Current State of Physiology Undergraduate Degree Programs and Curricula: Survey Results from the Physiology Majors Interest Group Inaugural Meeting

Abstract

The inaugural Physiology Majors Interest Group (P‐MIG)meeting took place May 18–19, 2017 at Michigan State University in EastLansing, Michigan. The purpose of the conference was (1) to build a network of peer undergraduate Physiology programs, (2) to begin discussions regarding national guidelines for undergraduate Physiology programs, and (3) to establish a regular conference for Physiology programs. P‐MIG conference attendees (n=34) and others who participated remotely(n=9) completed detailed pre‐ and post‐ meeting surveys regarding their collegiate affiliation, program requirements and course offerings, degree conferred and primary focus area, undergraduate enrollment and graduating class size, and student career interests. Key survey results are as follows: At the collegiate level, 34% of programs are housed in Colleges of Arts and Sciences and 15% in Colleges of Medicine. Fifty‐six percent of programs include “Physiology” in their departmental name, and the majority of other programs expressed a focus on Physiology despite having a different name. Programs are housed in a variety of different departments including 28% in Department of Physiology, 20% in Department of Biology, and 12% in Department of Biological/Life Sciences. Seventy‐six percent of programs offer a Bachelor of Science degree with others offering a Bachelors of Arts or another degree name. Program size varies from <200 students (41%), between 200–400 students(32%), and 27% of programs reported enrollments of 400+ undergraduate students. Most programs have options available or required for experience in research (90%), internship (72%), study abroad(100%), outreach (63%), and other engagement activities outside the classroom(82%). The extensive curricular requirement data will be made available. Of the 27 attendees who completed the post‐conference survey, 81% reported that they were extremely likely to attend a future P‐MIG conference. Ninety‐three percent of respondents listed networking and community as the most useful aspect of the conference in a free‐response question. Learning about other programs was the second most frequently cited useful outcome (40.7%). In summary, the inaugural P‐MIG conference was a great start to building a network of peer undergraduate programs and moving towards a set of national guidelines for Physiology programs. The second P‐MIG conference is scheduled for June 28–29, 2018 at The University of Arizona in Tucson, AZ.Support or Funding InformationAmerican Physiological Society; Association of Chairs of Departments of Physiology; Michigan State University, Department of Physiology and College of Natural Science; Michigan State University Associate Provost for Undergraduate Education & Dean of Undergraduate Studies; University of Oregon, Department of Human Physiology; University of Arizona, Department of PhysiologyThis abstract is from the Experimental Biology 2018 Meeting. There is no full text article associated with this abstract published in The FASEB Journal.