Presented By: Matthew Brennan, Wayne State University School of Medicine
Co-Authors: Marissa Zhu, Wayne State University School of Medicine

Purpose
The traditional feedback model in undergraduate medical education is characterized by end-of-course questionnaires and static, unilateral feedback. This paradigm has significant gaps in capturing the student experience. We propose an innovative multidisciplinary curriculum feedback model designed to more accurately interpret course feedback and generate evidence-based solutions.

Methods
Our innovation leverages the expertise of three unique stakeholders in course review: the course director (CD), curriculum specialist (CS), and student curriculum representative (SCR). The feedback model employs five main components: Real-time feedback form - to capture live feedback. Post-course survey and student focus group - to capture class-wide trends as well as in-depth commentary. Multidisciplinary task force - to leverage the expertise of CDs, CSs, and SCRs when interpreting feedback and generating evidence-based solutions. Pilot student focus group - to gather feedback on the proposed solutions. Closing the loop - by informing the prior cohort of course improvements.

Results
This feedback model exhibits several benefits. Real-time feedback captures feedback throughout the course without waiting until the end. A post-course student focus group provides context and depth to course reviews, absent in simple questionnaires. A multidisciplinary task force drastically reduces the likelihood that course feedback is misinterpreted while increasing the practicality and effectiveness of proposed course improvements. The pilot student focus group offers an additional checkpoint to ensure that proposed changes align with student needs. Last, informing the prior cohort of course improvements boosts student morale, improving the quality of future course evaluations.

Conclusion
The multidisciplinary curriculum feedback model represents a significant improvement over traditional feedback mechanisms in medical education, fostering a more responsive and inclusive approach to curriculum review. While it demands more resources and coordination, the model's ability to accurately identify and remedy major course concerns justifies its implementation. The dialogic approach to curriculum development can improve course quality and student satisfaction across institutions.