J R Soc Med 2005;98:91-95
doi:10.1258/jrsm.98.3.91
© 2005 Royal Society of Medicine
Osler, Flexner, apprenticeship and 'the new medical education'
Tim Dornan DM FRCP
Hope Hospital (University of Manchester School of Medicine), Stott Lane,
Salford, Manchester M6 8HD, UK
E-mail:
tim.dornan{at}manchester.ac.uk
 |
INTRODUCTION
|
|---|
These are bewildering times for doctors who teach medical students.
The UK
General Medical Council (GMC) has reminded them they
have a duty to
teach,
1 yet stirred
up such radical change that
their task is unrecognizably different from what
they themselves
experienced as
students.
2,3
This essay draws on biographies
of two people who changed the face of medical
education in the
20th century to trace the origins of this bewilderment and
suggest
a direction for the 21st
century.
4,5
Most of today's doctors
just associate the name of William Osler with
nodes they were
taught about but never see. In Michael Bliss's biography,
he
comes to life as a master clinician, apprentice-master, and
humanist role
model. I first became aware of Abraham Flexner
as the author of a century-old
report that got medical education
into the mess it is in today. Wrong. He was
a visionary educationalist
who raised standards of medicine round the world by
wedding
it with biomedical science. After vignettes of these two men,
I
describe what the GMC has recommended and read between the
lines of its
recommendations. To finish, I suggest the wheel
has come full circle.
Apprenticeship, central to Osler and Flexner's
educational visions, needs
to be revitalized.
 |
WILLIAM OSLER
|
|---|
Osler was totally dedicated to the training of young doctors,
captured in
his epitaph 'I taught medical students in the wards'.
He was an
astute and sceptical bedside clinician and a keen
observer, analyst and
synthesizer. He was versed in both the
humanities and the sciences. For him,
medicine was 'an old art
[that]... must be absorbed in the new
science'. As a person,
he is remembered for hard work, equanimity,
enthusiasm, and
a keen interest in people. Although he made major
contributions
to pathology, he said doctors should care more about the
individual
than the disease. Born into a large family in 1847, Osler derived
his
humanism from the strong Christian values of his parents, who
lived
missionary lives in pioneer Canada. He adopted role models
from an early age,
under whose influence he developed a passion
for natural history and a
discipline of scrupulous observation.
He switched his university study from
divinity to medicine and
from Toronto, where medical teaching was very poor,
to Montreal,
where it was still far from perfect. Hard work, an irrepressibly
cheerful
personality, an emerging fascination for pathology, and the
mentorship
of a Montreal physician supported his education and drew him
to the
attention of seniors.
Medical qualification was not an entrée to professional practice in
the way it is now. Like many aspiring North American physicians Osler visited
Europe, where he studied in London, Berlin (under Rudolf Virchow) and Vienna.
At the age of 25, this ambitious and knowledgeable but clinically
inexperienced self-directed learner was offered a chair at McGill medical
school, Montreal. There he taught students and built up a clinical practice.
Lucrative work was monopolized by physicians on the hospital staff, which
Osler was not, so he took an interest in smallpox. Attending physicians were
expected to conduct postmortems, a duty that Osler regarded as a natural
extension of the history and examination. They were often lax and Osler took
over the duty, developing a deep understanding of disease which he shared
enthusiastically with students. He was such a popular lecturer that the McGill
medical students escorted him en masse to the station when he left in 1884 to
take up the chair of medicine in Philadelphia. There he built up his private
practice but continued to teach in the dead-house and on the wards, nurturing
curiosity and projecting enthusiasm onto his learners.
Osler was recruited in 1889 as foundation physician-inchief and chair of
medicine at Johns Hopkins University, Baltimore. This was to be the epitome of
a modern medical school, integrating the values of scientific medicine into
clinical practice. Osler introduced a clerkship system that gave students a
role in the clinical service. Disease, in his view, was the student's
chief teacher, and teaching should be at the bedside rather than in the
lecture hall. Teaching away from the bedside was a 'bastard
substitute'. It was from Baltimore that Osler published his landmark
textbook The Principles and Practice of Medicine. By then a major
international figure, Osler was invited to take up the Regius Chair of
Medicine in Oxford in 1905, where he remained until his death in 1919.
 |
ABRAHAM FLEXNER
|
|---|
Although not a doctor, this son of an impoverished immigrant
family became
the most influential medical educationalist in
the world. He caused many US
medical schools to go out of business,
and bitterly regretted that those which
provided for women and
blacks were hardest hit. He was a pioneer of active,
learner-centred
education with strongly progressive views on such modern
themes
as education's social responsibility and widened participation.
Abraham
was born in Louisville, Kentucky, in 1866, the sixth of nine
children.
Aged 17, he could take just long enough away from
supporting his mother and
siblings to complete a classics degree
at Johns Hopkins University, but then
had to return to Louisville
as breadwinner. He found employment as a
schoolteacher and quickly
distinguished himself as a progressive
educationalist. His family
was eventually secure enough for him to leave
Louisville and
pursue his career at the age of 38. He took a psychology degree
at
Harvard then went to Germany to study education.
Philanthropists with fortunes to spend on the common good were a powerful
