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?