Department of Medicine, Uniformed Services University of the Health Sciences, Bethesda, Maryland, USA.
Department of Medicine, Faculty of Medicine, University of California San Francisco, San Francisco, California, USA.
Med Educ. 2017 Jul;51(7):755-767. doi: 10.1111/medu.13334. Epub 2017 Apr 18.
Although health professions education scholarship units (HPESUs) share a commitment to the production and dissemination of rigorous educational practices and research, they are situated in many different contexts and have a wide range of structures and functions.
In this study, the authors explore the institutional logics common across HPESUs, and how these logics influence the organisation and activities of HPESUs.
The authors analysed interviews with HPESU leaders in Canada (n = 12), Australia (n = 21), New Zealand (n = 3) and the USA (n = 11). Using an iterative process, they engaged in inductive and deductive analyses to identify institutional logics across all participating HPESUs. They explored the contextual factors that influence how these institutional logics impact each HPESU's structure and function.
Participants identified three institutional logics influencing the organisational structure and functions of an HPESU: (i) the logic of financial accountability; (ii) the logic of a cohesive education continuum, and (iii) the logic of academic research, service and teaching. Although most HPESUs embodied all three logics, the power of the logics varied among units. The relative power of each logic influenced leaders' decisions about how members of the unit allocate their time, and what kinds of scholarly contribution and product are valued by the HPESU.
Identifying the configuration of these three logics within and across HPESUs provides insights into the reasons why individual units are structured and function in particular ways. Having a common language in which to discuss these logics can enhance transparency, facilitate evaluation, and help leaders select appropriate indicators of HPESU success.
尽管健康专业教育学术单位(HPESUs)都致力于生产和传播严格的教育实践和研究成果,但它们所处的环境和结构与功能却千差万别。
本研究旨在探讨 HPESUs 共有的制度逻辑,以及这些逻辑如何影响 HPESUs 的组织和活动。
作者对来自加拿大(n=12)、澳大利亚(n=21)、新西兰(n=3)和美国(n=11)的 HPESU 领导人进行了访谈。他们采用迭代式分析方法,对访谈数据进行了归纳和演绎分析,以识别所有参与的 HPESUs 中的制度逻辑。作者还探讨了影响这些制度逻辑如何影响每个 HPESU 的结构和功能的情境因素。
参与者确定了影响 HPESU 组织结构和功能的三个制度逻辑:(i)财务问责制逻辑;(ii)凝聚力教育连续体逻辑;(iii)学术研究、服务和教学逻辑。尽管大多数 HPESUs 都体现了这三个逻辑,但这些逻辑的影响力在各个单位之间存在差异。每个逻辑的相对影响力影响着领导者关于单位成员如何分配时间以及 HPESU 重视哪种类型的学术贡献和产品的决策。
识别 HPESUs 内部和之间的这三个逻辑的配置,可以深入了解为什么个别单位以特定的方式进行组织和运作。用共同的语言来讨论这些逻辑可以提高透明度,促进评估,并帮助领导者选择适当的 HPESU 成功指标。