social force in early 20th century America. Abraham was hired by Andrew
Carnegie to advise his Foundation for the Advancement of Teaching on how
standards of medical teaching in the USA and Canada could be improved. The
publication of his report in 1910 made Flexner a celebrity round the
world.6 Hitherto,
any group of physicians could form a for-profit medical school issuing degrees
that were scarcely worth the paper they were written on. Abraham's elder
brother Simon, for example, qualified in medicine from Louisville in less than
a year without dissecting a body or ever seeing a patient. Over sixteen
months, Abraham made no fewer than 174 visits to medical schoolsa
remarkable achievement when one considers the vast size of the country and the
means of transport available to him. The American Medical Association, itself
concerned about standards of training but lacking the clout of a monied
philanthropy, was quick to team up with Flexner and endorse his
recommendations. The key to high-quality medical education was to be science.
Medical schools should be research-active university departments linked to
teaching hospitals with fulltime staff. The study of medicine should have
stiff entrance requirements, recruiting graduates who would work towards a
doctoral degree. After a 'preclinical' grounding in the scientific
disciplines, clinical education was to take place through participation in
apprenticeship hospital attachments, supported by bedside teaching. The most
respected research universities were to be taken as a benchmark against which
other medical schools would be judged, and Johns Hopkins provided a model.
Abraham was now so well known that, passing through London later in 1910,
he was called on to give evidence to the Haldane commission, which was
surveying UK medical education. Britain, he testified, had a strong tradition
of apprenticeship education by virtue of its clerkship system, but was much
weaker than Germany in the biomedical sciencesan observation that must
have been piquant in the early years of the 20th century. Abraham's elder
brother Simon was by this time a top US biomedical scientist. He constantly
reviewed and advised on Abraham's work, doubtless supporting his emphasis
on biomedical science. So, the 20th century medical curriculum was born at a
time when, in Bonner's words, 'the baffling and terrifying world of
illness was becoming intelligible and comprehensible' through biomedical
research, particularly into infectious
disease.5
 |
TOMORROW'S DOCTORS
|
|---|
The GMC took one of the boldest steps since Flexner when it
published
Tomorrow's Doctors in
1993,
2 and added
detail to its
recommendations in
2002.
3 The subject
matter of medical curricula
was to be reduced in quantity. There should be a
core curriculum
with defined learning outcomes and protected time for students
to
pursue their own interests. Disciplines should integrate their
contributions
into a thematic, perhaps systems-based, curriculum. Students
should
have real-life experiences in the early curriculum years and
they
should continue to learn foundation disciplines in the
later years. Those
foundation disciplines should include behavioural
and social sciences and
humanities as well as biomedical science.
There should be more emphasis on
people and populations, on
doctorpatient communication, and on ethics.
The curriculum
should familiarize students with modern fast-changing
healthcare
systems, multiprofessionalism, and healthcare in the community.
Medical
students should understand principles rather than rote-learn
facts.
They should learn through curiosity. Information and
communication technology
should be harnessed to support their
learning. Whilst lacking the fiscal power
of the Carnegie foundation
the GMC accredits the certifying exams of medical
schools, so
no UK basic medical curriculum was untouched by
Tomorrow's Doctors.
Happily, new medical schools have come into
existence rather
than established ones going to the wall as some did 90 years
ago
in the USA. Flexner would surely have approved of the effort
that is now
going into widening participation in medical education.
Clearly, medical students should experience the type of healthcare they
will practise and the context they will practise it in. We should capitalize
on new educational technologies; and postgraduate education is now so much
improved that there is sense in holding subject-matter forward to postgraduate
training. Flexner advocated learning through curiosity so there is nothing new
in that, but from here on Tomorrow's Doctors is unconvincing on
the reasons for change. It cites the need for lifelong learning skills and
curriculum overload as reasons, but doctors are already lifelong
learners,7 and
pedagogic education seems intuitively a better way of circumscribing
curriculum content than active learning. Integration of curriculum content is
perhaps the most controversial of all the GMC recommendations. The
tribulations of horizontally integrating clinical disciplines are the topic of
quite another
discussion,8 but the
call for medical schools to break open the Flexner/AMA preclinical to clinical
sequence is very germane to this one. Intrigued by it, we in Manchester set
out to develop a rationale for early
experience.9 We
interviewed people from first-year medical students to deans, and from
biomedical scientists to doctors who teach interpersonal communication. Quite
a coherent pattern emerged. 'Authentic human contact in a social or
clinical context', our respondents suggested, could:
- Orientate curricula towards the social context of practice
- Ease medical students' transition into the clinical environment
- Motivate them
- Make them more confident in approaching patients
- Increase their self-awareness, and awareness of others
- Strengthen, deepen, and contextualize their learning of the foundation
disciplines
