The Key — Intention vs. Impact for Penn Medicine’s New Curriculum
In January, Penn’s Perelman School of Medicine (PSOM) received an $8 million gift to overhaul its curriculum by launching a new initiative: Fueling Re-imagination to Advance Medical Education (FRAME). The project is an ambitious effort to modernize physician training by integrating emerging technologies, artificial intelligence, and precision medicine into the curriculum.
The gift is led by PSOM trustee Rod Wong (PSOM ‘03) and Marti Speranza Wong (C ‘98) through the RTW Foundation, the philanthropic arm of RTW Investments. Penn described FRAME as the largest single donation ever dedicated to PSOM’s curriculum innovation and framed it as a major step forward. Whether it is one will depend less on ambition than on results.
Penn is often a first mover in launching new academic initiatives. But FRAME’s success will depend less on being first and more on whether innovation actually drives outcomes. If this effort is truly transformative, its effects should be visible in the rigor of PSOM’s training, the impact of its research, and the quality of care delivered by Penn-trained physicians. To meet that standard, FRAME must remain tightly focused on outcomes rather than novelty. That requires clearly articulated goals and progress evaluated against evidence of real improvement.
PSOM has met this standard before. In 1997, PSOM launched Curriculum 2000, a sweeping overhaul that emphasized preventive medicine, patient-centered care, and a more flexible, integrated educational model. Its success was measurable.
Curriculum 2000’s virtual curriculum was quickly adopted by other medical education programs. Since its launch, PSOM has consistently ranked among the top medical schools in the country, often within the top three, while maintaining residency match rates between 95 and 100 percent. That sustained excellence followed a willingness to take calculated risks, assess results, and refine the curriculum in the pursuit of outcomes.
FRAME arrives as Penn continues to emphasize first-mover leadership across the university. Penn was the first Ivy to introduce an undergraduate AI major. It remains an open question whether that initiative will produce durable gains in student outcomes, like job prospects, startup ideas, or commercial success in the AI industry, or whether its primary value lies only in signaling innovation.
For FRAME, substance must come first. Initiative leaders Lisa Bellini, MD, Executive Vice Dean of PSOM, and Jennifer Kogan, MD (PSOM ’95), Vice Dean for Undergraduate Medical Education, will need to clearly define what success looks like and establish benchmarks that reveal whether the new curriculum is working.
Penn has emphasized that FRAME may produce an open curriculum that can be shared with other institutions, making adoption elsewhere one possible indicator of success. Other measures could include demonstrable improvements in clinical preparation, strong residency placements, and measurable gains in research productivity and patient outcomes among Penn-trained physicians.
PSOM’s last major curriculum overhaul coincided with its rise from roughly tenth place in the early 1990s to a consistent position among the country’s top three medical schools. FRAME presents an opportunity to pursue academic excellence that drives impact that is no less visible. If the overhaul works, Penn should be able to demonstrate it, define it, measure it, and report it, allowing innovation to be judged by its downstream impact.
The Almanac
Curated highlights from this week’s Penn news
Wharton to proceed to trial in $37 million contract dispute
Prysm sued last year, alleging Wharton ended the partnership prematurely, violating the two groups’ contract. Penn claims the termination was justified, arguing Prysm used Wharton’s trademarked name and logo in a presentation without permission and then did not pay Wharton its fair share of the tuition revenue.
Wharton filed for summary judgment, citing the breach as sufficient for their termination of the partnership. However, Judge Costello of the Eastern District of Pennsylvania denied the request, ruling a jury must decide whether Prysm’s actions constituted a breach of contract.
So what? Penn and its peers increasingly turn to private sector partnerships amid federal funding uncertainty. This dispute highlights the legal and financial risks of such arrangements and the potentially high costs when collaborations break down.
Penn closes cyber breach investigation, hackers respond by releasing more data
On Monday, Penn stated in a new court filing that only 10 individuals had personal information compromised in last October’s Graduate School of Education (GSE) breach. Over the past several months, 18 alumni sued Penn over the breach, but Penn claims that none of their data was compromised. Seven have since withdrawn.
This week, Penn announced that its investigation into the breach concluded in January. The university has notified affected individuals and taken down the public incident-response website, arguing hackers’ claims that data on more than 1.2 million people had been compromised were “mischaracterized.”
However, on Wednesday, following Penn’s public statements and refusal to pay a ransom, the ShinyHunters hacker group released additional data. The new files reportedly include donor gift records and personal information tied to prominent alumni, including Marc Rowan (W ‘84, WG ‘85) and members of the Trump family. Internal talking points and progress reports from Penn’s University Task Force on Antisemitism were also disclosed.
So what? Penn has emphasized that it identified affected individuals and handled the breach responsibly, but the new release undercuts those assurances. Continued leaks risk further eroding confidence among alumni, donors, and the public.
Thank you for reading the Franklin’s Forum newsletter! We love connecting with our readers — send us your thoughts and questions, Penn news, and ideas for future issues. If you enjoyed this edition, please spread the word by forwarding it to friends and classmates.