Downloaded from http://veterinaryrecord.bmj.com/ on June 16, 2015 - Published by group.bmj.com
Research
Research EDITORIAL
Taking the right track: new directions in veterinary education Jennifer Hammond
Since the publication of the Royal College of Veterinary Surgeons (RCVS) Day One Competences (RCVS 2014) over a decade ago, veterinary education in the UK has become increasingly focused on educational outcomes. Accreditation by the RCVS and other professional bodies such as the European Association of Establishments for Veterinary Education and the American Veterinary Medical Association requires universities to demonstrate that their curricula are effectively aligned with these outcomes. Assessment practices need to ensure that students have achieved these competences on graduation. The veterinary profession is not unique in this; other health professions have adopted similar approaches, with the concept of ‘outcome-based education’ (Harden 1999) now becoming one of the dominant paradigms in health professions education.
Jennifer Hammond, VetMB, MA, FHEA, MRCVS, University of Glasgow, Bearsden Road, Glasgow G61 1QH, UK e-mail: [email protected]
84 | Veterinary Record | July 26, 2014
There is also a growing consensus across the veterinary profession that modern day vets cannot realistically achieve and maintain omincompetence (competence across all species) (Eyre 2001, Gorman 2001, Halliwell 1999, Radostits 2002). In 2001,the RCVS education strategy steering group described the requirement for graduates to be omnicompetent as ‘unrealistic and fundamentally misguided’. While recognising that veterinary degrees should represent a broad training, the group concluded that significant flexibility is required and proposed that this should be achieved through educational innovation and periods of elective study rather than species specialisation before graduation. International commentators have agreed that the concept of omnicompetence is outdated and conclude that veterinary education must fundamentally change, moving away from a generalist approach and towards one that is specialised and takes into account the variety of fields that are needed to meet the diverse needs of society (Radostits 2002).
Downloaded from http://veterinaryrecord.bmj.com/ on June 16, 2015 - Published by group.bmj.com
Research There is ongoing discussion about how veterinary schools should respond to this debate, specifically to what extent students at undergraduate level should focus on one or more species areas. Two papers by Crowther and colleagues (2014a, b), summarised on p 86 and p 87 of this issue of this issue of Veterinary Record, represent an important contribution to the debate on tracking in UK veterinary education. Tracking is not a new concept; as the authors note, several veterinary schools outside of the UK have adopted a tracked education model (van Beukelen 2004, Vecerek 2006, Walsh and others 2009). The authors differentiate between partial tracking where students qualify able to practise in all species, and full tracking, which would result in registration being restricted to the area that the student had specialised in (Crowther and others 2014a, b). The first paper describes the outcomes of a survey of three key stakeholder groups in UK veterinary education: students, university staff and veterinary practitioners. Participants were asked to give their opinions on partial and full tracking. The authors conclude that while partial tracking would be widely accepted, a move towards full tracking would not be supported (Crowther and others 2014a). The study also addresses the important question of whether a move to tracking is capable of producing a veterinary workforce that aligns with the requirements of the UK profession. The results indicated that, although career aspirations change as students move through the veterinary degree programme, the career aspirations of final year students are broadly aligned with the current
veterinary employment profile in the UK (Crowther and others 2014a). Qualitative research is not common in the veterinary literature, but in this case the qualitative data that form the basis of the second paper (Crowther and others 2014b) add considerable detail to the quantitative data. The description of the key arguments in the debate, as expressed by students, academic staff and practitioners, map out critical areas that must be considered when making decisions on tracking and understanding potential implications for stakeholders. By demonstrating clear support for partial tracking among students, practitioners and university staff, and opposition to full tracking and restricted registration, these studies go a long way towards moving this debate forward. There is scope to expand partial tracking options beyond the short elective periods typically included in the final year, and into earlier years of veterinary degree programmes. This requires a different way of looking at veterinary education – instead of taking an exhaustive approach, we can recognise multiple pathways to competency. Students need the skills to be self-directed learners who can identify their own learning needs and maintain their professional competency over the course of their veterinary career. As acknowledged by Crowther and colleagues, supporting students during track selection is essential, especially if individual career aspirations are liable to change. We are now able to begin to move beyond discussions of the viability of omincompetence and the complex process of developing and maintaining partial accreditation. Instead, the focus can move
towards developing and evaluating models of flexibility and choice in the context of UK veterinary education and we can do so in the context of having a clearer understanding of the implications of these changes.
