No abstract

Global health inequities have created an urgency for health professions education to transition towards responsive and contextually relevant curricula. Such transformation and renewal processes hold significant implications for those educators responsible for implementing the curriculum. Currently little is known about how health professions educators across disciplines understand a responsive curriculum and how this understanding might influence their practice. We looked at curricula that aim to deliver future health care professionals who are not only clinically competent but also critically conscious of the contexts in which they serve and the health care systems within which they practice. We conducted a qualitative study across six institutions in South Africa, using focus group discussions and in-depth individual interviews to explore (i) how do health professions educators understand the principles that underpin their health professions education curriculum; and (ii) how do these understandings of health professions educators shape their teaching practices? The transcripts were analysed thematically following multiple iterations of critical engagement to identify patterns of meaning across the entire dataset. The results reflected a range of understandings related to knowing, doing, and being and becoming; and a range of teaching practices that are explicit, intentionally designed, take learning to the community, embrace a holistic approach, encourage safe dialogic encounters, and foster reflective practice through a complex manner of interacting. This study contributes to the literature on health professions education as a force for social justice. It highlights the implications of transformative curriculum renewal and offers insights on how health professions educators embrace notions of social responsiveness and health equity to engage with these underlying principles within their teaching.

Background. Interprofessional education (IPE) can be seen as the vehicle to address the health and social problems of society through collaborative approaches. Since IPE should be facilitated by educators who are skilled in this area, faculty development initiatives should be based on the principles of IPE and collaborative practice (IPECP). Objective. To explore academics' knowledge and experiences of IPECP. Methods. The study used an exploratory descriptive design and the appreciative inquiry framework underpinned data gathering and analysis. The data were collected using workshops, and the participants of the workshops shared their knowledge and experiences of IPECP, which were audiorecorded and analysed using thematic analysis. Ethical clearance was obtained from the University of the Western Cape, Cape Town, South Africa. Results. The analysis revealed three themes: knowledge of IPE; experiences of IPECP; and enablers of IPECP aligned to the dream and discovery phases of appreciative inquiry. The findings revealed that academics were knowledgeable about the concept of IPE and that their experiences with IPECP ranged from clinical supervision to research. Regarding enablers of IPECP, they provided important input, which could facilitate IPECP in a university faculty. These included competencies for IPECP, professional development and a common practice framework. Conclusion. The academics who attended the faculty development workshops were knowledgeable about the concepts of IPECP. They concluded that for IPE to be effective, a common practice framework should be adopted in the faculty to inform specific teaching and learning strategies and outcomes. This open-access article is distributed under Creative Commons licence CC-BY-NC 4.0. Afr J Health Professions Educ

No abstract

In 2018, the United Nations global report showed that people with disabilities, who make up 15% of the worlds' population, have poorer health and rehabilitation access (SDG 3). Without improving the needed person-centered health and rehabilitation services at household level, SDG 3 cannot be achieved. This includes addressing human resource shortages through training multi-skilled community based rehabilitation workers (CRWs) to build rural workforce capacity and enhance the lives of people with disabilities, particularly in LMICs where the need is higher but resources are lower. However, to date, there is no documentation and analysis of existing training and its scope for this workforce in LMICs. A situational mapping overview was undertaken to review the current status of rural rehabilitation training programs offered in Southern Africa for CRWs. CRWs are rehabilitation personnel, based in the home/community, who are not professionals (without a bachelor qualification) but render non-institutional rehabilitation and inclusive development in communities, under the supervision of rehabilitation practitioners. Information on these programs was obtained using a two-step process. Firstly, a descriptive list of university courses for rehabilitation workers offered in the Southern African countries was collected via an internet and literature search. Secondly, detailed information about the disability and rural rehabilitation courses was collected from the respective institutions and their designated websites. There are six training courses targeted at CRWs or disability practitioners with a disability focus being offered at universities in Southern Africa, five of these in South Africa and one in Zimbabwe. Additionally, four training courses are offered as online/open resources by global organizations and are self-directed with no accreditation. While other key competencies feature, none of these programmes' learning outcomes make direct reference to the Ned et al. A Situational Mapping Overview of Training rural practice context and its complexities in relation to disability and poverty. The situational mapping overview shows limited training targeted at CRWs in Southern Africa, to effectively facilitate rural rehabilitation, poverty reduction and social inclusion. There is a need for an articulated community-orientated rural training to respond to the unmet needs. This may require a different set of competencies and assessment standards for trainees as well as additional competencies for their supervisors and mentors.