Theories and Models in Health Sciences Education – a Literature Review

IF 0.5 Q4 EDUCATION & EDUCATIONAL RESEARCH
Miriam Lacasse, Frédéric Douville, C. Gagnon, C. Simard, L. Côté
{"title":"Theories and Models in Health Sciences Education – a Literature Review","authors":"Miriam Lacasse, Frédéric Douville, C. Gagnon, C. Simard, L. Côté","doi":"10.5206/cjsotl-rcacea.2019.3.9477","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Working within a scholarship of teaching and learning (SoTL) perspective requires a rigorous approach based on conceptual frameworks in order to build on previous developments. Nevertheless, in health sciences education, the development, implementation, and evaluation of many educational innovations are carried out without an underlying conceptual framework, partly due to a lack of knowledge about any such applicable framework. The objective of this research was to catalogue conceptual frameworks mentioned in recently published health sciences education articles and to classify them according to their use in various SoTL contexts. A literature review in health sciences education from the January, 2011 to March, 2016 period was carried out using the Pubmed, CINAHL, Embase, ERIC, and PsychINFO databases and based on the following terms: (a) theories and models; (b) education; and (c) health professionals. The titles and abstracts of articles were reviewed for purposes of including research articles, innovation reports, and synthesis articles using or discussing theories or models. Data extraction followed the SoTL classification contexts provided by Simpson et al. (2007). A total of 471 articles were selected, retrieving 324 conceptual theories and models, classified according to Simpson’s classification in one or more categories: Teaching (n=294), Curriculum development (n=182), Mentoring (n=12), Leadership/administration (n=16), and Learner assessment (n=78). In conclusion, this literature review identified conceptual theories and models mentioned in articles published in health sciences education from 2011 to 2016. This repertory highlights the importance of conceptual frameworks in health science education. It should encourage faculty members to work from a SoTL perspective by making it easier to identify conceptual frameworks pertaining to the educational innovations they are addressing.","PeriodicalId":44267,"journal":{"name":"Canadian Journal for the Scholarship of Teaching and Learning","volume":"24 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.5000,"publicationDate":"2019-12-31","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"5","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Canadian Journal for the Scholarship of Teaching and Learning","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.5206/cjsotl-rcacea.2019.3.9477","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"EDUCATION & EDUCATIONAL RESEARCH","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 5

Abstract

Working within a scholarship of teaching and learning (SoTL) perspective requires a rigorous approach based on conceptual frameworks in order to build on previous developments. Nevertheless, in health sciences education, the development, implementation, and evaluation of many educational innovations are carried out without an underlying conceptual framework, partly due to a lack of knowledge about any such applicable framework. The objective of this research was to catalogue conceptual frameworks mentioned in recently published health sciences education articles and to classify them according to their use in various SoTL contexts. A literature review in health sciences education from the January, 2011 to March, 2016 period was carried out using the Pubmed, CINAHL, Embase, ERIC, and PsychINFO databases and based on the following terms: (a) theories and models; (b) education; and (c) health professionals. The titles and abstracts of articles were reviewed for purposes of including research articles, innovation reports, and synthesis articles using or discussing theories or models. Data extraction followed the SoTL classification contexts provided by Simpson et al. (2007). A total of 471 articles were selected, retrieving 324 conceptual theories and models, classified according to Simpson’s classification in one or more categories: Teaching (n=294), Curriculum development (n=182), Mentoring (n=12), Leadership/administration (n=16), and Learner assessment (n=78). In conclusion, this literature review identified conceptual theories and models mentioned in articles published in health sciences education from 2011 to 2016. This repertory highlights the importance of conceptual frameworks in health science education. It should encourage faculty members to work from a SoTL perspective by making it easier to identify conceptual frameworks pertaining to the educational innovations they are addressing.
健康科学教育的理论与模型——文献综述
在教与学学术(SoTL)的视角下工作需要基于概念框架的严格方法,以便在以前的发展基础上建立。然而,在卫生科学教育中,许多教育创新的发展、实施和评价都是在没有基本概念框架的情况下进行的,部分原因是缺乏对任何此类适用框架的了解。这项研究的目的是对最近发表的健康科学教育文章中提到的概念框架进行分类,并根据它们在各种SoTL背景下的使用情况对它们进行分类。采用Pubmed、CINAHL、Embase、ERIC和PsychINFO数据库,对2011年1月至2016年3月的健康科学教育领域的文献进行综述,基于以下术语:(A)理论和模型;(b)教育;(c)卫生专业人员。对文章的标题和摘要进行审查,以纳入使用或讨论理论或模型的研究文章、创新报告和综合文章。数据提取遵循Simpson等人(2007)提供的SoTL分类上下文。共有471篇文章被选择,检索了324个概念理论和模型,根据辛普森的分类分为一个或多个类别:教学(n=294),课程开发(n=182),指导(n=12),领导/管理(n=16)和学习者评估(n=78)。综上所述,本文献综述确定了2011年至2016年在健康科学教育期刊上发表的文章中提到的概念理论和模型。该剧目突出了概念框架在健康科学教育中的重要性。它应该鼓励教师从SoTL的角度来工作,使其更容易识别与他们正在处理的教育创新有关的概念框架。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
14
审稿时长
8 weeks
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信