{"title":"播客在健康人文教育中的应用","authors":"N. Carlin","doi":"10.1093/MED/9780190636890.003.0021","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"The discussion of cases in bioethics education—especially clinical ethics education in medical schools—has been the leading pedagogical strategy for several decades. There are good reasons for this. One is that because time spent on bioethics education in health professional schools is limited, students need to be introduced to key issues quickly. Cases accomplish this, with the added benefit that this pedagogical approach is structurally similar to the teaching of other clinical topics (e.g., morbidity and mortality rounds, team-based learning classes, and standardized patient encounters). Another is that the dominant theoretical approach to teaching bioethics is principlism, which involves the application of principles to scenarios in clinical ethics, research ethics, public health ethics, etc. Sometimes the discussion of cases centers on “classic cases,” such as that of Karen Ann Quinlan or of Terri Schiavo. Other times the discussion of cases entails focusing on short, fabricated, and specialty-related vignettes in, for example, psychiatric ethics. But a problem with case-based approaches is that the presentation of these cases often seems too “thin,” and therefore the discussion of the issues raised by a given case may be superficial. Thus, other pedagogical approaches in health professional education have emerged in recent years, narrative medicine being one of the most prominent. In this chapter, a new approach will be introduced: using podcasts in health humanities education. This approach retains the advantages of using cases but adds the advantages of narrative approaches.","PeriodicalId":272911,"journal":{"name":"Teaching Health Humanities","volume":" March","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2019-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Using Podcasts in Health Humanities Education\",\"authors\":\"N. Carlin\",\"doi\":\"10.1093/MED/9780190636890.003.0021\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"The discussion of cases in bioethics education—especially clinical ethics education in medical schools—has been the leading pedagogical strategy for several decades. There are good reasons for this. One is that because time spent on bioethics education in health professional schools is limited, students need to be introduced to key issues quickly. Cases accomplish this, with the added benefit that this pedagogical approach is structurally similar to the teaching of other clinical topics (e.g., morbidity and mortality rounds, team-based learning classes, and standardized patient encounters). Another is that the dominant theoretical approach to teaching bioethics is principlism, which involves the application of principles to scenarios in clinical ethics, research ethics, public health ethics, etc. Sometimes the discussion of cases centers on “classic cases,” such as that of Karen Ann Quinlan or of Terri Schiavo. Other times the discussion of cases entails focusing on short, fabricated, and specialty-related vignettes in, for example, psychiatric ethics. But a problem with case-based approaches is that the presentation of these cases often seems too “thin,” and therefore the discussion of the issues raised by a given case may be superficial. Thus, other pedagogical approaches in health professional education have emerged in recent years, narrative medicine being one of the most prominent. In this chapter, a new approach will be introduced: using podcasts in health humanities education. This approach retains the advantages of using cases but adds the advantages of narrative approaches.\",\"PeriodicalId\":272911,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Teaching Health Humanities\",\"volume\":\" March\",\"pages\":\"0\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2019-01-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Teaching Health Humanities\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1093/MED/9780190636890.003.0021\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Teaching Health Humanities","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1093/MED/9780190636890.003.0021","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
摘要
几十年来,生命伦理学教育中的案例讨论,特别是医学院的临床伦理学教育,一直是主要的教学策略。这是有充分理由的。一是由于卫生专业学校用于生物伦理教育的时间有限,需要迅速向学生介绍关键问题。案例实现了这一目标,其额外的好处是,这种教学方法在结构上类似于其他临床主题的教学(例如,发病率和死亡率查房,以团队为基础的学习课程,以及标准化的患者接触)。另一种观点是,讲授生命伦理学的主要理论方法是原则主义,即将原则应用于临床伦理学、研究伦理学、公共卫生伦理学等领域。有时,对案例的讨论集中在“经典案例”上,比如凯伦·安·昆兰(Karen Ann Quinlan)或特丽·夏沃(Terri Schiavo)的案例。其他时候,对案例的讨论需要集中在简短的、虚构的和与专业相关的小插曲上,例如,精神病学伦理。但是,基于案例的方法的一个问题是,这些案例的呈现往往显得过于“单薄”,因此,对给定案例提出的问题的讨论可能是肤浅的。因此,近年来出现了卫生专业教育的其他教学方法,叙事医学是其中最突出的一种。在本章中,将介绍一种新的方法:在健康人文教育中使用播客。这种方法保留了用例的优点,但增加了叙述方法的优点。
The discussion of cases in bioethics education—especially clinical ethics education in medical schools—has been the leading pedagogical strategy for several decades. There are good reasons for this. One is that because time spent on bioethics education in health professional schools is limited, students need to be introduced to key issues quickly. Cases accomplish this, with the added benefit that this pedagogical approach is structurally similar to the teaching of other clinical topics (e.g., morbidity and mortality rounds, team-based learning classes, and standardized patient encounters). Another is that the dominant theoretical approach to teaching bioethics is principlism, which involves the application of principles to scenarios in clinical ethics, research ethics, public health ethics, etc. Sometimes the discussion of cases centers on “classic cases,” such as that of Karen Ann Quinlan or of Terri Schiavo. Other times the discussion of cases entails focusing on short, fabricated, and specialty-related vignettes in, for example, psychiatric ethics. But a problem with case-based approaches is that the presentation of these cases often seems too “thin,” and therefore the discussion of the issues raised by a given case may be superficial. Thus, other pedagogical approaches in health professional education have emerged in recent years, narrative medicine being one of the most prominent. In this chapter, a new approach will be introduced: using podcasts in health humanities education. This approach retains the advantages of using cases but adds the advantages of narrative approaches.