- Help them learn about the processes and contexts of healthcare, and the
role of health professionals.
Medical education, we inferred from those responses, is a process of
socialization that needs to start earlier and continue throughout. We have
since completed a systematic review which, patchy as the evidence may be,
shows that early experience can indeed yield some or all of those benefits
and, moreover, help recruit primary care practitioners to underserved
populations.10
Conducting the early experience survey, I detected an inconsistency in the
minds of some respondents, particularly basic scientists and academic clinical
specialists. Asked why we should provide early experience, they offered a
strongly humanist rationale. And yet their conceptions of medical education
were dominated by biomedical science. They seemed almost to have two
epistemologies of medicine that were not reconciled with one another.
Tomorrow's Doctors, I suggest, recognized that tension and set
out to reconcile it, tacitly acknowledging the importance of biomedical
science but giving it a place within a wider framework. Osler, for me, had the
balance right. Flexner espoused a biomedical epistemology of medicine that was
sorely needed in his time, though it later ran riot in the hands of
pedagogues. He, I am sure, would not have approved of humiliating medical
students for not being able to repeat from memory topographical anatomy they
had not yet seen applied in
life.9 He would have
predicted that problem-based learning would produce just as good anatomy
knowledge as didactic
education,11 and
was an advocate of behavioural and social sciences ahead of his times.
 |
APPRENTICESHIP
|
|---|
The
Oxford English Dictionary defines an apprentice as: 'A
learner
of a craft, bound to serve, and entitled to instruction from,
his or
her employer for a specified period. Also a beginner
or novice.' Flexner
was able to put his emphasis on biomedical
science because universities could
recruit humane clinician
scientists and assign medical students to them to
learn the
'duties of a
doctor'.
12 The
'professionalism' that 21st century
medical schools are exhorted to
teach their
students
13 is the
very
set of attributes that learners seek out in such clinician role
models.
14,15
And
how can those attributes be taught other than by role
modelling?
1,1619
Apprenticeship has come under severe strain, at least in the UK, for
several reasons. Wealthy patients have always been able to choose not to be
treated by novices, but now everyone has that option. Expertise has become
superspecialized and technological in its nature, so students have to learn
clinical skills from scores of teachers. As attachments have become more
numerous, they have become shorter and the number of learners has increased,
so education has become less personal. Traditional bedside teaching skills
have decayed as each generation is less exposed to
them.20 New
educational technologies such as skills
training21 and
problem-based
learning22 have
brought education within the control of the objective-driven curriculum by
substituting simulation for reality. All that sounds depressingly like the
curriculum 'without the personal influence of [clinical] teachers upon
pupils' that Osler likened to an Arctic winter.
Early experience intrigues me because it is the one component of the new
medical education that seems to go in the opposite direction. It brings
medical students into contact, albeit brief, with doctors and patients when
they would traditionally have been confined to the medical school, learning
basic science from scientists. Hoorah for that, but now we have another
problem. Pedagogy is very clearly prescribed these days. What is the pedagogy
of latter-day Oslers? Bedside teaching, role modelling, and apprenticeship are
the names most commonly used, but are any of them in good enough health to be
standard-bearer for the new century? Tomorrow's Doctors is
noticeably silent on teaching in clinical settings.
 |
CLINICAL EDUCATION IN THE NEW CENTURY
|
|---|
An answer comes from apprenticeship itself, which is coming
back into vogue
and adapting to the modern
age.
23 New
apprenticeship
theories hold that it is an oversimplification to
'atomize'
professional expertise into knowledge, skills and
attitudes
because they are too intertwined to be learned in isolation
from one
another. Moreover, experts have 'tacit knowledge' (can
be
demonstrated better than it can be put into
words),
24 and
students
have to learn it through modelling in practice
settings.
25
Apprenticeship
has been defined as 'legitimate peripheral
participation'.
26
In
the 21st century medical context, that means 'getting students
involved
in service as much as current [over-]regulation permits'.
Apprentices
develop a professional identity by socializing into a community
of
professional learning and practice. New apprenticeship theory
rejects extreme
conceptualizations of self-directed
learning,
27
recognizing
the importance of the chemistry between teacher and learner
in the
workplace.
23,28
New apprenticeship is supported by some of my own research. 'Good
firms' are characterized by the quality of their leadership and the
supportiveness of the learning environment, and there are hints that
'clinical teaching' is as much a social as an instructional
process.29 Clinical
teachers, although bewildered by the pace of change, have very positive
attitudes towards
learners.30 We have
been able to create short moments of contact between the teacher, learner and
patient that reintroduce apprenticeship principles to the shift-working
National Health Service of
today.31,32
Our students learn seamlessly across the interface between primary, secondary
and tertiary care. Table 1
presents those ideas as generalizable suggestions for apprenticeship in modern
clinical settings.
 |
CONCLUSION
|
|---|
Apprenticeship is as relevant a word today as it was a century
