Department of Behavioural Medicine, University of KwaZulu-Natal, Durban, South Africa.
Med Teach. 2023 Sep;45(9):991-996. doi: 10.1080/0142159X.2023.2206535. Epub 2023 May 18.
Medical education research is rooted in a long tradition of objectivity, evidence-based methods, and clinical surety. However, the inexorable confidence, health professions research education, and scholarship have in the manifest supremacy of western science as foundational epistemology is questionable. Is this bravado legitimate and if so by what authority? How does this dominance of western epistemic frames determine how we are seen and how we see ourselves as health professions educators scholars and researchers? In what ways does western epistemic dominance influence how and why we conduct research? What do we consider as important to research in health professions education (HPE)? The answers are different depending on where we position ourselves or are placed in a hierarchy of scholarly privilege. I pose that the supremacy of Western scientific epistemology in modern medical education, research, and practice blurs differently colored scientific lenses and silences marginalized voices from legitimate contribution to HPE.
医学教育研究根植于客观、循证方法和临床确定性的悠久传统。然而,健康职业研究教育和学术对西方科学作为基础认识论的明显至上的坚定信心是值得怀疑的。这种虚张声势是合理的吗?如果是,依据什么权威?这种西方认识论框架的主导地位如何决定我们被如何看待以及我们如何看待自己作为健康职业教育者、学者和研究人员?西方认识论的主导地位在何种程度上影响我们进行研究的方式和原因?我们认为健康职业教育研究(HPE)中什么是重要的?答案因我们所处的位置或在学术特权的等级制度中所处的位置而异。我提出,现代医学教育、研究和实践中西方科学认识论的至上地位模糊了不同颜色的科学视角,并使边缘化的声音无法对 HPE 做出合理的贡献。