RESPONDING TO THE PROPOSED USMLE “GATEWAY” INITIATIVE: ONE MEDICAL SCHOOL’S STORY

 

Ruth Greenberg* and David Wiegman, University of Louisville School of Medicine, Louisville, KY, 40202, U.S.A.

 

PURPOSE: For the past year, medical schools have been discussing the curricular and assessment implications associated with a possible change in the current USMLE licensure system that would eliminate Step 1 and Step 2 CK and replace them with a new “gateway” examination at the end of third year.  Although no formal proposal has yet been presented by USMLE, medical educators have begun to consider its curricular impact.  This abstract describes the steps one medical school has taken to promote student success in a potential end-of-third-year examination.

 

METHODS: As a medical school with a relatively “traditional” curricular structure, we were concerned about the possible elimination of Step 1.  The Educational Policy Committee (EPC) encouraged the Dean to initiate curriculum review.  The Dean charged the EPC to make recommendations that would respond to the proposed Gateway system.  The EPC hosted a Curriculum Retreat to solicit feedback about a core set of curricular revisions.  The Retreat was well attended by stakeholders (students, department chairs, faculty).  Work groups were used to develop recommendations, including a “funding” work group.

 

RESULTS: The Curriculum Retreat was well received by attendees.  Post-retreat communications with attendees and other medical school stakeholders created a positive attitude toward curricular change.  Recommendations and a proposed budget were forwarded to the Dean.  Recommendations included starting clinical clerkships earlier, creating an integrated lecture series in clinical years for all students, and restructuring some basic science courses.

 

CONCLUSION: Even the possibility of change in a high-stakes licensure examination may become an effective tool for promoting curricular review and reform.