LCME Accreditation 2004 - 05
Congratulations Stanford University School of Medicine!
 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Orientation Presentation
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
On October 16-19, 2005 the Liaison Committee on Medical Education (LCME) Site Visit took place. (View visit agenda)
Accreditation Team:
Barbara Barzansky, PhD
Team Chair/Secretary
Secretary, Council on Medical Education and
Assistant LCME Secretary, AMA
Eric S. Marks, MD
Team Member
Associate Dean, Faculty Affairs
Professor, Medicine and Associate Professor, Nursing
Uniformed Services University of the Health Sciences
F. Edward Hebert School of Medicine
Helen R. Turner, MD, PhD
Team Member
Associate Dean, Academic Affairs
University of Mississippi School of Medicine
Herbert S. Chase, MD
Faculty Fellow
Deputy Dean for Education
Professor of Medicine
Yale University School of Medicine
Marina L. Ramos
Observer
Accreditation Administrator
American Medical Association
We are pleased to acknowledge that Stanford was granted full accreditation. Below is an excerpt, written by Dean Philip Pizzo, from his March 20, 2006 edition of the Dean’s Newsletter, regarding the official report from the LCME.
Thank you again to all who contributed and participated in this effort!
Regards,
Oscar Salvatierra, MD
Faculty Lead
Rebecca Trumbull
Project Manager
Kendra Baldwin
Project Coordinator
From the March 20, 2006 edition of the Dean’s Newsletter:
Official Report from the LCME
The official report from the Liaison Committee on Medical Education (LCME) was sent to President John Hennessy in early March. It is something we should all be proud of -- certainly compared to prior reports. The final 205-page report represents the work of the Site Review Committee that visited Stanford on October 16-19, 2005, coupled with a review by the LCME Council at its February 22-23 meeting. Based on the review we received a full eight-year accreditation, and our next full site review will take place in 2013-2014. In their official communication, the LCME identified some areas of strength (i.e., those that are above and beyond the expectations of the LCME) along with some areas that require continued attention during the years ahead. I share these comments with you in an unedited fashion in order to provide the greatest degree of transparency in this very important matter.
As stated in the letter to President Hennessy, the LCME concurred with the Site Review Committee in their assessment of areas of institutional strength, including:
- Dean Philip Pizzo has demonstrated his commitment to medical student education in a number of concrete ways, including making significant financial and other resources available and taking an active role in the conceptualization and planning of the new curriculum. Dr. Pizzo is recognized by faculty and students as a catalyst for bringing about curriculum change.
- There is a climate of collegiality among faculty that transcends departmental boundaries. This is exemplified by significant amounts of cross department and inter-school teaching and research.
- Average medical student debt is less than one half that of other private schools. This is made possible, in part, by endowment income that is committed to scholarship support. Students also receive comprehensive debt counseling.
- The medical school has made a major investment in information technology to support the medical education program. This permits the utilization of innovative computer based applications in the teaching and evaluation of medical students.
- The medical school, through the leadership of the library staff, has created a "library without walls" allowing students and faculty to have access to information from any location. Library staff are widely involved in curriculum planning and in medical student education.
- The medical school has committed significant resources, such as funding and personnel, in a targeted and coherent way to facilitate educational program change. The system to allocate funding to departments for teaching activity has facilitated the participation of faculty in teaching. A number of administrative positions, which are filled with talented and committed individuals, have been added to support medical education.
In addition, the LCME identified a number of transitional areas that will require close monitoring as well as three issues that require specific attention. The so-called "transitional issues" -- which can obviously become strengths or weaknesses -- include, in the words of the LCME:
- The medical school is working to resolve scheduling conflicts between medical school courses and required courses in the scholarly concentrations. In this context, a system to monitor student workload will be necessary.
- The Committee on Courses and Curriculum has been examining the teaching of clinical skills across the curriculum, based on concerns about student performance in the final clinical skills examination and student concerns about the level of clinical skills teaching during clerkships.
- The system for student advisement, including academic and career counseling, has changed in recent years. Student satisfaction with and utilization of the new advisory system are mixed.
- A plan has been approved for a new medical school education building (the Learning and Knowledge Center) with groundbreaking scheduled for 2007.
I agree with these issues and know that each area is currently being worked on by the Medical Education group and student services. In addition to these transitional issues, the LCME stated three areas of concern, as follows:
- At the time of the survey visit, departments were in the process of implementing a mid-clerkship review of patient encounter data but the process had not been completed in all departments.
- The implementation of a more systematic process to ensure formative feedback during the surgery and obstetrics-gynecology was underway at the time of the survey visit.
- Faculty diversity currently is limited and does not approach that of the student body.
Based on this, the LCME wishes to have follow-up addressing the following important areas in 2007: a) Monitoring patient encounters; b) Providing formative feedback; c) Promoting faculty diversity; d) Coordinating student schedules; e) Teaching clinical skills; f) Advising students; g) Constructing the Learning and Knowledge Center.
Overall this is a terrific report and I want to thank again the many dozens of faculty, students and staff who worked so hard to bring this to fruition. While we have important issues to address, we have made major progress and the LCME had praised us for these accomplishments. More importantly, regardless of LCME oversight, each of the areas identified represent issues that we ourselves want to address in our efforts to make Stanford as outstanding as it can be -- for our students and for the nation.
