Presented By: Luke Scheuer, Boston University Chobanian & Avedisian School of Medicine
Co-Authors: Molly Cohen-Osher, Boston University Chobanian & Avedisian School of Medicine
Priya Garg, Boston University Chobanian & Avedisian School of Medicine
Cameron Hill, Boston University Chobanian & Avedisian School of Medicine
Thomas McNamara, Boston University Chobanian & Avedisian School of Medicine
Caitlin Neri, Boston University Chobanian & Avedisian School of Medicine
Gwynneth Offner, Boston University Chobanian & Avedisian School of Medicine
Roey Ringel, Boston University Chobanian & Avedisian School of Medicine
Jonathan Wisco, Boston University Chobanian & Avedisian School of Medicine

Purpose
The Boston University Chobanian & Avedisian School of Medicine recently implemented a novel curriculum method focusing on a flipped-classroom style and team-based learning class sessions wherein students collaborate to apply knowledge to understand the underlying pathophysiology and clinical approaches to diseases. Faculty members created Self-Learning Guides (SLGs) from a combination of in-house text, video and third-party resources for students to prepare for these sessions. This study examined how the faculty viewed the process of curriculum creation, as well as students' perceptions of the SLGs. 

Methods 
A Likert-style survey asking about the implementation, effectiveness, and perception of SLGs was sent to all students of the 2026 class at BU Chobanian & Avedisian SOM; a similar survey about the SLG creation process was sent to all faculty who created SLGs.  

Results 
18 faculty members (58% response) and 72 students (48% response) responded to the survey. 66% of faculty members felt that SLGs required only minimal improvement going forward, compared to 21% of students. 61% of faculty members felt their SLGs alone were sufficient preparation for in-house and Step 1 exams. 61% of faculty additionally said their content did not require additional third-party resources; only 30% students did not feel that third-party resources were necessary to finalize their understanding of SLGs. 

Conclusion 
Faculty and student perceptions of the effectiveness of newly created SLGs are incongruent: Faculty members feel the curriculum they produce is suitably comprehensive for in-house exams and Step 1, but students do not feel as though the SLGs alone are sufficient for standardized board exam preparation. Disconnects between students and faculty may be the result of a gap in student-faculty perceptions of how content should be delivered. In the future, we will study whether student-faculty collaboration on the creation of SLGs minimizes this gap.