Curriculum Mapping Maintenance Strategy for NextGen MD Courses

Introduction

As our medical school endeavors to produce competent and compassionate healthcare professionals, we recognize that curricular adjustments are inevitable. Change management becomes our compass—a guiding force that ensures smooth transitions, stakeholder engagement, and sustained quality improvement. This describes our change management strategy for ongoing maintenance of the curriculum map in NextGenMD courses.

Purpose and Benefits 

This project’s purpose is to offer continuous quality improvement to the curriculum map. The initial implementation of the curriculum map in Elentra is only as good as it was at the time it was uploaded to the system. As faculty teach courses, review student evaluations, and keep up with the latest advancements in medicine, they will undoubtedly decide that learning objectives, session names, instruction type, etc. should be changed for the next time the course is delivered. We define what we mean by change management, provide rationale for maintaining the curriculum map, potential levels of change with roles and responsibilities, and timelines. Initially, it’s likely that the main ‘tool’ for keeping track of change management requests will be Microsoft Office products like Word and Excel. Eventually, we may have a fully formed curriculum management program that can provide a more streamlined form-based approach. A significant benefit of maintaining the curriculum map with a change management process is that we can monitor reports to LCME requirements. 

Other advantages: 

• Consistency: An accurate curriculum map ensures uniformity in content delivery and naming structure, and assessment methods. 

• Communication: Communication between faculty, students, and administrators improves due to having uniform titles of learning events and files.  

• Clarity: An accurate curriculum map reduces the confusion around titles of learning events, course- or session-level learning objectives, and keywords (e.g., precision medicine). 

• Efficiency: There will be no question for faculty as to what titles to use for learning events. 

• LCME Accreditation Compliance: An accurate curriculum map contributes to meeting accreditation requirements and makes reporting more efficient. Some of the LCME Standards potentially impacted: 
  • Standard 1.1 (Strategic Planning and Continuous Quality Improvement) 
  • Standard 6.1 (Program and Learning Objectives) 
  • Standard 7 (Curricular Content) 
  • Standard 8.2 (Use of Medical Education Program Objectives) 
  • Standard 8.3 (Curricular Design, Review, Revision/Content Monitoring) 
  • Standard 8.6 (Monitoring of Completion of Required Clinical Experiences) 
  • Standard 8.8 Monitoring Student Time)

A robust curriculum map that is updated annually contributes significantly to meeting these accreditation standards. 

Scope 

This change management for curriculum mapping initiative enhances the effectiveness of the curriculum map for our medical school. Curriculum mapping includes associating course-level and session-level objectives with institutional educational objectives (IEO’s) and strategically aligning other course elements such as instruction method and assessment type to ensure a cohesive and student-centered learning experience. The project scope includes: 

• A change management process and solution for maintaining the existing curriculum map regardless of learning management system utilized by the school. 
• Phase 1 Curriculum 
  • Gather data elements and functional requirements for managing curricular details for the Phase 1 curriculum. 
  • Develop standard procedures for collecting and managing information. 
  • Implement a technology solution the supports the functional requirements as defined.
  • Develop the desired reports: Usage, Mapping, Operational  
• Phase 2 Curriculum 
  • Gather data elements and functional requirements for managing information for the Phase 2 curriculum. 
  • Develop standard procedures for collecting and managing information. 
  • Implement a technology solution that supports the functional requirements as defined, building on the work performed for Phase 1. 
  • Develop the desired reports: Usage, Mapping, Operational 
• Phase 3 Curriculum 
  • Gather data elements and functional requirements for managing information for the Phase 3 curriculum. 
  • Develop standard procedures for collecting and managing information. 
  • Implement a technology solution that supports the functional requirements as defined, building on the work performed for Phases 1-2. 
  • Develop the desired reports: Usage, Mapping, Operational 
• MAP and Scholarly Concentration 
  • Gather data elements and functional requirements for managing information for the MAP and Scholarly Concentration curriculum. 
  • Develop standard procedures for collecting and managing information. 
  • Implement a technology solution that supports the functional requirements as defined, building on the work performed for Phases 1-3. 
  • Develop the desired reports: Usage, Mapping, Operational.

