Table 2

Outline of the process of the CRAG meetings

May 2010 (first all-day retreat)
  • FMCF and its accompanying write-up were presented in draft format (ie, draft 1)

  • Following the presentation and a discussion, work groups were formed to critique and provide feedback on the framework

  • Work groups presented their ideas to the larger group; this was followed by an intensive plenary debate

  • Revised FMCF (ie, draft 2) was sent to retreat attendees via e-mail to solicit feedback

  • Additional minor suggestions and changes were incorporated over the next few months

October 2010 (second all-day retreat)
  • Draft 2 of the FMCF and an accompanying revised write-up were presented

  • Participants provided feedback

  • Comments and suggestions were recorded and integrated over the next month

  • Definitions for the terms in the FMCF were drafted based on relevant literature

  • Additional information concerning pedagogic strategies was developed by the educational specialist to ensure the framework was grounded in educational theory

  • Definitions were sent to the small core curriculum working group (director of postgraduate education, administrators, 2 preceptors, including the Director of Evaluations, and the education specialist) to garner clarification, suggestions, and recommendations.

January 2011 (third all-day retreat)
  • Draft 3 of the FMCF, the accompanying revised write-up, and the definitions were presented

  • The presentation and discussion of the FMCF generated more “buy in” from stakeholders

  • Minor suggestions and recommendations were recorded and incorporated

March 2011 (fourth all-day retreat)
  • In mid-February 2011, all retreat attendees were e-mailed draft 4 of the FMCF, the accompanying write-up, and the definitions of terms

  • At the retreat, participants had the opportunity to approve the draft or provide further comments and recommendations

  • Additional minor suggestions were received and implemented. These changes included the following: creating a more inclusive description of procedural skills; changing the name of Behavioural Medicine to Behavioural Medicine and Mental Health; and including principles of adult education into the write-up of the framework

  • Final draft of the FMCF was professionally programmed into an interactive version, allowing the definition of the terms to emerge when “moused” over

May 2011 (fifth all-day retreat)
  • Interactive version of FMCF was shared with participants

  • Framework was sent for French translation to accommodate our Francophone preceptors and residents

  • There were discussions on the generation of learning strategies and evaluation tools, as well as the concept of an e-portfolio or e-dossier

  • Curriculum search tool (online curriculum database) was also introduced as a mechanism to logically sort through the learning objectives, strategies, and corresponding CanMEDS–Family Medicine roles and 99 key priorities

October 2011 (sixth all-day retreat)
  • Functionality of the curriculum search tool was elaborated on

  • Revised evaluation tools were presented and feedback was recorded for implementation purposes

  • CRAG—Curriculum Review Advisory Group, FMCF—Family Medicine Curriculum Framework.