|Kern et al.’s  six steps||
(i) Identification of a problem and a general needs assessment;|
(ii) targeted needs assessment;
(iii) goals and objectives;
(iv) educational strategies;
(vi) evaluation and feedback.
• This approach acknowledges that curriculum development is dynamic with multiple interacting components and interplay between steps. For example, availability of resources will have an impact on the learning objectives.|
• It streamlines curriculum development attempting to align targeted goals and objectives with implementation and evaluation.
• The aim is to improve the efficiency and effectiveness of teaching.
• The Kern approach is widely applicable to different fields of teaching.
|Sawyer et al.’s  six steps||
(i) Pre-simulation didactic learning|
(ii) observation of the procedure;
(iii) deliberate practice;
(iv) proof of competency prior to performing the skill on a patient;
(v) doing the procedure on patients;
(vi) maintenance through continued practice.
• Simulation training is split explicitly into cognitive and psychomotor phases with an expectation of adequate theoretical knowledge before simulator practice.|
• This approach promotes skill maintenance through continued practice but does not explore repetition intervals.
• It is more directive than the Kern approach and focused more on the design of procedural skill training.
• It explicitly includes a human performance element which decreases its utility for teaching rarely performed procedures.