'First in family' experiences in a Canadian medical school: A critically reflexive study.

BACKGROUND: Medical students from affluent and highly educated backgrounds remain overrepresented in Canadian medical schools despite widespread efforts to improve diversity. Little is known of the medical school experiences of students who are first in their family (FiF) to attend university. Drawing on Bourdieu and a critically reflexive lens, this study explored the experiences of FiF students in a Canadian medical school to better understand the ways in which the medical school environment can be exclusive and inequitable to underrepresented students. METHODS: We interviewed 17 medical students who self-identified as being FiF to attend university. Utilising theoretical sampling, we also interviewed five students who identified as being from medical families to test our emerging theoretical framework. Participants were asked to discuss what 'first in family' meant to them, their journey into medical school and their experiences at medical school. Bourdieu's theories and concepts were used as sensitising concepts to explore the data. RESULTS: FiF students discussed the implicit messages they received about who belongs in medical school, challenges in shifting from their pre-medical lives to a medical identity and competing with peers for residency programmes. They reflected on the advantages they perceived they had over their fellow students due to their less 'typical' social backgrounds. CONCLUSION: While medical schools continue to make strides when it comes to increasing diversity, inclusivity and equity require increased attention. Our findings highlight the ongoing need for structural and cultural change at admissions and beyond-change that recognises the much-needed presence and perspectives that underrepresented medical students, including those who are FiF, bring to medical education and healthcare. Engaging in critical reflexivity represents a key way that medical schools can continue to address issues of equity, diversity and inclusion.

Combining adaptive expertise and (critically) reflective practice to support the development of knowledge, skill, and society.

Adaptive expertise (AE) and reflective practice (RP), two influential and resonant theories of professional expertise and practice in their own right, may further benefit health professions education if carefully combined. The current societal and systemic context is primed for both AE and RP. Both bodies of work position practitioners as agentive, learning continually and thoughtfully throughout their careers, particularly in order to manage unprecedented situations well. Similar on the surface, the roots and practices of AE and RP diverge at key junctures and we will focus on RP's movement toward critically reflective practice. The roots of AE and RP, and how they relate to or diverge from present-day applications matter because in health professions education, as in all education, paradigmatic mixing should be undertaken purposefully. This paper will explore the need for AE and RP, their shared commitments, distinctive histories, pedagogical possibilities both individually and combined, and next steps for maximizing their potential to positively impact the field. We argue that this exploration is urgently needed because both AE and RP hold much promise for improving health care and yet employing them optimally-whether alone or together-requires understanding and intent. We build an interprofessional education case situated in long-term care, throughout the paper, to demonstrate the potential that AE and RP might offer to health professions education individually and combined. This exploration comes just in time. Within the realities of uncertain practice emphasized by the pandemic, practitioners were also called to act in response to complex and urgent social movements. A combined AE and RP approach, with focus on critically reflective practice in particular, would potentially prepare professionals to respond effectively, compassionately, and equitably to future health and social crises and challenges.

Examining the Impact of Dialogic Learning on Critically Reflective Practice.

PURPOSE: While research is beginning to reveal the potential of dialogue in sparking critical reflection (critically reflective ways of seeing), additional research is needed to guide the teaching of critical reflection toward enabling critically reflective practice (critically reflective ways of seeing and doing). An experimental study was conducted to investigate the impact of dialogic learning on critically reflective practice, compared to discussion-based learning. The dialogic intervention integrated the theory of Mikhail Bakhtin with the theory of critical reflection and critical disability studies. METHOD: In interprofessional groups of 4, medical, occupational therapy, and speech-language pathology students were randomly assigned to a learning condition that used a reflective discussion or critically reflective dialogue about a pediatric patient case. All participants were then randomly assigned a clinical report for a novel pediatric patient and asked to write a hypothetical clinical letter to the child's school. Hierarchical logistic regression models were constructed to estimate the probabilities of sentences and letters being critically reflective. RESULTS: The probability of sentences being critically reflective was significantly higher for the dialogue condition (0.26, 95% CI [0.2, 0.33]), compared to the discussion condition (0.11, 95% CI [0.07, 0.15]). Likewise, the probability of letters being critically reflective was significantly higher for the dialogue condition (0.26, 95% CI [0.15, 0.4]), compared to the discussion condition (0.04, 95% CI [0.01, 0.16]). In both conditions, the probability of a letter being critically reflective was positively associated with the proportion of critically reflective sentences. CONCLUSIONS: The results demonstrate dialogic learning prepared students to enact critically reflective practice when writing mock clinical letters. Students who participated in a dialogue engaged in a collaborative process of critical reflection and subsequently applied that way of seeing in the individual act of writing a letter. This study highlights how Bakhtin's theory of dialogue can advance critical pedagogy.

