Shifting the narrative and practice of assessing professionalism in dietetics education: An Australasian qualitative study.
assessment
curriculum
dietetics
education
health professions
professionalism
Journal
Nutrition & dietetics: the journal of the Dietitians Association of Australia
ISSN: 1747-0080
Titre abrégé: Nutr Diet
Pays: Australia
ID NLM: 101143078
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
06 2023
06 2023
Historique:
revised:
10
01
2023
received:
01
11
2022
accepted:
01
02
2023
medline:
5
6
2023
pubmed:
15
3
2023
entrez:
14
3
2023
Statut:
ppublish
Résumé
We aimed to explore current approaches to assessing professionalism in dietetics education in Australia and New Zealand, and asked the questions what is working well and what needs to improve? We employed a qualitative interpretive approach and conducted interviews with academic and practitioner (workplace-based) educators (total sample n = 78) with a key stake in dietetics education across Australia and New Zealand. Data were analysed using team-based, framework analysis. Our findings suggest significant shifts in dietetics education in the area of professionalism assessment. Professionalism assessment is embedded in formal curricula of dietetics programs and is occurring in university and placement settings. In particular, advances have been demonstrated in those programs assessing professionalism as part of the programmatic assessment. Progress has been enabled by philosophical and curricula shifts; clearer articulation and shared understandings of professionalism standards; enhanced learner agency and reduced power distance; early identification and intervention of professionalism lapses; and increased confidence and capabilities of educators. These findings suggest there have been considerable advances in professionalism assessment in recent years with shifts in practice in approaching professionalism through a more interpretivist lens, holistically and more student-centred. Professionalism assessment in dietetics education is a shared responsibility and requires further development and transformation to more fully embed and strengthen curricula approaches across programs. Further work should investigate strategies to build safer learning cultures and capacity for professionalism conversations and in strengthening approaches to remediation.
Identifiants
pubmed: 36916155
doi: 10.1111/1747-0080.12804
doi:
Types de publication
Journal Article
Langues
eng
Sous-ensembles de citation
IM
Pagination
240-252Commentaires et corrections
Type : CommentIn
Informations de copyright
© 2023 The Authors. Nutrition & Dietetics published by John Wiley & Sons Australia, Ltd on behalf of Dietitians Australia.
Références
Dietitians Australia. National Competency Standards for Dietitians in Australia. Dietitians Australia; 2021.
New Zealand Dietitians Board. Professional Standards and Competencies for Dietitians of New Zealand. New Zealand Dietitians Board; 2017.
Palermo C, Capra S, Ash S, Beck E, Truby H, Jolly B. Professional Competence Standards, Learning Outcomes and Assessment: Designing a Valid Strategy for Nutrition and Dietetics. Office for Learning and Teaching, Australian Government; 2014.
Wilkinson TJ, Wade WB, Knock LD. A blueprint to assess professionalism: results of a systematic review. Acad Med. 2009;81:551-558.
Monrouxe L, Rees C. Healthcare Professionalism: Improving Practice through Reflections on Workplace Dilemmas. John Wiley & Sons Ltd.; 2017:1-259.
Hodges B, Paul R, Ginsburg S, The Ottawa Consensus Group Members. Assessment of professionalism: from where have we come-to where are we going? An update from the Ottawa Consensus Group on the assessment of professionalism. Med Teach. 2019;41(3):249-255.
Hodges BD, Ginsburg S, Cruess R, et al. Assessment of professionalism: recommendations from the Ottawa 2010 conference. Med Teach. 2011;33(5):354-363.
Dart J, McCall L, Ash S, Blair M, Twohig C, Palermo C. Toward a global definition of professionalism for nutrition and dietetics education: a systematic review of the literature. J Acad Nutr Diet. 2019;119(6):957-971.
Dart J, McCall L, Ash S, Rees C. Conceptualizing professionalism in dietetics: an Australasian qualitative study. J Acad Nutr Diet. 2022;122(11):2087-2096.
Gibson S, Molloy E. Professional skill development needs of newly graduated health professionals: a systematic literature review. FoHPE. 2012;13(3):71-83.
Palermo C, Beck EJ, Chung A, et al. Work-based assessment: qualitative perspectives of novice nutrition and dietetic educators. J Hum Nutr Diet. 2014;27:513-521.
Palermo C, Gibson SJ, Dart J, Whelan K, Hay M. Programmatic assessment of competence in dietetics: a new frontier. J Acad Nutr Diet. 2017;117(2):175-179.
Wilkinson TJ, Tweed MJ, Egan TG, et al. Joining the dots: conditional pass and programmatic assessment enhances recognition of problems with professionalism and factors hampering student progress. BMC Med Educ. 2011;11(1):1-9.
Mahboob U, Evans P. Assessment of professionalism in integrated curriculum: the faculty's perspective. J Coll Physicians Surg Pak. 2013;23(10):771-774.
Schut S, Maggio LA, Heeneman S, van Tartwijk J, van der Vleuten C, Driessen E. Where the rubber meets the road-an integrative review of programmatic assessment in health care professions education. Perspect Med Educ. 2021;10(1):6-13.
Dart J, Twohig C, Anderson A, et al. The value of programmatic assessment in supporting educators and students to succeed: a qualitative evaluation. J Acad Nutr Diet. 2021;121(9):1732-1740.
