Context Globally, primary health care is facing workforce shortages. Longer and higher‐quality placements in primary care increase the likelihood of medical students choosing this specialty. However, the recruitment and retention of community primary care teachers are challenging. Relevant research was predominantly carried out in the 1990s. We seek to understand contemporary facilitators and barriers to general practitioner (GP) engagement with undergraduate education. Communities of practice (CoP) theory offers a novel conceptualisation, which may be pertinent in other community‐based teaching settings. Methods Semi‐structured interviews were undertaken with 24 GP teachers at four UK medical schools. We purposively sampled GPs new to teaching, established GP teachers and GPs who had recently stopped teaching. We undertook NVivo‐assisted deductive and inductive thematic analysis of transcripts. We used CoP theory to interpret data. Results Communities of practice theory illustrated that teachers negotiate membership of three CoPs: (i) clinical practice; (ii) the medical school, and (iii) teaching. The delivery of clinical care and teaching may be integrated or exist in tension. This can depend upon the positioning of the teaching and teacher as central or peripheral to the clinical CoP. Remuneration, workload, space and the expansion of GP trainee numbers impact on this. Teachers did not identify strongly as members of the medical school or a teaching community. Perceptions of membership were affected by medical school communication and support. The findings demonstrate gaps in medical school recruitment. Conclusions This research demonstrates the marginalisation of primary care‐based teaching and proposes a novel explanation rooted in CoP theory. Concepts including identity and membership may be pertinent to other community‐based teaching settings. We recommend that medical schools review and broaden recruitment methods. Teacher retention may be improved by optimising the interface between medical schools and teachers, fostering a teaching community, increasing professional rewards for teaching involvement and altering medical school expectations of learning in primary care.

The term post-truth became the 2016 Oxford Dictionary word of the year, yet many scholars question whether the term signals anything new, or whether post-truth is just lying, which has always been a part of politics and media. This paper contributes to this discussion by critically evaluating the extent to which the Brexit referendum, the UK's vote to exit the European Union, was based on post-truth politics. The paper develops the argument that Brexit is a key example of post-truth politics, and that two key factors ushered in this new form of politics into the UK: 1) technological changes associated with social media, which lead to a situation in which a significant portion of the population acquire their news online, while anybody can post anything online without checks on the accuracy of the claims; 2) a growing distrust in democratic institutions, political elites, expertise, and traditional media gatekeepers which leads, in turn, to a loss of trust in established expert knowledge, leaving the population willing to rely on information originating from questionable sources. This combination of a decline in trust of politicians and experts with social media reliance, drove the British public to emotionally charged, value-based decision making to a greater extent than before, which thus supports the claim that post-truth politics is indeed a novel phenomenon. Our analysis of the Brexit referendum raises the need for scholars to study the daily activities of the population and focus on its role as an active regime shaper.

This chapter uses an intersectional approach to explore the perspectives of young men based in one English county, who were involved in county lines drug distribution, and who had been identified by the professionals in their lives as potential victims of child criminal exploitation. Drawing on observations and semi-structured interviews, this chapter engages with intersectional scholarship to develop two key themes. Firstly, it conveys young men’s descriptions of their involvement in county lines as shaped by intersecting pressures of economic hardship and their expectations of their familial roles. Secondly, the chapter engages with the ways in which young men’s conceptualizations of their involvement in county lines, specifically, their rejection of the term ‘victim of exploitation’ and identification with the idea of involvement as a ‘constrained choice’, were informed by intersecting experiences of masculinity, socioeconomic marginalization and working-class identity.

No abstract

No abstract