Re-envisioning paradigms of education: towards awareness, alignment, and pluralism.

In this article we introduce a synthesis of education "paradigms," adapted from a multi-disciplinary body of literature and tailored to health professions education (HPE). Each paradigm involves a particular perspective on the purpose of education, the nature of knowledge, what knowledge is valued and included in the curriculum, what it means to learn and how learning is assessed, and the roles of teachers and learners in the learning process. We aim to foster awareness of how these different paradigms look in practice and to illustrate the importance of alignment between teaching, learning and assessment practices with paradigmatic values and assumptions. Finally, we advocate for a pluralistic approach that purposefully and meaningfully integrates paradigms of education, enhancing our ability to drive quality in HPE.

Assumptions About Competency-Based Medical Education and the State of the Underlying Evidence: A Critical Narrative Review.

PURPOSE: As educators have implemented competency-based medical education (CBME) as a framework for training and assessment, they have made decisions based on available evidence and on the medical education community's assumptions about CBME. This critical narrative review aimed to collect, synthesize, and judge the existing evidence underpinning assumptions the community has made about CBME. METHOD: The authors searched Ovid MEDLINE to identify empirical studies published January 2000 to February 2019 reporting on competence, competency, and CBME. The knowledge synthesis focused on "core" assumptions about CBME, selected via a survey of stakeholders who judged 31 previously identified assumptions. The authors judged, independently and in pairs, whether evidence from included studies supported, did not support, or was mixed related to each of the core assumptions. Assumptions were also analyzed to categorize their shared or contrasting purposes and foci. RESULTS: From 8,086 unique articles, the authors reviewed 709 full-text articles and included 189 studies reporting evidence related to 15 core assumptions. Most studies (80%; n = 152) used a quantitative design. Many focused on procedural skills (48%; n = 90) and assessed behavior in clinical settings (37%; n = 69). On aggregate, the studies produced a mixed evidence base, reporting 362 data points related to the core assumptions (169 supportive, 138 not supportive, and 55 mixed). The 31 assumptions were organized into 3 categories: aspirations, conceptualizations, and assessment practices. CONCLUSIONS: The reviewed evidence base is significant but mixed, with limited diversity in research designs and the types of competencies studied. This review pinpoints tensions to resolve (where evidence is mixed) and research questions to ask (where evidence is absent). The findings will help the community make explicit its assumptions about CBME, consider the value of those assumptions, and generate timely research questions to produce evidence about how and why CBME functions (or not).

Critically reflective practice and its sources: A qualitative exploration.

CONTEXT: Critical reflection may improve health professionals' performance of the social roles of care (eg collaboration) in indeterminate zones of practice that are ambiguous, unique, unstable or value-conflicted. Research must explore critical reflection in practice and how it is developed. In this study, we explored what critical reflection consisted of in a context known for indeterminacy, and to what sources participants attributed their critically reflective insights and approaches. METHODS: The study context was the interface between health care and education for children with chronic conditions or disabilities necessitating health-related recommendations and supports (eg accommodations or equipment) at school. We conducted a secondary analysis of 42 interview transcripts from an institutional ethnographic study involving health professionals, school-based educators and parents of children with chronic conditions or disabilities. We coded all transcripts for instances of critical reflection, moments that seemed to lack but could benefit from critical reflection, and participant-attributed sources of critically reflective insights. RESULTS: Critically reflective practice involved getting to know the other, valuing and leveraging different forms and sources of knowledge, identifying and communicating workarounds (ie strategies to circumvent imperfect systems), seeing inequities, and advocating as collaborators, not adversaries. Participants invariably attributed critically reflective insights to personal experiences such as former careers or close personal relationships. CONCLUSIONS: This study shows that personal experiences and connections inspire critically reflective views, and that being critically reflective is not a binary trait possessed (or not) by individuals. It is learnable through personally meaningful experiences. Health professions education could aim to preserve philosophical space for personal experience as a source of learning and integrate evidence-informed approaches to foster critically reflective practice.

A Dialogic Approach to Teaching Person-Centered Care in Graduate Medical Education.

