Institutional members access full text with Ovid®

Share this article on:

Have Motivation Theories Guided the Development and Reform of Medical Education Curricula? A Review of the Literature

Kusurkar, Rashmi A. MD, PhD; Croiset, Gerda MD, PhD; Mann, Karen V. MSc, PhD; Custers, Eugene PhD; ten Cate, Olle PhD

doi: 10.1097/ACM.0b013e318253cc0e
Curriculum

Purpose: Educational psychology indicates that learning processes can be mapped on three dimensions: cognitive (what to learn), affective or motivational (why learn), and metacognitive regulation (how to learn). In a truly student-centered medical curriculum, all three dimensions should guide curriculum developers in constructing learning environments. The authors explored whether student motivation has guided medical education curriculum developments.

Method: The authors reviewed the literature on motivation theory related to education and on medical education curriculum development to identify major developments. Using the Learning-Oriented Teaching model as a framework, they evaluated the extent to which motivation theory has guided medical education curriculum developers.

Results: Major developments in the field of motivation theory indicate that motivation drives learning and influences students’ academic performance, that gender differences exist in motivational mechanisms, and that the focus has shifted from quantity of motivation to quality of motivation and its determinants, and how they stimulate academic motivation. Major developments in medical curricula include the introduction of standardized and regulated medical education as well as problem-based, learner-centered, integrated teaching, outcome-based, and community-based approaches. These curricular changes have been based more on improving students’ cognitive processing of content or metacognitive regulation than on stimulating motivation.

Conclusions: Motivational processes may be a substantially undervalued factor in curriculum development. Building curricula to specifically stimulate motivation in students may powerfully influence the outcomes of curricula. The elements essential for stimulating intrinsic motivation in students, including autonomy support, adequate feedback, and emotional support, appear lacking as a primary aim in many curricular plans.

Dr. Kusurkar was a researcher, Center for Research and Development of Education, University Medical Center Utrecht, Utrecht, The Netherlands, at the time of writing. She is currently research team leader, Research in Medical Education, Institute of Education and Training, VU University Medical Center Amsterdam, Amsterdam, The Netherlands.

Dr. Croiset is professor of medical education and director, Institute of Education and Training, VU University Medical Center Amsterdam, Amsterdam, The Netherlands.

Dr. Mann is professor emeritus, Division of Medical Education, Dalhousie Faculty of Medicine Clinical Research Centre, Dalhousie University, Halifax, Nova Scotia, Canada.

Dr. Custers is a researcher, Center for Research and Development of Education, University Medical Center Utrecht, Utrecht, The Netherlands.

Dr. ten Cate is professor of medical education and director, Center for Research and Development of Education, University Medical Center Utrecht, Utrecht, The Netherlands.

Correspondence should be addressed to Dr. Kusurkar, VU University Medical Center Amsterdam, Institute of Education and Training, A-114, Postbus 7057, 1007 MB Amsterdam, The Netherlands; telephone: (+3120) 4446474; e-mail: R.Kusurkar@vumc.nl.

© 2012 Association of American Medical Colleges