Objectives 

• Alignment: ensure that our course objectives are directly linked to our IEOs. 
• Enhanced learning: improve student learning experiences by structuring the curriculum in a thoughtful way. 
• Consistency: establish consistent practices across courses and phases. 
• Stakeholder engagement: engage faculty, staff, and other stakeholders in the curriculum mapping and change management process. 

Resources Required 

This area summarizes all human and financial (if necessary) resources needed to successfully deliver this project. The stakeholders are listed below.  

• UMMSM Leadership & Curriculum Stakeholders: Identify the required components of a change management tool to properly document and implement changes to the curriculum map. 
• Instructional Design Team: Input into the change management process and tools. 
• Elentra Support Team: Implement approved changes to the curriculum map.  
• Program Managers and Coordinators: Provide feedback on timelines and process steps.  
• Faculty: Provide feedback on timelines and process steps. 

Deliverables 

• Change management guidelines 
  • Develop clear guidelines for change management, including roles, responsibilities, and best practices. 
  • Specify the tools and templates to be used for requesting changes. 
• Training and capacity building 
  • Conduct training sessions for faculty and staff on change management processes. 
  • Provide resources to enhance understanding of change management processes. 
• Communication plan 
  • Create a communication plan to inform stakeholders about the change management process. 
  • Regularly update stakeholders on progress and milestones. 
• Tools / software 
  • Evaluate and select appropriate tool(s) for efficient change requests and documentation. 
  • Ensure compatibility with existing systems and check for ease of use. 
• Pilot implementation 
  • Select a pilot group of courses to test the change management process. 
  • Gather feedback and make necessary adjustments. 
• Monitoring and evaluation 
  • Monitor progress, identify challenges, and address issues promptly.  
  • Obtain feedback from stakeholders on satisfaction and ease of use of the process. 

Boundaries 

This change management process focuses on certain aspects of curriculum mapping, including modifications to: 

• Institutional education objectives (IEOs) 
• Course objectives (CO) – each CO is mapped to one and only one IEO 
• Session objectives (SO) – each SO is mapped to one and only one CO 
• Session type 
• Session titles 
• Instructional method(s) – each SO is tagged with up to 3 instructional methods (IM) 
• Assessment method(s) – each SO is tagged with up to 3 assessment methods (AM) 
• Keywords – each SO is tagged with up to 10 keywords (KW) 
• Resource type – each SO is tagged with up to 3 resource types (RT) 

Scheduled Maintenance for NextGen MD Courses 

Creating a standard schedule for curricular maintenance depends on multiple factors, including when courses are delivered within each Phase during an academic period. For example, Phase 1 courses are taught annually (e.g., SSD 1 in fall, SSD 3 in spring, etc.) and will be reviewed once annually for changes. This process will determine a timeline for course reviews including due dates for change requests and decisions, communicating change request decisions, determining implementation plans such as personnel involved in fielding requests for change and implementing change requests, determining the impact on the curriculum, and finally, quality assurance. Maintenance is scheduled to be performed before the course’s next start date or academic year. However, in urgent cases or for minor revisions, the director of curriculum operations may choose to implement a change while the course is in progress. 

Identifying Revisions 

1. While a course is being taught, course directors, course faculty, phase leaders, and staff will keep notes on required revisions to be made during the maintenance period. These include:  
   • Announcements about changes that were not included in the most recent revision cycle (e.g., changes to an assignment that might impact the session objectives). 
   • Suggestions submitted by students and faculty informally and formally via course evaluations. 
   • Changes in the subject matter (e.g., new policies, scientific advances, disease name changes, etc.). 
   • Revisions can consider a previous AY course/phase review to inform changes, if needed. 
2. With each identified request for revision or change, the following should be documented: 
   • Name of impacted course and name of person requesting the change. 
   • Date of change request. 
   • Specificity. Using tracking changes and comments in the source document, communicate precisely where the revision must be made. 
   • Justification of the revision. Explain why it is needed. 
   • Associated objectives. Include the existing objective and requested change. Create new objectives if none exist. 
   • Dependencies. Be sure to identify and settle any dependencies such as references to the affected course components, alignments to tagged keywords, adjustments to curricular materials (e.g., objectives listed in PowerPoint slides), etc. 
   • Approval. All revisions must be reviewed by the course director. Depending on level (see below), a change may need to be approved. For example, revisions that affect course-level objectives or information communicated in the course syllabus may need to be submitted by LACE for approval by the Executive Curriculum Committee (ECC). 
3. Requests for changes to the curriculum are currently documented in the Change Management workbook, a prototype for the planned curriculum change management system. 

