Beyond the Lamppost: A Proposal for a Fourth Wave of Education for Collaboration
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Interprofessional education (IPE) is an increasingly popular educational model that aims to educate health care students to be better collaborators by enabling them to learn with, from, and about each other. IPE's rising popularity is evident in the increase in scholarship on this topic over the last few decades. In this Perspective, the authors briefly describe three historical "waves" of IPE: managing the health workforce through shared curriculum, maximizing population health through health workforce planning, and fixing individuals to fix health care. Using insights from the social sciences and past practice, they then discuss six reasons why the current third wave of IPE is likely to fall short of meeting its goals, including that (1) IPE is logistically complex and costly, (2) IPE is developmentally inappropriate, (3) the link between IPE and key outcomes is still missing, (4) IPE insufficiently engages with theory, (5) IPE rarely addresses power and conflict, and (6) health care is an inertial system that IPE is unlikely to change. The authors conclude by sharing their vision for a fourth wave of education for collaboration, addressing workplace systems and structures, which would combine undergraduate, uniprofessional education for collaboration with practice-based interventions.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".