Complex perspectives on learning objectives: stakeholders' beliefs about core objectives based on focus group interviews.

Full Abstract

OBJECTIVE:
To understand core curriculum design and involvement of stakeholders.

METHODS:
Twelve homogeneous focus group interviews with a total of 88 students, house officers, senior doctors and nurses concerning an undergraduate emergency medicine curriculum. Following content coding of transcripts, we analysed by condensation, categorisation and qualitative content analyses.

RESULTS:
The focus group participants gave a range of reasons for defining objectives or outcomes. They found their involvement in the process essential. Their argumentation and beliefs differed significantly, revealing 2 opposite perspectives:
objectives as context-free theory-based rules versus objectives as personal practice-based guidelines. The students favoured theory-based objectives, which should be defined by experts conclusively as minimum levels and checklists. The senior doctors preferred practice-based objectives, which should be decided in a collaborative, local, continuous process, and should be expressed as ideals and expectations. The house officers held both perspectives. Adding to complexity, participants also interpreted competence inconsistently and mixed concepts such as knowledge, observation, supervision, experience and expertise.

DISCUSSION:
Participating novices' perspectives on objectives differed completely from expertise level participants. These differences in perspectives should not be underestimated, as they can lead easily to misunderstandings among stakeholders, or between stakeholders, educational leaders and curriculum designers. We recommend that concepts are discussed with stakeholders in order to reach a common understanding and point of departure for discussing outcomes. Differences in perspectives, in our opinion, need to be recognised, respected and incorporated into the curriculum design process.

Learn Faster Today Improve your study skills

Author information

Author/s: Morcke, Anne Mette (AM); Wichmann-Hansen, Gitte (G); Nielsen, Dorte Guldbrand (DG); Eika, Berit (B);

Affiliation: Medical Education Unit, Aarhus University, Aarhus, Denmark. amm(-atsign-)medu.au.dk

Journal and publication information

Publication Type: Journal Article; Research Support, Non-U.S. Gov't

Journal: Medical education (Med Educ), published in England. (Language: eng)

Reference: 2006-Jul; vol 40 (issue 7) : pp 675-81

Dates: Created 2006/07/13; Completed 2006/10/30; Revised 2006/11/15;

PMID: 16836541, status: MEDLINE (last retrieval date: 12/26/2008)

Sourced from the National Library of Medicine. Abstract text and other information may be subject to copyright.

External Links for this article (including full text providers, if available):

Click Electronic Full-text Provider Links to see options for finding the electronic full text links to this article. Note there may be a subscription or fee required for access to the full text. See our FAQ for information on finding FREE full text articles.

This article may also be located in paper journal collections available in many libraries. Use the Journal and Publication Information above to find the full article.

MeSH headings (categories)

This article was linked to the MESH Headings shown below.

Attitude of Health Personnel
Clinical Competence - standards
Curriculum
Education, Medical, Undergraduate - organization & administration
Emergency Medicine - education

Focus Groups
Humans
Medical Staff, Hospital - psychology
Personal Satisfaction
Problem-Based Learning

These are the highest related articles currently in the database:

See 100+ related articles.