Stages of Concern of Medical Faculty toward Adoption of Competency-based Medical Education in India: A Multicentric Survey

CONTEXT: Currently, a major curricular reform in the form of competency-based medical education (CBME) curriculum is being rolled out across all medical colleges in India. However, it is important to find out and address the concerns of faculty regarding various aspects of this new curriculum. AIM: To analyze the concerns of the faculty members of medical colleges in India in response to the changes emerging from the adoption and implementation of the new curriculum through the concerns-based adoption model by applying the stages of concern (SoC) questionnaire. METHODOLOGY: A multicentric, cross-sectional quantitative study involving faculty members currently working in medical colleges and with more than 2 years of teaching experience was conducted using SoC questionnaire (SoCQ). The questionnaire was delivered as Google Form. RESULTS: Of the 744 faculty participants, 41.1% (306) of faculty belonged to the 31–40 years age group followed by the 41–50 years age group (267, 35.9%). Respondents rated their level of concern differently among the seven SoC - percentile scores were highest in Stage 0– awareness (94) and least in Stage 4– consequences (59). An appreciably higher percentile scores were seen at the consequences stage (63 vs. 54), collaboration stage (80 vs. 68), and refocusing stage (77 vs. 69) in those faculty members who were trained in curriculum implementation support program (CISP) compared to the untrained group. However; the SoCQ profiles of CISP trained and untrained faculty were very much similar. SoCQ profiles of holders of advanced training in medical education and non-holders were also the same. CONCLUSION: Almost after 2 years of well-planned introduction of the CBME curriculum in India, the generalized faculty profile is still suggestive of interested but non-user type for the adoption of CBME. However; compared to untrained faculty, CISP trained faculty is more concerned about the impact of CBME on students, collaborating with colleagues for its proper implementation and exploring more benefits from the implementation of CBME, indicating that more hand-holding is required for faculty development beyond CISP.