BACKGROUND: Training future physicians to provide compassionate, equitable, person-centered care remains a challenge for medical educators. Dialogues offer an opportunity to extend person-centered education into clinical care. In contrast to discussions, dialogues encourage the sharing of authority, expertise, and perspectives to promote new ways of understanding oneself and the world. The best methods for implementing dialogic teaching in graduate medical education have not been identified. OBJECTIVE: We developed and implemented a co-constructed faculty development program to promote dialogic teaching and learning in graduate medical education. METHODS: Beginning in April 2017, we co-constructed, with a pilot working group (PWG) of physician teachers, ways to prepare for and implement dialogic teaching in clinical settings. We kept detailed implementation notes and interviewed PWG members. Data were iteratively co-analyzed using a qualitative description approach within a constructivist paradigm. Ongoing analysis informed iterative changes to the faculty development program and dialogic education model. Patient and learner advisers provided practical guidance. RESULTS: The concepts and practice of dialogic teaching resonated with PWG members. However, they indicated that dialogic teaching was easier to learn about than to implement, citing insufficient time, lack of space, and other structural issues as barriers. Patient and learner advisers provided insights that deepened design, implementation, and eventual evaluation of the education model by sharing experiences related to person-centered care. CONCLUSIONS: While PWG members found that the faculty development program supported the implementation of dialogic teaching, successfully enabling this approach requires expertise, willingness, and support to teach knowledge and skills not traditionally included in medical curricula.

The Hidden Curriculum of Compassionate Care: Can Assessment Drive Compassion?

PURPOSE: Medical schools are expected to promote compassionate care among learners. Assessment is a key way to communicate values to learners but can create a hidden curriculum. Assessing compassionate care is challenging; however, not assessing it can communicate to students that such care is not valued. The purpose of this study was to explore how current assessment strategies promote or suppress the idea that caring behaviors are valued learning objectives. METHOD: Data sources were third-year course documents; interviews of 9 faculty, conducted between December 2015 and February 2016; and focus groups with 13 third-year medical students and an interview with 1 third-year medical student, conducted between February and June 2016. The stated intentions of third-year assessments were compared with the behaviors rewarded through the assessment process and the messages students received about what is valued in medical school. RESULTS: Syllabi did not include caring as a learning outcome. Participants recognized assessment as a key influence on student focus. Faculty perspectives varied on the role of medical schools in assessing students' caring and compassion. Students prioritized studying for assessments but described learning about caring and compassion from interactions such as meaningful patient encounters and both positive and negative role models that were not captured in assessments. CONCLUSIONS: Faculty members expressed concern about not assessing caring and compassion but acknowledged the difficulty in doing so. While students admitted that assessments influenced their studying, their reported experiences revealed that the idea that "assessment drives learning" did not capture the complexity of their learning.

Competency-based medical education: the discourse of infallibility.

BACKGROUND: Over the last two decades, competency-based frameworks have been internationally adopted as the primary educational approach in medicine. Yet competency-based medical education (CBME) remains contested in the academic literature. We look broadly at the nature of this debate to explore how it may shape scholars' understanding of CBME, and its implications for medical education research and practice. In doing so, we deconstruct unarticulated discourses and assumptions embedded in the CBME literature. METHODS: We assembled an archive of literature focused on CBME. The archive dates from 1996, the publication year of the first CanMEDS Physician Competency Framework. We then conducted a Foucauldian critical discourse analysis (CDA) to delineate the dominant discourses underpinning the literature. CDA examines the intersections of language, social practices, knowledge and power relations to highlight how entrenched ways of thinking influence what can or cannot be said about a topic. FINDINGS: Detractors of CBME have advanced an array of conceptual critiques. Proponents have often responded with a recurring discursive strategy that minimises these critiques and deflects attention from the underlying concept of the competency-based approach. As part of this process, conceptual concerns are reframed as two practical problems: implementation and interpretation. Yet the assertion that these are the construct's primary concerns was often unsupported by empirical evidence. These practices contribute to a discourse of infallibility of CBME. DISCUSSION: In uncovering the discourse of infallibility, we explore how it can silence critical voices and hinder a rigorous examination of the competency-based approach. These discursive practices strengthen CBME by constructing it as infallible in the literature. We propose re-approaching the dialogue surrounding CBME as a starting point for empirical investigation, driven by the aim to broaden scholars' understanding of its design, development and implementation in medical education.