This Article  • References  • Full text PDF  • Send to a friend  • Save in My Folder  • Save to citation manager  • Permissions  Citing Articles  • Contact me when this article is cited  Related Content  • Similar articles in this journal  Social Bookmarking   What's this?

LAWRENCE A. FISHER, PhD

Arch Dermatol. 1966;93(5):536-538.

	Since this article does not have an abstract, we have provided the first 150 words of the full text PDF and any section headings.

ONE OF THE MOST difficult problems in revising course content in any discipline is the establishment and maintenance of some systematic approach. The outline provided in this paper is meant to be a format which precludes the avoidance of any issues central to the development of sound educational practices. Although empirical in derivation, it is logical in sequence and has proven useful to educators in many different fields and disciplines.

The total process of curricular improvement may be considered as consisting of three broadly defined functions. The first is the development of objectives for an educational program. It is obvious that without a mission or goal or set of objectives, it is quite impossible to conduct an orderly planning of the course, or to develop an evaluation system which accurately measures the effectiveness of the program. The second function is the development of an ordered set of learning activities which . . . [Full Text PDF of this Article]

Author Affiliations
CHICAGO

From the Center of Research in Medical Education, University of Illinois, Chicago.

Footnotes
Read before the Second Conference on Undergraduate Teaching in Dermatology of the Association of Professors of Dermatology, Chicago, April 30-May 2, 1965.

Reprint requests to Center of Research in Medical Education, University of Illinois, Chicago 60612.

CiteULike    Connotea    Del.icio.us    Digg    Reddit    Technorati    Twitter     What's this?