Have a personal or library account? Click to login
What Stops Fairness from Emerging in Assessment? The Forces on a Complex Adaptive System Cover

What Stops Fairness from Emerging in Assessment? The Forces on a Complex Adaptive System

Perspectives on Medical Education
Volume 12 (2023): Issue 1
By: Nyoli Valentine,  Steven J. Durning,  Ernst Michael Shanahan and  Lambert Schuwirth  
Open Access
|Aug 2023

References

  1. 1van der Vleuten CM, Schuwirth LM. Assessing professional competence: from methods to programmes. Med Educ. 2005; 39(3): 309–17. DOI: 10.1111/j.1365-2929.2005.02094.x
    Back to article
  2. 2Schuwirth LW, van der Vleuten CM. A history of assessment in medical education. Adv Health Sci Educ Theory Pract. 2020; 25(5): 1045–56. DOI: 10.1007/s10459-020-10003-0
    Back to article
  3. 3ten Cate O. Entrustability of professional activities and competency-based training. Med Educ. 2005; 39(12): 1176–7. DOI: 10.1111/j.1365-2929.2005.02341.x
    Back to article
  4. 4Valentine N, Schuwirth L. Identifying the narrative used by educators in articulating judgement of performance. Perspect Med Educ. 2019; 8(2): 83–9. DOI: 10.1007/S40037-019-0500-Y
    Back to article
  5. 5Greenhalgh T, Papoutsi C. Studying complexity in health services research: desperately seeking an overdue paradigm shift. BMC Med. 2018; 16(1): 95. DOI: 10.1186/s12916-018-1089-4
    Back to article
  6. 6Long KM, McDermott F, Meadows GN. Being pragmatic about healthcare complexity: our experiences applying complexity theory and pragmatism to health services research. BMC Med. 2018; 16(1): 94. DOI: 10.1186/s12916-018-1087-6
    Back to article
  7. 7Bowe CM, Armstrong E. Assessment for Systems Learning: A Holistic Assessment Framework to Support Decision Making Across the Medical Education Continuum. Acad Med. 2017; 92(5): 585–92. DOI: 10.1097/ACM.0000000000001321
    Back to article
  8. 8Fraser SW, Greenhalgh T. Coping with complexity: educating for capability. BMJ. 2001; 323(7316): 799–803. DOI: 10.1136/bmj.323.7316.799
    Back to article
  9. 9Mennin S. Self-organisation, integration and curriculum in the complex world of medical education. Med Educ. 2010; 44(1): 20–30. DOI: 10.1111/j.1365-2923.2009.03548.x
    Back to article
  10. 10Cristancho S, Field E, Lingard L. What is the state of complexity science in medical education research? Med Educ. 2019; 53(1): 95–104. DOI: 10.1111/medu.13651
    Back to article
  11. 11Plsek PE, Greenhalgh T. Complexity science: The challenge of complexity in health care. BMJ. 2001; 323(7313): 625–628. DOI: 10.1136/bmj.323.7313.625
    Back to article
  12. 12Reed JE, et al. Simple rules for evidence translation in complex systems: A qualitative study. BMC Med. 2018; 16(1): 92. DOI: 10.1186/s12916-018-1076-9
    Back to article
  13. 13Van Beurden EK, et al. Making sense in a complex landscape: how the Cynefin Framework from Complex Adaptive Systems Theory can inform health promotion practice. Health Promot Int. 2013; 28(1): 73–83. DOI: 10.1093/heapro/dar089
    Back to article
  14. 14Kurtz CF, Snowden DJ. The new dynamics of strategy: Sense-making in a complex and complicated world. IBM Syst J. 2003; 42(3): 462–83. DOI: 10.1147/sj.423.0462
    Back to article
  15. 15Norman G. Chaos, complexity and complicatedness: lessons from rocket science. Med Educ. 2011; 45(6): 549–59. DOI; 10.1111/j.1365-2923.2011.03945.x
    Back to article
  16. 16Hauer KE, Lucey CR. Core Clerkship Grading: The Illusion of Objectivity. Acad Med. 2019; 94(4): 469–72. DOI: 10.1097/ACM.0000000000002413
    Back to article
  17. 17Hodges B. Assessment in the post-psychometric era: learning to love the subjective and collective. Med Teach. 2013; 35(7): 564–8. DOI: 10.3109/0142159X.2013.789134
    Back to article
  18. 18Rotthoff T. Standing up for Subjectivity in the Assessment of Competencies. GMS J Med Educ. 2018; 35(3): Doc29.
    Back to article
  19. 19Schuwirth LW, van der Vleuten CM. A plea for new psychometric models in educational assessment. Med Educ. 2006; 40(4): 296–300. DOI: 10.1111/j.1365-2929.2006.02405.x
    Back to article
  20. 20Eva KW, Hodges BD. Scylla or Charybdis? Can we navigate between objectification and judgement in assessment? Med Educ. 2012. 46(9): 914–9. DOI: 10.1111/j.1365-2923.2012.04310.x
    Back to article
  21. 21Govaerts M, van der Vleuten CM. Validity in work-based assessment: expanding our horizons. Med Educ. 2013; 47(12): 1164–74. DOI: 10.1111/medu.12289
    Back to article
  22. 22Valentine N, et al. The pursuit of fairness in assessment: Looking beyond the objective. Med Teach. 2022; 44(4): 353–9. DOI: 10.1080/0142159X.2022.2031943
