General principles for establishing programs to support professionalism and professional identity formation at the undergraduate and postgraduate levels
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
When the first edition of this book was written, there was a substantial body of information in the literature on how to design and implement programs to teach professionalism at the undergraduate and postgraduate levels. It was possible to elaborate a set of principles on the subject based on both our experience and that of others. 1–3 As we transition to recommending the addition of supporting professional identity formation as the educational objective, equivalent experience is not reflected in the medical literature. Any principles designed to assist individuals in establishing such programs must be derived from the literature on identity formation outside of medicine, 4,5 from the thoughts and recommendations of those who have studied professional identity formation in physicians, 6–11 and from the recommendations of authors who have contributed to this book. As is emphasized repeatedly in this book, the experience gained in teaching professionalism has been enormously valuable and provides a foundation upon which educational programs on professional identity formation can be built. While some of the principles elaborated to help design programs of teaching professionalism are still useful, new principles are required for new educational objectives. Any set of principles must be compatible with the complex nature of the medical curriculum, through which individuals become transformed from members of the lay public into skilled physicians. 12 When the teaching of professionalism was the educational objective, there was no unanimity of opinion on how best to organize the teaching, with two schools of thought being predominant. Those who emphasized the need for detailed knowledge of the subject tended to stress formal instruction, making the nature of professionalism explicit. 13–15 They defined professionalism, listed its attributes, emphasized the role of trust, and stressed its importance to medicine's relationship to society. Others believed that the teaching of professionalism should be approached primarily as a moral endeavor, emphasizing altruism and service, stressing the importance of role modeling, efforts to promote self-awareness, community service, and other methods of acquiring experiential knowledge. While it would be wrong to overemphasize the differences between these two approaches, they did exist. Establishing professional identity formation as the educational goal quite effectively brings the two groups together. As medicine is a community of practice that students and residents wish to join (see Chapters 1 and 5), the values and norms of the community must be widely known and communicated to learners.
Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.
Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier
Prédiction machine sur la base complète
Imitation des enseignantsNi prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Le volet Gemma est une étiquette directe du modèle pour chaque travail de la base, lue sur la notice réduite au titre. Le volet Codex est un classifieur appris des 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et calibré sur les taux pondérés de l'échantillon; les champs sans appui suffisant ne portent aucun appel Codex. Le mode candidate est l'union des deux volets; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont pas des étiquettes humaines.
Scores du classifieur distillé par catégorie (deux têtes)
| Catégorie | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Métarecherche | 0,004 | 0,003 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,001 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,001 | 0,001 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,002 | 0,006 |
| Communication savante | 0,005 | 0,004 |
| Science ouverte | 0,001 | 0,003 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,002 | 0,005 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,010 | 0,005 |
Scores machine (provisoires)
Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.
Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découleClassification
machine, non validéePrédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule source (Gemma direct ou Codex distillé), pas un consensus.
Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».