ArticleBMC medical education2024
Flipping the expert: faculty educator sensemaking during transition to an active learning-based curriculum.
Article in BMC medical education, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
3 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 9 citations in OpenAlex.
- Evidence of the effectiveness of projects, programs, and/or strategies for curricular innovation in undergraduate health courses: systematic review and meta-analysis.BMC medical education · 2025Pooled it
- AI Integration in Undergraduate Medical Education: Qualitative Study of Faculty Perspectives in the United Arab Emirates.JMIR medical education · 2026Article
- Breaking the mould: stakeholder insights into the shift from 2 + 4 to a 6-Year continuous medical curriculum in South Korea.BMC medical education · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
purposeCurricular change is becoming a standard feature of medical schools as they respond to learners' evolving needs. Implementing change is not always straightforward, however, especially when it directly shifts the expected roles of faculty educators. The authors investigated how faculty educators navigated a significant transition to the Active, Competency-Based, and Excellence-Driven (ACE) curriculum at one state medical school.
methodThe authors employed a qualitative descriptive design and conducted thematic analysis. From June 2018 to January 2019, the authors conducted individual, in-depth interviews with faculty educators and administrators involved in first-year medical student education. Data were analyzed inductively to identify the sensemaking process for faculty.
resultsTwenty-one faculty educators participated in interviews averaging 58 min. Four phases were identified among educators as they moved through the change: (1) Making Sense of the Change; (2) Grieving the Lecturer Educator Role; (3) Risking an Active Learning Educator Role; and (4) Identifying the Rewards of Active Learning-based Teaching.
conclusionFaculty buy-in is an essential component of successful curricular change implementation. While most faculty in this study reported eventual enjoyment from the new interactional teaching that fostered critical thinking, navigating the change was not always smooth. This study suggests faculty development around curricular change should be tailored to address the varying faculty concerns relevant to the four phases that were identified. Effective and optimal faculty support during large-scale curricular change must take into account not just new skills but also the grief and risk faculty may experience as their roles shift.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.