McElhinney T K
J Clin Ethics. 1993 Fall;4(3):273-5.
Although almost three decades have passed from the early days of the modern medical ethics movement, both articles discussed here manifest variations of some old concerns. First, an acceptance of ethics is incorporated into general requirements and found in specific programs, but ethics is not given great attention by those who decide who will enter the medical profession. Second, in the clinical setting itself, practitioners are busy and the teaching process is placed amidst a multitude of other concerns. And third, the goals for resident and faculty education are remarkably similar to those proposed for undergraduates (awareness, development of analytical skills, involvement in patient care, and so forth). The evaluation of ethics instruction, which has been a concern since the 1960s, has a new face. Upon entering the medical-education setting, humanists found that there was a need for accountability that they had not generally experienced in their university teaching. Yet, they also knew that ethics was different from other medical courses, and that quantifying its special contribution was difficult. Today's general societal emphasis on cost and outcome as measures of the value of education gives consideration of evaluation a critical role. White and Zaner, and most of the other authors cited here, mention the need for systematic accounting of the results of teaching, as well as the difficulty of evaluation. The evaluation of the effectiveness of ethics instruction will remain problematic, yet it is necessary in the changing health-care market. To the degree to which it is possible to communicate knowledge about ethics, residency and other accrediting bodies can provide means to evaluate the results of teaching.(ABSTRACT TRUNCATED AT 250 WORDS)
尽管现代医学伦理运动开展至今已过去近三十年,但这里讨论的两篇文章都体现了一些旧有担忧的变体。首先,伦理接受度被纳入一般要求并在特定项目中得以体现,但决定谁能进入医学行业的人并未给予伦理太多关注。其次,在临床环境本身,从业者很忙,教学过程被置于众多其他事务之中。第三,住院医师和教师教育的目标与本科生教育目标极为相似(提高意识、培养分析技能、参与患者护理等等)。自20世纪60年代以来一直备受关注的伦理教学评估呈现出了新面貌。进入医学教育领域后,人文学者发现需要有问责制,而这在他们的大学教学中通常未曾经历过。然而,他们也明白伦理与其他医学课程不同,量化其特殊贡献很困难。当今社会普遍强调将成本和成果作为教育价值的衡量标准,这使得对评估的考量具有关键作用。怀特和扎纳以及这里引用的大多数其他作者都提到了对教学结果进行系统核算的必要性以及评估的难度。伦理教学效果的评估仍将存在问题,但在不断变化的医疗保健市场中这是必要的。就传播伦理知识的可能性而言,住院医师培训及其他认证机构可以提供评估教学结果的方法。(摘要截选至250词)