Article Text

Download PDFPDF

Response to letters by M. Jawad Hashim and Chuan Zou: Advancing curriculum development and medical education research
  1. Margaret Dobson
  1. Department of Family Medicine, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, MI, United States
  1. Correspondence to Dr Margaret Dobson; mlekande{at}

Statistics from

Request Permissions

If you wish to reuse any or all of this article please use the link below which will take you to the Copyright Clearance Center’s RightsLink service. You will be able to get a quick price and instant permission to reuse the content in many different ways.

In response to Hashim and Zou:

We appreciate the thoughtful read of our article1 ‘Curriculum development: a how to primer’ and the commentaries about this topic by Drs Hashim and Zou. We thank Dr Hashim for bringing to light another specific type of teaching style, called here a mini-workshop, using some of the theory of the flipped classroom, which is ever more present in medical education. We validate that many aspects of medical education benefit from some hands-on practice, with pre-learning to be done either independently or as a group before the skill-based learning can take place. This would fit nicely with many other modalities one might consider during ‘step 4: selecting teaching/educational strategies’ as articulated in our primer ‘one should match the learner, teacher and material to one or more of the available teaching formats.’1

Dr Zou’s commentary reaches a bit further into the medical education research realm, which might or might not be a part of curriculum development. We felt this primer was intended to speak most directly to the development and implementation of a curriculum, with a nod towards evaluation, rather than representing a commentary on medical education research. We agree that there is certainly a need for more rigorous medical education research and discussion about methodology is important, but beyond the scope of our primer.


  1. 1.


  • Funding The author has not declared a specific grant for this research from any funding agency in the public, commercial or not-for-profit sectors.

  • Competing interests None declared.

  • Patient consent for publication Not required.

  • Provenance and peer review Commissioned; internally peer reviewed.

Linked Articles