References
Crowther, E., Hughes, K., Handel, I., Whittington, R., Pryce, M., Warman, S. & Baillie, S. (2014a) Stakeholder consultation on tracking in UK veterinary degrees: part 1. Veterinary Record doi:10.1136/vr.102342 Crowther, E., Hughes, K., Handel, I., Whittington, R., Pryce, M., Warman, S. & Baillie, S. (2014b) Stakeholder consultation on tracking in UK veterinary degrees: part 2. Veterinary Record doi:10.1136/vr.102341 Eyre, P. (2001) Engineering veterinary education. Journal of Veterinary Medical Education 29, 195-200 Gorman, N. (2001) Veterinary Education and Training A Framework for 2010 and Beyond. http://web.up.ac. za/UserFiles/RCVS%20proposals%202001(1).pdf. Accessed July 10, 2014 Halliwell, R. E. (1999) Veterinary education: time to abandon the cult of coverage. Canadian Veterinary Journal 40, 408-10 Harden, R. M. (1999) AMEE Guide 14: Outcomebased education: part 1. An introduction to outcomebased education. Medical Teacher 21, 7-14 Radostits, O. M. (2002) Engineering veterinary education: a clarion call for reform in veterinary education – let’s do it! Journal of Veterinary Medical Education 30, 176-90 RCVS (2014) RCVS Day One Competences. www.rcvs. org.uk/document-library/rcvs-day-one-competences. Accessed July 17, 2014 Van Beukelen, P. (2004) Curriculum development in the Netherlands: introduction of tracks in the 2001 curriculum at Utrecht University, The Netherlands. Journal of Veterinary Medical Education 31, 227-233 Vecerek, V. (2006) Two differentiated programs of veterinary medical education at the university of veterinary and pharmaceutical sciences in the Czech Republic. Journal of Veterinary Medical Education 33, 197-205 Walsh, D. A., Klosterman, E. S. & Kass, P. H. (2009) Approaches to veterinary education–tracking versus a final year broad clinical experience. Part two: instilled values. Revue Scientifique et Technique 28, 811-22
doi: 10.1136/vr.g4589
July 26, 2014 | Veterinary Record | 85
Downloaded from http://veterinaryrecord.bmj.com/ on June 16, 2015 - Published by group.bmj.com
Taking the right track: new directions in veterinary education Jennifer Hammond Veterinary Record 2014 175: 84-85
doi: 10.1136/vr.g4589 Updated information and services can be found at: http://veterinaryrecord.bmj.com/content/175/4/84
These include:
References Email alerting service
This article cites 7 articles, 0 of which you can access for free at: http://veterinaryrecord.bmj.com/content/175/4/84#BIBL Receive free email alerts when new articles cite this article. Sign up in the box at the top right corner of the online article.
Notes
To request permissions go to: http://group.bmj.com/group/rights-licensing/permissions To order reprints go to: http://journals.bmj.com/cgi/reprintform To subscribe to BMJ go to: http://group.bmj.com/subscribe/
Research
Research EDITORIAL
Taking the right track: new directions in veterinary education Jennifer Hammond
Since the publication of the Royal College of Veterinary Surgeons (RCVS) Day One Competences (RCVS 2014) over a decade ago, veterinary education in the UK has become increasingly focused on educational outcomes. Accreditation by the RCVS and other professional bodies such as the European Association of Establishments for Veterinary Education and the American Veterinary Medical Association requires universities to demonstrate that their curricula are effectively aligned with these outcomes. Assessment practices need to ensure that students have achieved these competences on graduation. The veterinary profession is not unique in this; other health professions have adopted similar approaches, with the concept of ‘outcome-based education’ (Harden 1999) now becoming one of the dominant paradigms in health professions education.
Jennifer Hammond, VetMB, MA, FHEA, MRCVS, University of Glasgow, Bearsden Road, Glasgow G61 1QH, UK e-mail: [email protected]
84 | Veterinary Record | July 26, 2014
There is also a growing consensus across the veterinary profession that modern day vets cannot realistically achieve and maintain omincompetence (competence across all species) (Eyre 2001, Gorman 2001, Halliwell 1999, Radostits 2002). In 2001,the RCVS education strategy steering group described the requirement for graduates to be omnicompetent as ‘unrealistic and fundamentally misguided’. While recognising that veterinary degrees should represent a broad training, the group concluded that significant flexibility is required and proposed that this should be achieved through educational innovation and periods of elective study rather than species specialisation before graduation. International commentators have agreed that the concept of omnicompetence is outdated and conclude that veterinary education must fundamentally change, moving away from a generalist approach and towards one that is specialised and takes into account the variety of fields that are needed to meet the diverse needs of society (Radostits 2002).
