Academy for Innovation in Medical Education, Faculty of Medicine, University of Ottawa, ON, Canada.
Adv Health Sci Educ Theory Pract. 2012 Aug;17(3):357-67. doi: 10.1007/s10459-011-9313-4. Epub 2011 Jul 3.
Recent debates question the extent to which adopting an educational innovation requires compromise between the innovation's original design and the adoption site's context. Through compromises, the innovation's fundamental principles may be transferred, transformed, or abandoned. This paper analyzes such compromises during the piloting of Team-Based Learning (TBL). We ask: When is the process of transferring an innovation actually a process of transformation? This study is an autoethnography of our research team's implementation process. Autoethnographies are personalized accounts where authors draw on their own experiences to extend understanding of a particular topic. To conduct this autoethnography, we used an in-depth, interactive interview with the piloting clinician educator. In the analysis of TBL's fundamental principles, some aspects of the principles transferred easily, while others were transformed. Analysis raised concerns that the transformations threatened the foundational principles of TBL. While an educational innovation's techniques may seem to be surface structures, they are realizations of deeper fundamental principles. The fundamental principles are themselves realizations of the innovation's foundational philosophy. When techniques and/or principles are modified to a context, it is important to analyze if the modifications continue to uphold the innovation's philosophy.
最近的一些辩论质疑在多大程度上采用教育创新需要在创新的原始设计和采用地点的背景之间进行妥协。通过妥协，创新的基本原则可能会被转移、转变或放弃。本文分析了在基于团队的学习（TBL）试点过程中的这些妥协。我们提出：当转移创新的过程实际上是一个转变的过程时，会发生什么？这项研究是我们研究团队实施过程的自传体。自传体是作者利用自己的经验来扩展对特定主题的理解的个性化叙述。为了进行这种自传体研究，我们对试点临床教育者进行了深入的互动采访。在对 TBL 基本原则的分析中，原则的某些方面很容易转移，而其他方面则发生了转变。分析引起了人们的担忧，即这些转变威胁到了 TBL 的基本原则。虽然教育创新的技术似乎是表面结构，但它们是更深层次基本原则的体现。基本原则本身就是创新基础哲学的体现。当技术和/或原则被修改为一个背景时，分析修改是否继续坚持创新的哲学是很重要的。
