Core knowledge, skills, and attitudes in child health for undergraduates.

There has been concern that medical schools admit the educational cream ofyoung enthusiastic inquisitive students and five years later produce doctors who are often bored and unquestioning.1-3 Medical schools need to examine the reasons for this. In the UK, the General Medical Council (GMC) report has made major directions about undergraduate medical education in general.4 While not dealing specifically with child health there are three broad issues that apply: the GMC recommended decreased course content, improved methods of teaching, and a decrease in the number of assessments. There has also been concern that educators have not always linked these assessments to the objectives of the course. In addition to the national impetus from the GMC, Nottingham University has been conducting a wide ranging curriculum review from 1990-5, which has led to an expansion of teaching time within child health from eight to 10 weeks as well as integration of core teaching between obstetrics and gynaecology, perinatology, genitourinary medicine, and genetics. This article will deal with current views and controversies on core knowledge, clinical skills, and attitudes for undergraduates studying child health. We will give some indication of the current trends in Nottingham but do not mean to suggest that this is the only way forward. However, Nottingham has a relatively young course and there has been an effort to integrate preclinical and clinical training through the three educational themes cell, man, and community as well as an enthusiasm to experiment with novel teaching and assessment strategies. It must be emphasised that the developments in child health, described here, are a small part of the total cirriculum review. A major new component of which is the introduction of a fourth educational theme, concerned with personal and professional development.