why to adopt integrated curriculum?
• Summary
• Q&A
• Take home message.
Integration
• The term integration literally means “ to combine into a whole”.
• Integration is a process describing a movement toward integrated learning helping students make connections across curricula.
Traditional
Huge teaching load and less learning at the end of the day.
Traditional
Nobody seriously concerned with the learning of the student.
“ Go and study to be a parrot”
TraditionalRarely incorporates the students in the learning process.
Traditional
Failed students labelled as “incapable”—It’s a kind of dictatorship or monopoly of the traditional system.
Shortcomings of Traditional Curriculum
Traditional educational method contains---80% listening, 15% observing and 5% of doing things.
We hear during lecture class--- we forget mostly, so
we need to study hard.
We observe it---we remember more, it makes things easier for self study.
We practice it---we understand and retain the information and incentive
for self study and preparedness for next
session.
Integrated Curriculum An educational system that has an impact greater
than the sum of its parts.
The educational system is coordinated, with well understood and mutually supporting elements-
each element taking on a well defined functions.
All the elements work together to enable students to reach program learning outcomes.
Traditional vs Integrated medical education
Life itself is not divided into boundaries or
compartment, why take knowledge in different
disciplines.
In integrated curricula knowledge is called forth
in the context of problems, interests,
issues and concerns at hand.
In pursuit of curriculum integration, disciplines of
knowledge are not enemy. Instead they are useful & necessary ally.
Integration
Conceptual approaches
Curricular integration can be viewed as a ladder with discipline based teaching (isolation) at the bottom of the ladder and full integration (trans-disciplinary teaching) at the top.
Why integrate?
Integration enhances deep learning as it calls upon students to establish links.
Why integrate?
Human structure and functions are integrated. Systems cannot function in Isolation.
Integration encourages more holistic view of patient problems.
Why integrate?
Cognitive psychology
Integration develops creative thinking as it encourages the student to form his own opinions about issues important to him.
Why integrate?
Contextual learning:
Teaching, practicing and assessing knowledge and skills in the context in which the will be used leads to better recall and application.
Why integrate?
Societal demand
In the context of a rapidly changing health care environment, it was felt that the roles and abilities required of physicians needed to be further defined and explored.
Why integrate?
Faculty development vs professionalization
Promotion of staff communication and collaboration with a more efficient use of teaching resources.
Teachers become more aware of one another’s contributions.
Planning vs implementation
Why integrate?
Motivation
Student empowerment to learn increases their motivation levels.
Why integrate?More accurate diagnoses.
( Schmidt et al, 1996)
Better understanding of biomedical principles. (Dahle et al,2002)
More input from clinicians needed in vertical integration.( Davis & Harden,2003)
Repetition of content is reduced in an integrated curriculum while reinforcement of learning is enhanced.
Summary
Integrated curriculum leads to better
engagement and learning of students.
Integrating the clinical sciences with basic
concepts will yield better doctors with superior
understanding, ultimately improving patient
care and societal satisfaction.
Refrences
• Schmidt, H. G., Machiels-Bongaerts, M., Hermans, H., ten Cate, T. J., Venekamp, R., & Boshuizen, H. P. (1996). The development of diagnostic competence: comparison of a problem-based, an integrated, and a conventional medical curriculum. Academic Medicine, 71(6), 658-64.
• Dahle, L. O., Brynhildsen, J., Fallsberg, M. B., Rundquist, I., & Hammar, M. (2002). Pros and cons of vertical integration between clinical medicine and basic science within a problem-based undergraduate medical curriculum: examples and experiences from Linköping, Sweden. Medical Teacher, 24(3), 280-285.
• Davis, M. H., & Harden, R. M. (2003). Planning and implementing an undergraduate medical curriculum: the lessons learned. Medical teacher, 25(6), 596-608.
• Harden, R. M. (2000). The integration ladder: a tool for curriculum planning and evaluation. MEDICAL EDUCATION-OXFORD-, 34(7), 551-557.
Questions?