Over the past decade, numerous reports have called for reform of the dental school curriculum. Now, a survey has found that, while some areas lag behind, U.S. and Canadian dental schools have made progress in implementing reforms that are improving the way future dentists are being educated.
The survey report, published in the September 2004 issue of the Journal of Dental Education, found that the most frequent curriculum innovation in the past three years was increased use of computer and web-based learning. The use of new technologies generally helps make learning more efficient and adaptable to students' varying needs. Eighty-six percent of schools responding reported substantial progress in this area.
Close behind in the rankings were creation of patient care experiences early in the curriculum and enhancement of competency evaluation methods-both reported by 84 percent of responses. "Clearly, dental schools have determined that students' learning throughout the curriculum is enhanced when they have early and frequent interaction with patients," said Denise Kassebaum, D.D.S., M.S., lead author of the report.
The structure of the curriculum is evolving to some degree as well. Although only 14 percent of schools reported having a curriculum organized around interdisciplinary courses and integrated components, 66 percent said their schools were largely discipline-based with a few interdisciplinary courses. Twenty percent still have a discipline- and lecture-based curriculum. Fifty-nine percent of schools reported using problem-based learning in some courses, and 38 percent use case-related learning in all or some components of courses.
The survey also provided evidence that the decades-long drumbeat of criticism about the overly dense dental school curriculum seems to be having an effect. Many have long argued that the curriculum is crowded with redundant or marginally useful material and leaves too little time for students to consolidate concepts or develop critical thinking skills. This survey found substantial recognition among dental school leaders that decompression of the curriculum has to occur. Seventy-nine percent of schools reported progress in curriculum decompression in the last three years, and 55 percent indicated plans for further decompression in the next three years.
As worthy as is the notion of curriculum decompression, however, the report's authors caution dental educators that there are better and worse ways to proceed. "Across-the-board reductions in clock hours, for example, may help avoid turf battles," said William Hendricson, M.A., M.S., coauthor of the report, "but do not help faculty make wise and fundamental decisions about the philosophy and focus of their educational programs." The authors recommend how schools can move forward productively by establishing curriculum prioritization hierarchies, future forecasting, and ideal curriculum committees.
The survey had a response rate of 87 percent of North American schools of dental medicine. The results are reported in "The Dental Curriculum at North American Dental Institutions in 2002-03: A Survey of Current Structure, Recent Innovations, and Planned Changes" by Denise K. Kassebaum, William D. Hendricson, Thomas Taft, and N. Karl Haden, Journal of Dental Education, Vol. 68, No. 9 (September 2004), published by the American Dental Education Association.
