This study examined the current format of curricula at North American dental schools, determined curriculum evaluation strategies, and identified recently implemented changes as well as planned future innovations. The academic affairs deans of sixty-four North American dental schools received an email survey in August 2002; a second, follow-up survey was sent to nonresponders in February 2003. Online responses were collected and analyzed using SurveyTracker software. The final response rate was 87 percent, with forty-eight U.S. schools and eight Canadian schools responding. Respondents were asked to select descriptive statements about the general organization of their curricula and the degree to which problem-based learning (PBL), case-reinforced learning (CRL), curricular integration, and community-based clinical treatment experiences were incorporated. They were also requested to identify strategies employed to evaluate the curriculum and to report recently completed and desired future curriculum modifications. In regard to desired future curriculum innovations, respondents identified why they were considering curriculum changes and identified resources needed to implement the planned changes. Sixty-six percent of those who responded defined their current curriculum organization as primarily discipline-based with a few interdisciplinary courses. Nearly 60 percent of schools reported that they used PBL and CRL in specific courses or for components of certain courses, but only 5 percent of the respondents indicated that all of their courses used PBL. Regarding integration of major sections of the curriculum, only 7 percent reported that their entire curriculum was organized around themes of interrelated topics. Sixty-four percent reported that their curriculum had required community-based clinical treatment experiences for students. The most frequent innovations in the past three years were increased use of computer and web-based learning (86 percent), creation of patient care experiences early in the curriculum (84 percent), enhancement of competency evaluation methods (84 percent), and curriculum decompression (79 percent). These items plus increased community-based care were the most frequently identified future curricular innovations. There were virtually no differences between the responses of Canadian and U.S. dental schools. The results of this study help to broadly characterize dental curricula at North American dental institutions and identify curriculum modifications anticipated by the academic dean respondents.Dr. Kassebaum is Executive Associate Dean,

Current advanced degree and research training programs no longer attract adequate numbers of students. The present system of dental education severely limits the appeal of these programs due to overcrowded curricula and clinical components that operate in an environment segregated from the academic/research enterprise. To make research-oriented education/training programs more accessible and increase the number of interested students, the culture of dental schools and dental education must change. Programs for future dental researchers and academicians must be supported by curricula that foster an appreciation of research/discovery, an interest in academic/research careers, and the application of biomedical/clinical advances to practice. The Marquette University School of Dentistry has designed a comprehensive new curriculum that supports student research and scholarly activity throughout all four years of dental education. The curriculum minimizes discipline-based courses and is structured into interdisciplinary content tracks that integrate biomedical, behavioral, and clinical sciences while emphasizing the application of science to patient care. A specific research/scholarly track represents dedicated didactic time that exposes all dental students to material not traditionally included in dental curricula. This track includes mentored research/scholarly experiences at local and national sites that are individually structured for each student. Customized student schedules facilitate participation in these experiences without hardship or penalty. This curriculum structure may serve as a model for research non-intensive institutions seeking to increase student interest in academic and research careers.

Our objective was to evaluate changes in curriculum and culture within a research non-intensive dental school after implementation of programs supported by the NIH-NIDCR R25 Oral Health Research Curriculum Grant. We designed new curricular elements to foster an appreciation of research/discovery, an interest in academic/research careers, and application of biomedical/clinical advances to patient care. Funding was utilized to develop, implement, and assess a dedicated curricular track of continuous student research/scholarly activity throughout the four years of dental education. This track represented mandatory hours of didactic time exposing students to topics not traditionally included in dental curricula. Additionally, students were provided with customized flexible schedules to participate in elective "hands-on" mentored research/scholarly experiences at local, national, and international sites, including linkages to certificate, MS, and PhD programs. Funding was also used to support a wide array of faculty development activities that provided skill sets required to deliver integrated biomedical/clinical content, research-oriented evidence-based approaches to dental education, and translational case-based teaching methods emphasizing the application of new science/technologies to patient care. We measured changes in student, faculty, and institutional profiles/attitudes using traditional benchmarks, surveys, and focus groups. Comparisons were made between baseline data prior to R25 program initiation and data collected after years 3-4 of program implementation. Significant increases were demonstrated in: (1) student participation in research/scholarship, attendance at national meetings, research awards, publication of manuscripts, pursuit of advanced training/degrees, and expressions of interest in academic/research careers; (2) faculty participation in development activities, publication of manuscripts, and mentoring of students; and (3) increased institutional credibility within the university, supportive infrastructure for research/scholarship, and cultural expectations for academic excellence. Thus, we believe that the R25 programming changed the culture of our dental school, creating a supportive environment for research/scholarship, increasing academic productivity, and altering the attitudes of faculty/students.