Table 7.

Importance of selected catalysts for curricular change, by percent of total responses

CatalystHighly ImportantImportantMarginally ImportantNot ImportantN
Note: Percentages may not total 100% because of rounding.
Educational best practices in the literature48%33%15%4%52
Internal curriculum review46%40%10%4%52
Administration dissatisfaction38%36%8%19%53
Committee/task force recommendations36%24%19%21%53
New scientific evidence that needs incorporation35%42%15%8%52
Student feedback34%49%11%6%53
New dean’s ideas30%23%8%40%53
Accreditation site visit28%13%28%30%53
Performance on national boards and licensing exams23%34%19%24%53
New ADEA competencies23%28%36%13%53
Faculty dissatisfaction17%53%13%17%53
Physical plant changes17%19%15%49%53
Changes in parent university/health science center13%30%28%28%53
Economic conditions13%21%19%47%53
Leadership of an influential faculty member13%45%19%23%53
Mock site visit by consultants12%20%22%47%51
Alumni feedback11%43%24%21%53
Reduced faculty numbers or experience8%36%19%38%53
Faculty visits to other schools6%40%30%24%53
External consultants6%19%30%45%53
Legislative or university mandates6%8%19%68%53
Grants, donations, gifts4%8%32%57%53
Curricular change in other schools in the region2%2%28%68%53
Declining number of applicants and feedback from applicants09%11%79%53