ABSTRACT
Introduction: The practice of medicine involves, among other things, managing ambiguity, interpreting context and making decisions in the face of uncertainty. These uncertainties, amplified for learners, can be negotiated in a variety of ways; however, the promise, efficiency and availability of mobile technologies and clinical decision supports make these tools an appealing way to manage ambiguity.Mobile technologies are becoming increasingly prevalent in medical education and in the practice of medicine. Because of this, we explored how the use of mobile technologies is influencing residents' experiences of graduate medical education. Methods: We conducted an 18-month qualitative investigation to explore this issue. Our research was conceptually and theoretically framed in sociomaterial studies of professional learning. Specifically, our methods included logging of technology use and related reflexive writing by residents (n=10), interviews with residents (n=12) and interviews with faculty (n=6). Results: We identified three challenges for graduate medical education related to mobile technology use: (1) efficiency versus critical thinking; (2) patient context versus evidence-based medicine and (3) home/work-life balance. Discussion: In this digital age, decontextualised knowledge is readily available. Our data indicate that rather than access to accurate knowledge, the more pressing challenge for medical educators is managing how, when and why learners choose to access that information.
ABSTRACT
Distributed medical education (DME) is a type of distance learning in which students participate in medical education from diverse geographic locations using Web conferencing, videoconferencing, e-learning, and similar tools. DME is becoming increasingly widespread in North America and around the world.Although relatively new to medical education, distance learning has a long history in the broader field of education and a related body of literature that speaks to the importance of engaging in rigorous and theoretically informed studies of distance learning. The existing DME literature is helpful, but it has been largely descriptive and lacks a critical "lens"-that is, a theoretical perspective from which to rigorously conceptualize and interrogate DME's social (relationships, people) and material (technologies, tools) aspects.The authors describe DME and theories about distance learning and show that such theories focus on social, pedagogical, and cognitive considerations without adequately taking into account material factors. They address this gap by proposing sociomateriality as a theoretical framework allowing researchers and educators to study DME and (1) understand and consider previously obscured actors, infrastructure, and other factors that, on the surface, seem unrelated and even unimportant; (2) see clearly how the social and material components of learning are intertwined in fluid, messy, and often uncertain ways; and (3) perhaps think differently, even in ways that disrupt traditional approaches, as they explore DME. The authors conclude that DME brings with it substantial investments of social and material resources, and therefore needs careful study, using approaches that embrace its complexity.
