Managing assessment during curriculum change: Ottawa Consensus Statement

Abstract

Curriculum change is relatively frequent in health professional education. Formal, planned curriculum review must be conducted periodically to incorporate new knowledge and skills, changing teaching and learning methods or changing roles and expectations of graduates. Unplanned curriculum evolution arguably happens continually, usually taking the form of “minor” changes that in combination over time may produce a substantially different programme. However, reviewing assessment practices is less likely to be a major consideration during curriculum change, overlooking the potential for unintended consequences for learning. This includes potentially undermining or negating the impact of even well-designed and important curriculum changes. Changes to any component of the curriculum “ecosystem “- graduate outcomes, content, delivery or assessment of learning – should trigger an automatic review of the whole ecosystem to maintain constructive alignment. Consideration of potential impact on assessment is essential to support curriculum change. Powerful contextual drivers of a curriculum include national examinations and programme accreditation, so each assessment programme sits within its own external context. Internal drivers are also important, such as adoption of new learning technologies and learning preferences of students and faculty. Achieving optimal and sustainable outcomes from a curriculum review requires strong governance and support, stakeholder engagement, curriculum and assessment expertise and internal quality assurance processes. This consensus paper provides guidance on managing assessment during curriculum change, building on evidence and the contributions of previous consensus papers.

Keywords:

• Assessment
• curriculum change
• health professional education

Disclosure statement

The authors have no declarations of interest to report.

Glossary

Curriculum ecosystem: Describes the complex inter-relationship of learning content, delivery and assessment that exists in the dynamic context of both higher education and healthcare systems.

Additional information

Funding

The author(s) reported there is no funding associated with the work featured in this article.

Notes on contributors

Richard B. Hays

The authors are an international group recruited through AMEE networks to provide expertise, contribution from educators and learners, and representation of geographic and health systems diversity.

Richard B Hays, James Cook University, Townsville, Australia.

Tim Wilkinson

Tim Wilkinson, University of Otago, Christchurch, New Zealand.

Lionel Green-Thompson

Lionel Green-Thompson, University of Capetown, South Africa.

Peter McCrorie

Peter McCrorie, University of Cyprus, Larnaca, Cyprus.

Valdes Bollela

Valdes Bollela, Universidade Cidade de Sao Paulo, Brazil.

Vishna Devi Nadarajah

Vishna Devi Nadarajah, Newcastle University, Johor, Malaysia.

M. Brownell Anderson

M. Brownell Anderson, Universidade do Minho, Braga, Portugal.

John Norcini

John Norcini, FAIMER, Philadelphia, USA.

Dujeepa D. Samarasekera

Dujeepa D. Samarasekera, University of Singapore, Singapore.

Katharine Boursicot

Katharine Boursicot, Health Professional Assessment Consultancy, Singapore.

Bunmi S Malau-Aduli

Bunmi S Malau-Aduli, University of Newcastle, Newcastle, Australia.

Madalina Elena Mandache

Madalina Elena Mandache, University of Medicine and Pharmacy of Craiova, Romania.

Azhar Adam Nadkar

Azhar Adam Nadkar, Stellenbosch University, Capetown, South Africa.