Search

In this Invited Commentary, the author examines two curated Academic Medicine volumes showcasing foundational research and key writings on professionalism in medicine and medical education, collectively spanning from 1994 to 2016. The author reviews the beginnings of the medical professionalism movement and examines how the trends and themes reflected in the first volume-specifically the work to define, assess, and institutionalize professionalism-capture key elements in this movement. He then examines how the trends and themes in the second volume align with and build on those from the first, noting two themes that extend across a number of second volume articles: a unit-of-analysis issue and the challenge of context. The author identifies several topics that have yet to be adequately mined and calls attention to two bridge-spanning articles in the second volume that, respectively, take us into the future (around the topic of identify formation) and back to the past (on the hidden curriculum). Finally, the author reflects on "directions home" in medicine's noble search for its moral core and collective identity.

Current controversies in medical education associated with professionalism, including disagreements about curriculum, pedagogy, and assessment, are rooted in part in the differing frameworks that are used to address professionalism. Three dominant frameworks, which have evolved in the medical education community, are described. The oldest framework is virtue based and focuses on the inner habits of the heart, the development of moral character and reasoning, plus humanistic qualities of caring and compassion: The good physician is a person of character. The second framework is behavior based, which emphasizes milestones, competencies, and measurement of observable behaviors: The good physician is a person who consistently demonstrates competence in performing patient care tasks. The third framework is identity formation, with a focus on identity development and socialization into a community of practice: The good physician integrates into his or her identity a set of values and dispositions consonant with the physician community and aspires to a professional identity reflected in the very best physicians. Although each professionalism framework is useful and valid, the field of medical education is currently engaged in several different discourses resulting in misunderstanding and differing recommendations for strategies to facilitate professionalism. In this article, the assumptions and contributions of each framework are described to provide greater insight into the nature of professionalism. By examining each discourse in detail, underlying commonalities and differences can be highlighted to assist educators in more effectively creating professionalism curricula, pedagogy, and assessment.

In this review article we describe the current scope, methods, and contents of medical ethics education in medical schools in Western English speaking countries (mainly the United Kingdom, the United States, and Australia). We assess the strengths and weaknesses of current medical ethics curricula, and students' levels of satisfaction with different teaching approaches and their reported difficulties in learning medical ethics concepts and applying them in clinical practice. We identify three main challenges for medical ethics education: counteracting the bad effects of the "hidden curriculum," teaching students how to apply ethical knowledge and critical thinking to real cases in clinical practice, and shaping future doctors' right character through ethics education. We suggest ways in which these challenges could be addressed. On the basis of this analysis, we propose practical guidelines for designing, implementing, teaching, and assessing a medical ethics program within a four-year medical course., (Copyright 2016 The Journal of Clinical Ethics. All rights reserved.)