Jamieson J, Palermo C, Hay M, Gibson S. Assessment practices for dietetics trainees: a systematic review. J Acad Nutr Diet. 2019;119(2):272-292.
Morgan K, Campbell KL, Sargeant S, Reidlinger DP. Preparing our future workforce: a qualitative exploration of dietetics practice educators' experiences. J Hum Nutr Diet. 2019;32(2):247-258.
Jamieson J, Jenkins G, Beatty S, Palermo C. Designing programmes of assessment: a participatory approach. Med Teach. 2017;39(11):1182-1188.
Jamieson J, Hay M, Gibson S, Palermo C. Implementing programmatic assessment transforms supervisor attitudes: an explanatory sequential mixed methods study. Med Teach. 2021;43(6):709-717.
Burr V. Social Constructionism. Routledge; 2015.
Rees CE, Crampton PE, Monrouxe LV. Re-visioning academic medicine through a constructionist lens. Acad Med. 2020;95(6):846-850.
Bunniss S, Kelly DR. Research paradigms in medical education research. Med Educ. 2010;44(4):358-366.
Barry CA, Britten N, Barber N, Bradley C, Stevenson F. Using reflexivity to optimize teamwork in qualitative research. Qual Health Research. 1999;9:26-44.
Kuper A, Lingard L, Levinson W. Critically appraising qualitative research. BMJ. 2008;337:687-689.
Malterud K, Siersma V, Guassora A. Sample size in qualitative interview studies: guided by information power. Qual Health Research. 2016;26:1753-1760.
Dart J, Ash S, McCall L, Rees CE. “We are our own worst enemies”: A qualitative exploration of sociocultural factors in dietetics education influencing student-dietitian transitions. J Acad Nutr Diet. 2022;122(11):2036-2049.
Ritchie J, Spencer L. Qualitative data analysis for applied policy research. Analyzing Qualitative Data. Routledge; 2002:187-208.
Palermo C. Transforming Competency-Based Assessment in Nutrition and Dietetics. Final report. Office of Teaching and Learning; 2016.
Dart J. Expanding perspectives on professionalism in dietetics. Nutr & Diet. 2022;79(4):424-426.
Bacon R, Kellett J, Dart J, et al. A consensus model: shifting assessment practices in dietetics tertiary education. Nutr Diet. 2018;75(4):418-430.
Palermo C. Leadership and practice in times of complexity and uncertainty. Nutr & Diet. 2020;77(5):487-489.
Heeneman S, de Jong LH, Dawson LJ, et al. Ottawa 2020 consensus statement for programmatic assessment-1. Agreement on the principles. Med Teach. 2021;43(10):1139-1148.
Van Der Vleuten C, Schuwirth L, Driessen E, et al. A model for programmatic assessment fit for purpose. Med Teach. 2012;34(3):205-214.
Dudek NL, Marks MB, Regehr G. Failure to fail: the perspectives of clinical supervisors. Acad Med. 2005;80(10):S84-S87.
Yepes-Rios M, Dudek N, Duboyce R, Curtis J, Allard RJ, Varpio L. The failure to fail underperforming trainees in health professions education: a BEME systematic review: BEME Guide No. 42. Med Teach. 2016;38(11):1092-1099.
Mak-van der Vossen M. ‘Failure to fail’: the teacher's dilemma revisited. Med Educ. 2019;53(2):108-110.
Hughes LJ, Mitchell ML, Johnston AN. Moving forward: barriers and enablers to failure to fail-a mixed methods meta-integration. Nurse Educ Today. 2021;98:104666.
Chou CL, Kalet A, Costa MJ, Cleland J, Winston K. Guidelines: the dos, don'ts and don't knows of remediation in medical education. Perspect Med Educ. 2019;8(6):322-338.
Kalet A, Chou CL. Remediation in Medical Education. Springer; 2014.
Brennan N, Price T, Archer J, Brett J. Remediating professionalism lapses in medical students and doctors: a systematic review. Med Educ. 2020;54(3):196-204.
Ellaway RH, Chou CL, Kalet AL. Situating remediation: accommodating success and failure in medical education systems. Acad Med. 2018;93(3):391-398.
Mills LM, Boscardin C, Joyce EA, Ten Cate O, O'Sullivan PS. Emotion in remediation: a scoping review of the medical education literature. Med Educ. 2021;55(12):1350-1362.
Mak-van der Vossen MC, de la Croix A, Teherani A, van Mook WN, Croiset G, Kusurkar RA. A road map for attending to medical students' professionalism lapses. Acad Med. 2019;94(4):570-578.
Lucey C, Souba W. Perspective: the problem with the problem of professionalism. Acad Med. 2010;85(6):1018-1024.
Kalet A, Chou CL, Ellaway RH. To fail is human: remediating remediation in medical education. Perspect Med Educ. 2017;6(6):418-424.
Ramani S, Könings KD, Ginsburg S, van der Vleuten CP. Twelve tips to promote a feedback culture with a growth mind-set: swinging the feedback pendulum from recipes to relationships. Med Teach. 2019;41(6):625-631.
Telio S, Ajjawi R, Regehr G. The “educational alliance” as a framework for reconceptualizing feedback in medical education. Acad Med. 2015;90(5):609-614.
McGinness HT, Caldwell PH, Gunasekera H, Scott KM. An educational intervention to increase student engagement in feedback. Med Teach. 2020;42(11):1289-1297.