Downloaded from http://veterinaryrecord.bmj.com/ on June 16, 2015 - Published by group.bmj.com
Research There is ongoing discussion about how veterinary schools should respond to this debate, specifically to what extent students at undergraduate level should focus on one or more species areas. Two papers by Crowther and colleagues (2014a, b), summarised on p 86 and p 87 of this issue of this issue of Veterinary Record, represent an important contribution to the debate on tracking in UK veterinary education. Tracking is not a new concept; as the authors note, several veterinary schools outside of the UK have adopted a tracked education model (van Beukelen 2004, Vecerek 2006, Walsh and others 2009). The authors differentiate between partial tracking where students qualify able to practise in all species, and full tracking, which would result in registration being restricted to the area that the student had specialised in (Crowther and others 2014a, b). The first paper describes the outcomes of a survey of three key stakeholder groups in UK veterinary education: students, university staff and veterinary practitioners. Participants were asked to give their opinions on partial and full tracking. The authors conclude that while partial tracking would be widely accepted, a move towards full tracking would not be supported (Crowther and others 2014a). The study also addresses the important question of whether a move to tracking is capable of producing a veterinary workforce that aligns with the requirements of the UK profession. The results indicated that, although career aspirations change as students move through the veterinary degree programme, the career aspirations of final year students are broadly aligned with the current
veterinary employment profile in the UK (Crowther and others 2014a). Qualitative research is not common in the veterinary literature, but in this case the qualitative data that form the basis of the second paper (Crowther and others 2014b) add considerable detail to the quantitative data. The description of the key arguments in the debate, as expressed by students, academic staff and practitioners, map out critical areas that must be considered when making decisions on tracking and understanding potential implications for stakeholders. By demonstrating clear support for partial tracking among students, practitioners and university staff, and opposition to full tracking and restricted registration, these studies go a long way towards moving this debate forward. There is scope to expand partial tracking options beyond the short elective periods typically included in the final year, and into earlier years of veterinary degree programmes. This requires a different way of looking at veterinary education – instead of taking an exhaustive approach, we can recognise multiple pathways to competency. Students need the skills to be self-directed learners who can identify their own learning needs and maintain their professional competency over the course of their veterinary career. As acknowledged by Crowther and colleagues, supporting students during track selection is essential, especially if individual career aspirations are liable to change. We are now able to begin to move beyond discussions of the viability of omincompetence and the complex process of developing and maintaining partial accreditation. Instead, the focus can move
towards developing and evaluating models of flexibility and choice in the context of UK veterinary education and we can do so in the context of having a clearer understanding of the implications of these changes.
References
Crowther, E., Hughes, K., Handel, I., Whittington, R., Pryce, M., Warman, S. & Baillie, S. (2014a) Stakeholder consultation on tracking in UK veterinary degrees: part 1. Veterinary Record doi:10.1136/vr.102342 Crowther, E., Hughes, K., Handel, I., Whittington, R., Pryce, M., Warman, S. & Baillie, S. (2014b) Stakeholder consultation on tracking in UK veterinary degrees: part 2. Veterinary Record doi:10.1136/vr.102341 Eyre, P. (2001) Engineering veterinary education. Journal of Veterinary Medical Education 29, 195-200 Gorman, N. (2001) Veterinary Education and Training A Framework for 2010 and Beyond. http://web.up.ac. za/UserFiles/RCVS%20proposals%202001(1).pdf. Accessed July 10, 2014 Halliwell, R. E. (1999) Veterinary education: time to abandon the cult of coverage. Canadian Veterinary Journal 40, 408-10 Harden, R. M. (1999) AMEE Guide 14: Outcomebased education: part 1. An introduction to outcomebased education. Medical Teacher 21, 7-14 Radostits, O. M. (2002) Engineering veterinary education: a clarion call for reform in veterinary education – let’s do it! Journal of Veterinary Medical Education 30, 176-90 RCVS (2014) RCVS Day One Competences. www.rcvs. org.uk/document-library/rcvs-day-one-competences. Accessed July 17, 2014 Van Beukelen, P. (2004) Curriculum development in the Netherlands: introduction of tracks in the 2001 curriculum at Utrecht University, The Netherlands. Journal of Veterinary Medical Education 31, 227-233 Vecerek, V. (2006) Two differentiated programs of veterinary medical education at the university of veterinary and pharmaceutical sciences in the Czech Republic. Journal of Veterinary Medical Education 33, 197-205 Walsh, D. A., Klosterman, E. S. & Kass, P. H. (2009) Approaches to veterinary education–tracking versus a final year broad clinical experience. Part two: instilled values. Revue Scientifique et Technique 28, 811-22
doi: 10.1136/vr.g4589
July 26, 2014 | Veterinary Record | 85
Downloaded from http://veterinaryrecord.bmj.com/ on June 16, 2015 - Published by group.bmj.com
Taking the right track: new directions in veterinary education Jennifer Hammond Veterinary Record 2014 175: 84-85
doi: 10.1136/vr.g4589 Updated information and services can be found at: http://veterinaryrecord.bmj.com/content/175/4/84
These include:
References Email alerting service
This article cites 7 articles, 0 of which you can access for free at: http://veterinaryrecord.bmj.com/content/175/4/84#BIBL Receive free email alerts when new articles cite this article. Sign up in the box at the top right corner of the online article.
Notes
To request permissions go to: http://group.bmj.com/group/rights-licensing/permissions To order reprints go to: http://journals.bmj.com/cgi/reprintform To subscribe to BMJ go to: http://group.bmj.com/subscribe/
