首页> 外文期刊>Medical education >Complex perspectives on learning objectives: stakeholders' beliefs about core objectives based on focus group interviews.
【24h】

Complex perspectives on learning objectives: stakeholders' beliefs about core objectives based on focus group interviews.

机译:学习目标的复杂观点:利益相关者基于焦点小组访谈对核心目标的信念。

获取原文
获取原文并翻译 | 示例
       

摘要

To understand core curriculum design and involvement of stakeholders. Twelve homogeneous focus group interviews with a total of 88 students, house officers, senior doctors and nurses concerning an undergraduate emergency medicine curriculum. Following content coding of transcripts, we analysed by condensation, categorisation and qualitative content analyses. The focus group participants gave a range of reasons for defining objectives or outcomes. They found their involvement in the process essential. Their argumentation and beliefs differed significantly, revealing 2 opposite perspectives: objectives as context-free theory-based rules versus objectives as personal practice-based guidelines. The students favoured theory-based objectives, which should be defined by experts conclusively as minimum levels and checklists. The senior doctors preferred practice-based objectives, which should be decided in a collaborative, local, continuous process, and should be expressed as ideals and expectations. The houseofficers held both perspectives. Adding to complexity, participants also interpreted competence inconsistently and mixed concepts such as knowledge, observation, supervision, experience and expertise. Participating novices' perspectives on objectives differed completely from expertise level participants. These differences in perspectives should not be underestimated, as they can lead easily to misunderstandings among stakeholders, or between stakeholders, educational leaders and curriculum designers. We recommend that concepts are discussed with stakeholders in order to reach a common understanding and point of departure for discussing outcomes. Differences in perspectives, in our opinion, need to be recognised, respected and incorporated into the curriculum design process.
机译:了解核心课程设计和利益相关者的参与。针对本科急诊医学课程的十二次同质焦点小组访谈,总共对88名学生,内务干事,高级医生和护士进行了采访。笔录内容编码之后,我们通过缩合,分类和定性内容分析进行了分析。焦点小组参与者提出了定义目标或结果的一系列原因。他们发现参与该过程至关重要。他们的论点和信念差异很大,揭示了两种相反的观点:目标是基于无上下文理论的规则,而目标则是基于个人实践的准则。学生们偏爱基于理论的目标,这应该由专家们最终确定为最低水平和清单。高级医生倾向于基于实践的目标,这些目标应通过协作,本地,连续的过程来确定,并应表达为理想和期望。众议院官员持这两种观点。除了增加复杂性外,参与者还不一致地解释了能力,并混淆了诸如知识,观察,监督,经验和专业知识等概念。参与的新手对目标的看法与专门知识水平的参与者完全不同。这些观点的差异不容小under,因为它们很容易导致利益相关者之间或利益相关者,教育领导者和课程设计者之间的误解。我们建议与利益相关者讨论概念,以便就讨论结果达成共识和出发点。我们认为,观点的差异必须得到承认,尊重并纳入课程设计过程。

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