首页> 外文期刊>Advances in Health Sciences Education >The fragmented discourse of the ‘knowledgeable doer’: nursing academics’ and nurse managers’ perspectives on a master’s education for nurses
【24h】

The fragmented discourse of the ‘knowledgeable doer’: nursing academics’ and nurse managers’ perspectives on a master’s education for nurses

机译:“知识分子”的支离破碎的论述:护理学者和护士经理对护士硕士教育的看法

获取原文
获取原文并翻译 | 示例
           

摘要

There has been a proliferation of taught masters’ degrees for nurses in recent years, and like masters’ programmes in other disciplines, the aspirations of such educational endeavours are far from unanimous. This article reports on part of a wider study, and focuses on a qualitative analysis of the perspectives of two key sets of stakeholders, namely academic education providers, and senior clinical nursing personnel, on masters’ education for nurses. Fifteen participants were interviewed in depth, and data were subjected to a qualitative content analysis. Findings indicated that while both sets of participants invoked the discourse of the ‘knowledgeable doer’, that is, the notion of amalgamating a high level of theoretical knowledge with practical know how, there were also differences in how each group deployed this discourse. Academics tended to emphasise the ‘knowing that’ or theoretical aspect of the discourse, whereas those in senior clinical roles adduced the practical component more strongly. We argue that the discourse of the ‘knowledgeable doer’ is far from stable, unified and universally agreed, but rather comprises competing elements with some emphasised over others according to the subject position of the particular individual. We locate the diverse perspectives of the two sets of stakeholders within debates about the status of masters’ programmes in relation to vocational and liberal education.
机译:近年来,护士授课式硕士学位的数量激增,就像其他学科的硕士课程一样,这种教育努力的目标并非遥遥一致。本文是对更广泛研究的一部分的报告,着重于定性分析两种主要利益相关者的观点,即学术教育提供者和高级临床护理人员对护士的硕士教育的看法。对15名参与者进行了深度访谈,并对数据进行了定性内容分析。研究结果表明,尽管两组参与者都引用了“知识渊博者”的话语,即将高水平的理论知识与实践知识融合在一起的观点,但是每个小组如何部署这种话语也存在差异。学术界倾向于强调话语的“了解”或理论方面,而具有高级临床职务的人则更加强调实际内容。我们认为,“知识分子”的论述远非稳定,统一和普遍同意,而是包含竞争性元素,其中某些元素根据特定个体的主题地位而被强调。在有关职业和自由教育的硕士课程状态的辩论中,我们找到了两组利益相关者的不同观点。

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
获取原文

客服邮箱:kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备:11010802029741号 ICP备案号:京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有
  • 客服微信

  • 服务号