Curriculum change involves a complex set of challenges. The rhetorical curriculum (ideas of what curriculum should be, as embodied in speeches and reports), the formal curriculum (written policy in the form of textbooks and curriculum guides), the curriculum-in-use (the content that teachers actually use in classrooms), and the received curriculum (what students actually learn in these classrooms) all need to be addressed.
A variety of factors have deflected reform attempts. These include conflicting goals, the power of credentialing over learning, keeping a system that works, organizational convenience, and system adaptability.
One of the most significant barriers to effective curriculum change is the perception that the current system is already good enough. For example, the enduring sense that current academic programs produce competent doctors and nurses may reinforce the assumption that there is little reason to change.
The purpose of this study was to investigate the perspectives of faculty and staff regarding a new curriculum initiative. A survey was distributed to all clinical and basic science faculty and staff. Fifty-one of the respondents agreed to participate in interviews. Interviews were transcribed and coded for themes. Interviewees were split into three subgroups: clinical, full-time basic science faculty, and full-time clinician/staff.
Overall, the interviews revealed a high level of concern for personal impact. Many interviewees were unsure how the curriculum design elements would impact their teaching and assessment practices. In particular, the emphasis on student choice and accountability for learning was viewed as a risk to faculty members.