Preclinical Medical Student Hematology/Oncology Education Environment

Abstract

To better prepare medical students to care for patients in today's changing health-care environment as they transition to continuing their education as residents, many US medical schools have been reviewing and modifying their curricula and are considering integration of newer adult learning techniques, including team-based learning, flipped classrooms, and other active learning approaches (Assoc Am Med Coll. 2014). Directors of hematology/oncology (H/O) courses requested an assessment of today's H/O education environment to help them respond to the ongoing changes in the education content and environment that will be necessary to meet this goal. Several recommendations for the improvement of cancer education resulted from American Association for Cancer Education's (ACCE's) "Cancer Education Survey II" including a call for medical schools to evaluate the effectiveness of current teaching methods in achieving cancer education objectives (Chamberlain et al. J Cancer Educ 7(2):105-114.2014). To understand the current environment and resources used in medical student preclinical H/O courses, an Internet-based, Survey Monkey®-formatted, questionnaire focusing on nine topic areas was distributed to 130 United States Hematology/Oncology Course Directors (HOCDs). HOCDs represent a diverse group of individuals who work in variably supportive environments and who are variably satisfied with their position. Several aspects of these courses remain relatively unchanged from previous assessments, including a predominance of traditional lectures, small group sessions, and examinations that are either written or computer-based. Newer technology, including web-based reproduction of lectures, virtual microscopes, and availability of additional web-based content has been introduced into these courses. A variety of learner evaluation and course assessment approaches are used. The ultimate effectiveness and impact of these changes needs to be determined.

Keywords: Compensation; Curriculum; Education; Medical student; Technology; Training.