An undergraduate Otolaryngology curriculum comparison in the United Kingdom using a Curriculum Evaluation Framework

R. A. Steven (Lead / Corresponding author), G. J. Mires, S. K. W. Lloyd, S. McAleer

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

1 Citation (Scopus)
98 Downloads (Pure)

Abstract

Objective: 1.To compare undergraduate Otolaryngology curricula in the United Kingdom. 2.To develop a tool which would allow undergraduate specialty curricula to be compared.

Design: Development of a Curriculum Evaluation Framework and survey.

Setting: UK medical schools.

Participants: Otolaryngology curricula were requested from all 32 UK medical schools who award a primary medical qualification. 19 curricula were received and examined.

Main outcome measures: A thematic and content analysis of curriculum documents was undertaken. Outcome measures include an examination of curriculum content and methods, type of assessment and alignment of curricula with the General Medical Council's Tomorrow's Doctors document.

Results: Learning objectives were listed by 18 of the 19 medical schools who responded. The most commonly included theme was clinical conditions (100%). Psychosocial aspects of otolaryngology was the least covered theme (37%). Examination skills were covered by the majority (74%). Outpatient clinics and theatre attendance were the most commonly utilised teaching methods (47%). Student checklists were the most common form of assessment (32%). Only 4 medical schools linked their curricula to the GMC's Tomorrow's Doctors document.

Conclusions: The development of a Curriculum Evaluation Framework allowed for a systematic comparison of curricula. This study, evaluating Otolaryngology curricula, has highlighted the variability of curricula from both a content and methods perspective in the UK. The study provides those involved with curriculum planning an overview of the main themes currently taught in the UK and offers examples of individual topics. It also offers an insight into the way in which Otolaryngology is taught in the UK.

Original languageEnglish
Pages (from-to)963-968
Number of pages6
JournalClinical Otolaryngology
Volume42
Issue number5
Early online date4 Jan 2017
DOIs
Publication statusPublished - Oct 2017

Fingerprint

Otolaryngology
Curriculum
Medical Schools
United Kingdom
Outcome Assessment (Health Care)
Ambulatory Care Facilities
Checklist
Teaching

Cite this

@article{39680c5de83045ff94caa5aff3dd34bb,
title = "An undergraduate Otolaryngology curriculum comparison in the United Kingdom using a Curriculum Evaluation Framework",
abstract = "Objective: 1.To compare undergraduate Otolaryngology curricula in the United Kingdom. 2.To develop a tool which would allow undergraduate specialty curricula to be compared.Design: Development of a Curriculum Evaluation Framework and survey.Setting: UK medical schools.Participants: Otolaryngology curricula were requested from all 32 UK medical schools who award a primary medical qualification. 19 curricula were received and examined.Main outcome measures: A thematic and content analysis of curriculum documents was undertaken. Outcome measures include an examination of curriculum content and methods, type of assessment and alignment of curricula with the General Medical Council's Tomorrow's Doctors document.Results: Learning objectives were listed by 18 of the 19 medical schools who responded. The most commonly included theme was clinical conditions (100{\%}). Psychosocial aspects of otolaryngology was the least covered theme (37{\%}). Examination skills were covered by the majority (74{\%}). Outpatient clinics and theatre attendance were the most commonly utilised teaching methods (47{\%}). Student checklists were the most common form of assessment (32{\%}). Only 4 medical schools linked their curricula to the GMC's Tomorrow's Doctors document.Conclusions: The development of a Curriculum Evaluation Framework allowed for a systematic comparison of curricula. This study, evaluating Otolaryngology curricula, has highlighted the variability of curricula from both a content and methods perspective in the UK. The study provides those involved with curriculum planning an overview of the main themes currently taught in the UK and offers examples of individual topics. It also offers an insight into the way in which Otolaryngology is taught in the UK.",
author = "Steven, {R. A.} and Mires, {G. J.} and Lloyd, {S. K. W.} and S. McAleer",
note = "Funding: none.",
year = "2017",
month = "10",
doi = "10.1111/coa.12824",
language = "English",
volume = "42",
pages = "963--968",
journal = "Clinical Otolaryngology",
issn = "1749-4478",
publisher = "Wiley",
number = "5",

}

An undergraduate Otolaryngology curriculum comparison in the United Kingdom using a Curriculum Evaluation Framework. / Steven, R. A. (Lead / Corresponding author); Mires, G. J.; Lloyd, S. K. W.; McAleer, S.

