This Article  • 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 JAMA  Social Bookmarking   What's this?

Nicholas A. Halasz, MD
San Diego

JAMA. 1971;217(8):1104.

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

To the Editor.—

A recent editorial (216:1853-1854, 1971) refers to a statement made by me (New Eng J Med 284:979, 1971) and attaches an interpretation to which I object strongly. In no way did I imply or state that curricular reform in our medical schools is dangerous per se. It becomes a threat only when accomplished in a vacuum without taking into account concurrent trends and changes in the entire continuum of medical education. Curricular reform and innovation grow rightly out of our dissatisfaction with the lockstep post-Flexnerian system. So long as change is not sought as a status symbol it should be welcomed, because it offers the hope of an improved learning experience to our students. This potential for improvement is much enhanced by the involvement and enthusiasm which innovation engenders in a faculty. These are essential ingredients of good teaching and represent major secondary gains arising . . . [Full Text PDF of this Article]

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