ago. It
demands mutual trust and support between teachers and
learners, good use of
the rich case-mix going through wards,
outpatient clinics and health centres,
and imaginative capitalization
on new collegial structures such as
multiprofessional teams.
The goals of education are too important to be left
to chance
or
whim,
33 so they
must be defined rather than left to happenstance,
but tacit knowledge and
attitudes must be given due recognition
and allowed to pass from teacher to
learner by role modelling.
Concern about accountability must not keep learners
away from
the sharp end of clinical care, though 'see one, do one, teach
one'
must be banished for all time. Medical students are as able
and
motivated learners as any teacher could ask for. The UK
National Health
Service is an ideal setting for integrated learning.
The challenge is not to
create a new educational theory, but
to re-apply an old one to the
fast-changing context of 21st
century healthcare.
Note This paper is based partly on presentations to the Medical
Society of London and the Osler Club of London.
 |
REFERENCES
|
|---|
- General Medical Council. The Doctor as
Teacher. London: GMC, 1999
- General Medical Council. Tomorrow's
Doctors. London: GMC, 1993
- General Medical Council. Tomorrow's Doctors,
2nd edn. London: GMC, 2002
- Bliss M. William Osler. A Life in Medicine.
New York: Oxford University Press, 1999
- Bonner TM. Iconoclast. Abraham Flexner and a Life in
Learning. Baltimore: Johns Hopkins University Press,2002
- Flexner A. Medical Education in the United States and
Canada. A Report to the Carnegie Foundation for the Advancement of
Teaching. Boston: Updyke, 1910
- Grant J, Stanton F. The Effectiveness of Continuing
Professional Development. London: Joint Centre for Education in
Medicine, 1998
- Patel L, Buck P, Dornan TL, Sutton A. Child health and
obstetricsgynaecology in a problem-based curriculum: accepting the
limits of integration and the need for differentiation. Med
Educ 2002; 36:261
-71[CrossRef][Medline]
- Dornan T, Bundy C. What can experience add to early medical
education? Consensus survey. BMJ 2004;
329: 834-7[Abstract/Free Full Text]
- Dornan T, Littlewood S, Margolis S, Scherpbier A, Spencer J,
Ypinazar V. How Can Early Experience Contribute to the Basic
Education of Health Professionals? BEME (Best Evidence Medical
Education)
[www.bemedcollaboration.org/reports/Early%20clinical%20experience20updated%20protocol%20Oct%2004.doc]
- Prince KJAH, van Marneren H, Hylkema N, Drukker J, Scherpbier AJJA,
van der Vleuten CPM. Does problem-based learning lead to deficiencies in basic
science knowledge? An empirical case on anatomy. Med
Educ 2003; 37:15
-21[CrossRef][Medline]
- General Medical Council. Duties of a
Doctor. London: GMC, 1993
- Medical Professionalism Project. Medical professionalism in the new
millennium. Clin Med 2002;
2: 116-18[Medline]
- Wright SM, Kern DE, Kolodner K, Howard DM, Brancati FL. Attributes
of excellent attending-physician role models. N Engl J
Med 1998; 339:1986
-93[Abstract/Free Full Text]
- Skeff KM, Mutha S. Role modelsguiding the future of
medicine. N Engl J Med 1998;
339:2015
-17[Free Full Text]
- Baillie L. Factors affecting student nurses' learning in
community placements: a phenomenological study. J Adv
Nursing 1993; 18:1040
-53
- Ludmerer KM. Instilling professionalism in medical education.
JAMA 1999;
282: 881-2[Free Full Text]
- Elzubeir MA, Rizk DEEE. Identifying characteristics that students,
interns and residents look for in their role models. Med
Educ 2001; 35:272
-7[CrossRef][Medline]
- Elnicki DM, Kolarik R, Bardella I. Third year medical
students' perceptions of effective teaching behaviours in a
multidisciplinary ambulatory clerkship. Acad Med2003; 78:815
-19[Medline]
- Ramani S, Orlander JD, Strunin L, Barber TW. Whither bedside
teaching? A focus-group study of clinical teachers. Acad
Med 2003; 78:384
-90[Medline]
- Patrick J. Training, Research and Practice.
London: Academic Press, 1992
- Schmidt HG. Foundations of problem-based learning: some explanatory
notes. Med Educ 1993;
27: 422-32[Medline]
- Ainley P, Rainbird H. Apprenticeship, Towards a New
Paradigm of Learning. London: Kogan Page,1999
- Wyatt JC. Management of explicit and tacit knowledge. J
R Soc Med 2001; 94:6
-9[Medline]
- Choi J, Hannafin M. Situated cognition and learning environments:
roles, structures and implications for design. Educ Technol Res
Devel 1995; 43:53
-69[CrossRef]
- Wenger E. Communities of Practice, Learning, Meaning and
Identity. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press,1998
- Brookfield S, ed. Self-directed Learning: From Theory to
Practice. New Directions for Continuing Education, No.25. San
Francisco: Jossey-Bass, 1985
- Gijselaers WH. Connecting problem-based practices with educational
theory. New Directions in Teaching and Learning1996; 68:13
-21
- Dornan T, Boshuizen H, Cordingley L, Hider S, Hadfield J,
Scherpbier A. Evaluation of self-directed clinical education: validation of an
instrument. Med Educ 2004;
38: 670-8[CrossRef][Medline]
- Dornan T, Scherpbier A, King N, Boshuizen H. Clinical teachers and
problem based learning. Phenomenological study. Med
Educ (in press)
- Dornan T, Brown M, Powley D, Hopkins M. A technology using feedback
to manage experience based learning. Med Teacher2004; 26:736
-8[CrossRef]
- Dornan T, Hadfield J, Brown M, Boshuizen H, Scherpbier A. How can
medical students learn self-directly in the clinical environment? Design based
research. Med Educ (in press)
- Norman GR. The adult learner: a mythical species. Acad
Med 1999; 74:886
-9[Medline]
- Levinson W, Rubenstein A. Mission criticalintegrating
clinician educators into academic medical centers. N Engl J
Med 1999; 341:840
-3[Free Full Text]
- Stewart M, Brown JB, Weston WW, McWhinney IR, McWilliam CL, Freeman
TR. Patient-centred Medicine. Transforming the Clinical
Method. Thousand Oaks: Sage, 1995