Change Levels with Roles and Responsibilities 

This table outlines the change levels, requests, approvals, and implementation of change requests. Please review the timeline for change requests to ensure an efficient process. 

Change Level	Step 1 – Request	Step 2 – Approval	Step 3 – Implementation
Level 1 Content changes that do not affect the curriculum map.  Examples: Changes to resources (e.g., prep work readings or viewings, PPTX updates, case + discussion, etc.) Directions for activities or assignments	Who: Course/Clerkship Director or Course/Clerkship Designee   What: No formal request required. During course-level meetings, faculty declares planned changes.	Who: Course/Clerkship Director and/or Director of Curriculum Operations, LMS Service Manager  What: Review the changes and identify any issues with alignment or other dependencies.	Who: Faculty member or Other Course Designee  What: Finalize new version of course materials, including directions to assignments.   Who: Phase Manager, Coordinators, or LMS Service Manager  What: Implement the approved change by publicizing a clean version of materials and/or make the changes in the LMS and keep a backup copy of materials in SharePoint. Review for errors.
Level 2 Content changes to individual courses that affect the curriculum map that do not cause downstream ramifications to content and assessments.  Examples: Orthographic for objectives or session titles (spelling, etc.)  Naming conventions & changes (sessions, assessments, )  Changes to tags: Instructional methods  Resource types Assessment methods Keywords	Who: Course/Clerkship Director or Course Designee  What: Submit a form to propose changes, including rationale.	Who: Course/Clerkship Director and/or Director of Curriculum Operations, LMS Service Manager  What: Review the form, identify any issues with alignment or other dependencies, and determine a course of action for implementation. Review the planned change and recommend revisions or approval.   Who: Executive Curriculum Committee (ECC) and Learner Assessment and Curricular Evaluation (LACE), Phase Directors, and Phase Sub-committees.  What: Informed of the planned change during the annual course and phase reviews.	Who: Phase Manager, Coordinator, Instructional Designer, or Elentra Service Manager   What: Implement the change in the LMS and ensure change is documented in the change management Excel Workbook for future reference. Review for errors.
Level 3 Structural changes to individual courses or changes that affect multiple courses that cause downstream ramifications to content and assessments.  Examples: Structural changes (merging, adding, deleting sessions)  Errors in linking objectives  Adding or revising in ways that change the meaning of: Course level objectives  Session level objectives	Who: Course/Clerkship Director or Course Designee   What: Submit a form to propose changes, including rationale and details about affected content and assessments.	Who: Course/Clerkship Director and Director of Curriculum Operations    What: Review the form, identify any issues with alignment or other dependencies, and determine a course of action for implementation.   Who: Phase Director, Phase Sub-committees, LACE  What: Review the change and recommend revisions or approval.   Who: ECC  What: Review the change and provide final approval during annual phase review.	Who: Phase Manager, Coordinator, Instructional Designer, or LMS Service Manager  What: Implement the change in the LMS and ensure change is documented in the change management Excel Workbook for future reference. Review for errors.
Level 4 Structural changes to individual courses or changes that affect multiple courses that cause downstream ramifications to the overall curriculum.  Examples: Institutional Educational Objectives (IEOs) Course structure (e.g., split BMPH into two courses) New courses Retiring courses	Who: ECC, MELT, Phase Leadership  What: Submit a form to propose changes, including rationale and details about affected content and assessments.	Who: ECC  What: Approve the change	What: Implement the change in the LMS and ensure change is documented in the change management Excel Workbook for future reference. Review for errors.

Scheduling Revisions 

This table identifies due dates for revision requests (e.g., within 4 weeks of course completion). Some requests (e.g., adjusting a comma in a session level learning objective) are minor and do not fall into this more formal process. Faculty and course directors should be tracking potential changes for the next time a course or clerkship is delivered while they are delivering the course or clerkship. For example, changes such as modifying learning objectives should not require completed evaluations for faculty to review to make decisions about changes for a future class year. Reference the general roles and responsibilities by levels of change above for responsibilities in these areas.  

