...
首页> 外文期刊>Advances in health sciences education: theory and practice >Continuing the competency debate: Reflections on definitions and discourses
【24h】

Continuing the competency debate: Reflections on definitions and discourses

机译:继续竞争性辩论:关于定义和疑惑的思考

获取原文
获取原文并翻译 | 示例
   

获取外文期刊封面封底 >>

       

摘要

We read with much interest Parent, Jouquan and De Ketele's engaging and thoughtful commentary "CanMEDS and other "competency and outcome-based approaches" in medical education: clarifying the ongoing ambiguity" (Parent et al. 2012). We appreciate the authors' interest in our publication, Flower Power: the armoured expert in the CanMEDS competency framework? (Whitehead et al. 2011) and thank the editor of Advances in Health Sciences Education for the opportunity to respond. Parent et al. make an important contribution to ongoing discussions about the strengths, limitations, practicality and theoretical constructions of competency frameworks and outcomes-based curricula.
机译:我们用很多兴趣的父母,jouquan和de ketele的参与和周到的评论“队列和其他”竞争力和结果“在医学教育中的攻击:澄清了持续的歧义”(Harent等人。2012)。 我们赞赏提交人对我们的出版物的兴趣,花卉动力:梅尔瑟斯能力框架的装甲专家? (Whitehead等人2011)并感谢卫生科学教育进展的编辑,有机会回应。 父母等人。 对持续讨论有关能力框架和基于结果的课程的优势,局限,实用性和理论结构的重要贡献。

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