KENNETH D. ROYAL; JASON C.B. RINALDO
Volume 4, Issue 3 , July 2016, , Pages 150-154
Abstract
Introduction: For some time now the field of medical educationhas been criticized by many of its stakeholders. Countless debateshave been presented in the literature regarding the quality ...
Read More
Introduction: For some time now the field of medical educationhas been criticized by many of its stakeholders. Countless debateshave been presented in the literature regarding the quality ofmedical education research, adequacy of methodological rigor,and other concerns.Methods: At present, the views expressed have largely come fromphysicians and individuals with less familiarity with educationscience.Results: As prolific educational researchers with Ph.Ds inEducation and Psychology, we offer a critique of medicaleducation’s apparent identity crisis and address what we believeare some of the most significant problems continuing to impedethe field of medical education from catching up with the broaderfield of education. We close with specific recommendations forimproving the overall state of medical education.Conclusion: Finally, both editors and reviewers for medicaleducation journals need to abandon the hegemonic viewsregarding research design. Thus, research designs that many in theclinical sciences often perceive as ‘weak’ are entirely appropriatein education research fields.Keywords: Medical education; Education; Medicine; Education research; Quality; Research design