In: Clinical Otolaryngology, Vol. 42, No. 5, 10.2017, p. 963-968.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

TY - JOUR

T1 - An undergraduate Otolaryngology curriculum comparison in the United Kingdom using a Curriculum Evaluation Framework

AU - Steven, R. A.

AU - Mires, G. J.

AU - Lloyd, S. K. W.

AU - McAleer, S.

N1 - Funding: none.

PY - 2017/10

Y1 - 2017/10

N2 - Objective: 1.To compare undergraduate Otolaryngology curricula in the United Kingdom. 2.To develop a tool which would allow undergraduate specialty curricula to be compared.Design: Development of a Curriculum Evaluation Framework and survey.Setting: UK medical schools.Participants: Otolaryngology curricula were requested from all 32 UK medical schools who award a primary medical qualification. 19 curricula were received and examined.Main outcome measures: A thematic and content analysis of curriculum documents was undertaken. Outcome measures include an examination of curriculum content and methods, type of assessment and alignment of curricula with the General Medical Council's Tomorrow's Doctors document.Results: Learning objectives were listed by 18 of the 19 medical schools who responded. The most commonly included theme was clinical conditions (100%). Psychosocial aspects of otolaryngology was the least covered theme (37%). Examination skills were covered by the majority (74%). Outpatient clinics and theatre attendance were the most commonly utilised teaching methods (47%). Student checklists were the most common form of assessment (32%). Only 4 medical schools linked their curricula to the GMC's Tomorrow's Doctors document.Conclusions: The development of a Curriculum Evaluation Framework allowed for a systematic comparison of curricula. This study, evaluating Otolaryngology curricula, has highlighted the variability of curricula from both a content and methods perspective in the UK. The study provides those involved with curriculum planning an overview of the main themes currently taught in the UK and offers examples of individual topics. It also offers an insight into the way in which Otolaryngology is taught in the UK.

AB - Objective: 1.To compare undergraduate Otolaryngology curricula in the United Kingdom. 2.To develop a tool which would allow undergraduate specialty curricula to be compared.Design: Development of a Curriculum Evaluation Framework and survey.Setting: UK medical schools.Participants: Otolaryngology curricula were requested from all 32 UK medical schools who award a primary medical qualification. 19 curricula were received and examined.Main outcome measures: A thematic and content analysis of curriculum documents was undertaken. Outcome measures include an examination of curriculum content and methods, type of assessment and alignment of curricula with the General Medical Council's Tomorrow's Doctors document.Results: Learning objectives were listed by 18 of the 19 medical schools who responded. The most commonly included theme was clinical conditions (100%). Psychosocial aspects of otolaryngology was the least covered theme (37%). Examination skills were covered by the majority (74%). Outpatient clinics and theatre attendance were the most commonly utilised teaching methods (47%). Student checklists were the most common form of assessment (32%). Only 4 medical schools linked their curricula to the GMC's Tomorrow's Doctors document.Conclusions: The development of a Curriculum Evaluation Framework allowed for a systematic comparison of curricula. This study, evaluating Otolaryngology curricula, has highlighted the variability of curricula from both a content and methods perspective in the UK. The study provides those involved with curriculum planning an overview of the main themes currently taught in the UK and offers examples of individual topics. It also offers an insight into the way in which Otolaryngology is taught in the UK.

U2 - 10.1111/coa.12824

DO - 10.1111/coa.12824

M3 - Article

C2 - 28052572

VL - 42

SP - 963

EP - 968

JO - Clinical Otolaryngology

JF - Clinical Otolaryngology

SN - 1749-4478

IS - 5

ER -