Curriculum Analysis using Harden’s 10 questions framework: Case study Faculty of Medicine and Health Sciences, University of El Imam EL Mahadi (2018)
Introduction:Curriculum analysis is defined as unpacking a curriculum into its component parts, evaluating how the parts fit together, checking underlying beliefs and assumptions and seeking justification for curriculum choices and assumptions.
Methods:This is a qualitative descriptive study analyzing the undergraduate curriculum of Faculty of Medicine and Health Sciences, University of El Imam El Mahdi by adopting Harden’s 10 Questions of curriculum development framework approach. Answering Harden’s questions reflects the fundamental curricular components and how the different aspects of a curriculum framework fit together.
Results:The analysis of the curriculum of Faculty of Medicine and Health Sciences, University of El Imam El Mahdi reveals a curriculum with interactive components. Clear structured objectives and goals reflect the faculty’s vision. The approach for needs assessment is based on a scientific ground, and the curriculum integrated contents have been set to meet national and international requirements. Adopting SPICES strategies helps the faculty and students achieve the objectives of the curriculum. Different motivated instructional methods are adopted compatible with the program objectives and outcomes. A wide range of assessment methods has been adopted correctly and reliably, and in alignment with the intended outcomes to assess the learning outcomes of the curriculum. The Faculty of Medicine and Health Sciences, University of El Imam El Mahdi has a favorable educational environment for operation of its curriculum and it has also a well-defined policy for curriculum management, monitoring and evaluation.
Conclusion:Harden’s 10 questions are satisfactorily addressed by the multi-discipline and well developed, well-structured, and integrated curriculum of the Faculty of Medicine and Health Sciences, University of El Imam El Mahdi. The curriculum supports the mission and objectives of the faculty.
2. Posner JG. Analyzing the curriculum. 3rd ed. Ohio, USA: McGraw-Hill Humanities Social; 2004. p. 315.
3. Heyman RD. Analyzing the curriculum. Int Rev Educ. 1981;27(4):449–70.
4. Bandaranayake R C. How to plan a curriculum. Med Teach.1985; (7): 7-13.
5. Harden RM. Ten questions to ask when designing a curriculum. Med Educ. 1986; 20(4):356–65.
6. Harden, R.M., Sowden, S. & Dunn, W.R. Some educational strategies in curriculum development: the SPICES model, ASME Medical Education Booklet No 18, Medical Education.1984(18): 284–297.
7. Harden RM. Trends and the future of post graduate medical education. BMJ Acad Med. 2006; 23(10): 798-802.
8. Malik AS, Malik RH. The undergraduate curriculum of Faculty of Medicine and Health Sciences, Universiti Malaysia Sarawak in terms of Harden’s 10 questions. Med Teach. 2002; 24(6):616–21.
9. Swanwick T. Understanding Medical Education: Evidence, Theory and Practice. New Jersey:
10. Faculty of medicine curriculum hard copy document. Alimam almahdi university (unpublished).
11. Central Bureau of Statistics Republic of Sudan Population and Housing Census 2008. Sudan: White Nile State Publication; 2008.
12. El-Hazmi MA, Haque SM. Curriculum evaluattion: status and options Med Educ 1985; 19:48-53.
13. Al-Gendan YM, Al-Sulaiman AA, Al-Faraidy A. Undergraduate curriculum reform in Saudi mediccal schools: which direction to go? Saudi Med J 2000; 21:324-6.
14. Das M, Lanphear JH, Ja’afar R. Faculty evaluation of educational strategies in medical schools. Med Teach. 2014;16(4):355–61.
15. Ahmed YA , SALMA ALNEEL . Analyzing the curriculum of the faculty of medicine, University of Gezira using Harden’s 10 questions framework. J Adv Med Educ Prof. 2017; 5( 2):60-66.
16. Khalid A. Bin Abdulrahman. The current status of medical education in the Gulf Cooperation Council countries. Ann Saudi Med 2008; 28(2): 83-88.
17. Association of American Medical Colleges. Physicians for the Twenty-first Century: Report of the project panel on the General Professional Education of the Physicians and College Preparation for Medicine. J Med Educ 1984; 59, Part 2:1-208.
18. Anderson MB, Swanson AG. Educating medical students- the ACME-TRI report with supplements. Acad Med 1993; 68 (Suppl.):S1-46.
19. GMC. Tomorrow’s Doctors. Recommendations on Undergraduate Medical Curriculum. London: General Medical Council, 1993.
20. Schmidt HG , Machiels-Bongaerts M, Hermans H, Ten Cate TJ, Venekamp R, Boshuizen HPA. The development of diagnostic competence: comparison of a problem-based, an integrated and a conventional medical curriculum. Acad Med 1996; 71(6):658-64.