    Back to article
  23. 23Ten Cate O, Regehr G. The Power of Subjectivity in the Assessment of Medical Trainees. Acad Med. 2019; 94(3): 333–7. DOI: 10.1097/ACM.0000000000002495
    Back to article
  24. 24Valentine N, et al. Making it fair: Learners’ and assessors’ perspectives of the attributes of fair judgement. Med Educ. 2021; 55(9): 1056–1066. DOI: 10.1111/medu.14574
    Back to article
  25. 25Valentine N, et al. Fairness in human judgement in assessment: a hermeneutic literature review and conceptual framework. Adv Health Sci Educ Theory Pract. 2021; 26(2): 713–38. DOI: 10.1007/s10459-020-10002-1
    Back to article
  26. 26Valentine N, et al. Fairness in Assessment: Identifying a Complex Adaptive System. Perspect Med Educ. 2023; 12(1): 315–26. DOI: 10.5334/pme.993
    Back to article
  27. 27Olmos-Vega FM, et al. A practical guide to reflexivity in qualitative research: AMEE Guide No. 149. Med Teach. 2022; 1–11. DOI: 10.1080/0142159X.2022.2057287
    Back to article
  28. 28Varpio L, et al. Shedding the cobra effect: problematising thematic emergence, triangulation, saturation and member checking. Med Educ. 2017; 51(1): 40–50. DOI: 10.1111/medu.13124
    Back to article
  29. 29Bergman E, et al. AM Last Page: A Guide to Research Paradigms Relevant to Medical Education. Acad Med. 2012; 87(4): 545. DOI: 10.1097/ACM.0b013e31824fbc8a
    Back to article
  30. 30Bleakley A, Cleland J. Sticking with messy realities: how ‘thinking with complexity’ can inform healthcare education research. In: Cleland J, Durning S (eds.) Researching Medical Education. West Sussex: Wiley-Blackwell; 2015: 81–92. DOI: 10.1002/9781118838983.ch8
    Back to article
  31. 31Durning SJ, et al. Perspective: Redefining Context in the Clinical Encounter: Implications for Research and Training in Medical Education. Acad Med. 2010; 85(5): 894–901. DOI: 10.1097/ACM.0b013e3181d7427c
    Back to article
  32. 32Stalmeijer RE, McNaughton N, Van Mook WN. Using focus groups in medical education research: AMEE Guide No. 91. Med Teach. 2014; 36(11): 923–39. DOI: 10.3109/0142159X.2014.917165
    Back to article
  33. 33Cristancho SM, Taylor T. The agility of ants: lessons for grappling with complexity in health care teamwork. Med Educ. 2019; 53(9): 855–7. DOI: 10.1111/medu.13937
    Back to article
  34. 34Woodruff JN. Solutionism: A study of rigour in complex systems. Med Educ. 2021; 55(1): 12–15. DOI: 10.1111/medu.14377
    Back to article
  35. 35Holden LM. Complex adaptive systems: concept analysis. J Adv Nurs. 2005; 52(6): 651–7. DOI: 10.1111/j.1365-2648.2005.03638.x
    Back to article
  36. 36Woodruff JN. Accounting for complexity in medical education: a model of adaptive behaviour in medicine. Med Educ. 2019; 53(9): 861–73. DOI: 10.1111/medu.13905
    Back to article
  37. 37Lipsitz LA, Goldberger AL. Loss of ‘complexity’ and aging: potential applications of fractals and chaos theory to senescence. JAMA. 1992; 267(13): 1806–9. DOI: 10.1001/jama.1992.03480130122036
    Back to article
  38. 38Holbrook MB. Adventures in complexity: An essay on dynamic open complex adaptive systems, butterfly effects, self-organizing order, coevolution, the ecological perspective, fitness landscapes, market spaces, emergent beauty at the edge of chaos, and all that jazz. Acad Mark Sci. 2003; 6(1): 1–184.
    Back to article
  39. 39Tsoukas H, Dooley KJ. Introduction to the special issue: Towards the ecological style: Embracing complexity in organizational research. Organ Stud. 2011; 32(6) 729–35. DOI: 10.1177/0170840611410805
    Back to article
  40. 40Golberger A. Non-linear dynamics for clinicians: chaos theory, fractals, and complexity at the bedside. The Lancet. 1996; 347(9011): 1312–4. DOI: 10.1016/S0140-6736(96)90948-4
    Back to article
  41. 41Boursicot K, et al. Performance assessment: Consensus statement and recommendations from the 2020 Ottawa Conference. Med Teach. 2021; 43(1): 58–67. DOI: 10.1080/0142159X.2020.1830052
    Back to article
DOI: https://doi.org/10.5334/pme.994 | Journal eISSN: 2212-277X
Journal RSS Feed
Language: English
Submitted on: Mar 31, 2023
Accepted on: Aug 7, 2023
Published on: Aug 24, 2023
Published by: Ubiquity Press
In partnership with: Paradigm Publishing Services
Publication frequency: 1 issue per year

© 2023 Nyoli Valentine, Steven J. Durning, Ernst Michael Shanahan, Lambert Schuwirth, published by Ubiquity Press
This work is licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 License.

Previous articleVolume 12 (2023): Issue 1Next article