CiteULike
Complore
Connotea
Del.icio.us
Digg
Reddit
Technorati What's this?
This article has been cited by other articles:

|
 |

|
 |
 
M. M. Spafford, C. F. Schryer, S. L. Campbell, and L. Lingard
Towards Embracing Clinical Uncertainty: Lessons from Social Work, Optometry and Medicine
Journal of Social Work,
August 1, 2007;
7(2):
155 - 178.
[Abstract]
[PDF]
|
 |
|

|
 |

|
 |
 
D. M. Irby
Educational Continuity in Clinical Clerkships
N. Engl. J. Med.,
February 22, 2007;
356(8):
856 - 857.
[Full Text]
[PDF]
|
 |
|

|
 |

|
 |
 
S. Littlewood, V. Ypinazar, S. A Margolis, A. Scherpbier, J. Spencer, and T. Dornan
Early practical experience and the social responsiveness of clinical education: systematic review
BMJ,
August 13, 2005;
331(7513):
387 - 391.
[Abstract]
[Full Text]
[PDF]
|
 |
|

|
 |

|
 |
 
S. Olsen and G. Neale
Clinical leadership in the provision of hospital care
BMJ,
May 28, 2005;
330(7502):
1219 - 1220.
[Full Text]
[PDF]
|
 |
|