Phase 1 Courses General Timeline for Changes and Approvals 

Course Review Completed*	Change Request Submission	Change Request Approval	Change Implementation**	Implementation Reviewed
No later than 4 weeks after the last day of class	No later than 6-8 weeks after completing the course review	Level 1 changes should be approved immediately; no later than 2 weeks after request submission for level 2 changes, no later than 8 weeks for level 3 changes	Curriculum Map Updates: No later than 8 weeks after the change is approved for level 1 changes; 12 weeks for level 2 changes; 16 weeks for level 3 changes  Materials Updates: No later than 30 days prior to the first day of the next delivery of a course or session/unit regardless of level	3-4 weeks before the first day of next delivery of course or session/unit
*Consists of previous AY full review and information gathered so far for the current class year. **The ‘change implementation’ timeline for curriculum map updates for MAP 102 Level 2 & 3 changes is 8 weeks due to the length of the courses.

Phase 2 Courses General Timeline for Changes and Approvals 

Clerkship Review Completed*	Change Request Submitted	Change Request Approval	Change Implementation**	Implementation Reviewed
No later than the end of Block 2	No later than the end of Block 3	No later than the first week of Block 4	No later than the first week of Block 4	No later than 3 weeks before the first day of Block 1 for the next class year
*Consists of previous AY full review and information gathered so far for the current academic year. **Change implementation timeline for MAP 201 & MAP 202 Level 2 & 3 changes is 8 weeks due to the length of the courses.

Phase 3 Courses General Timeline for Changes and Approvals 

Course Review Completed	Change Request Submission	Change Request Approval	Change Implementation	Implementation Reviewed
Mid-September	No later than first week of October	No later than second week of October	No later than mid-November	No later than mid-December for the next delivery of courses for the next class year

Course Changes Outside the Regular Course Cycle 

While efforts should be made to review courses before they launch and to ensure objectives and related linkages are correct, it is possible that certain errors or omissions will remain undetected until students for faculty discover them. These cases will need to be corrected for students to successfully complete the course. These cases also do not need formal committee approval but should be communicated with phase directors and managers. Examples: 

Missing Resources 

1. If a local resource is missing, it should be loaded into the Content Collection in SharePoint and then linked accordingly. 

2. If an external resource (e.g., YouTube video, webpage, etc.) is missing, it should be replaced with an alternative or deleted from the session page. 

3. Note that assigned resources require an effort estimate (number of minutes it takes to review the resource.) This estimate is required of all resources in the LMS. 

Critical Errors within Resources 

1. If a resource contains a typo or other error that may interfere with students completing the session, the revision should be made directly in the document stored in the Content Collection on SharePoint. 

2. For MAP 101, no further action is required since this course uses links to the centralized content collection for MAP courses in SharePoint. For the other courses, the file will need to be replaced in the course content collection in the LMS. 

Errors in Assessments 

1. If an assessment (quiz, exam, assignment) contains an error, it should be corrected as soon as possible in the LMS. 

2. If the course documentation includes exports or Word versions of assessments, then the same corrections will also need to be made to that documentation. 

3. Assessments are typically copied from the previous instance of a course in the LMS. However, Phase 1 courses may be migrated to Elentra and therefore any changes to assessments in these courses must be documented to ensure that the most recent version of the assessment will be migrated. 

Missing Assessments 

1. If a course director realizes that an assessment or component (e.g., a rubric) is missing while the course is in progress, the revision must be implemented as soon as possible. 

2. Ideally, the instructor who created the assessment or rubric will implement the assessment in the LMS. If support is required, it will be coordinated through the course director. These cases should be documented to avoid repetition in the future. 

Late Revisions and Additions 

1. The deadline for submitting regular revisions and additions (e.g., updated PPTX slide decks for the session, etc.) is set to allow implementation before the course start date. 

2. Any revisions that are made late and do not fall into any of the previously discussed categories must be  

1. Approved by the course director, and 

2. Shared with students via a course announcement to be made by the instructor or the course director. 

Such revisions will be added to the regular maintenance schedule to be permanently implemented after the course’s current iteration ends.