4.1 Article

Newly qualified doctors' perceptions of informal learning from nurses: implications for interprofessional education and practice

Journal

JOURNAL OF INTERPROFESSIONAL CARE
Volume 27, Issue 5, Pages 394-400

Publisher

TAYLOR & FRANCIS INC
DOI: 10.3109/13561820.2013.783558

Keywords

Case study; informal learning; interprofessional learning; interviews; professional identity; professional socialisation; workplace learning

Funding

  1. UK General Medical Council

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Newly qualified doctors spend much of their time with nurses, but little research has considered informal learning during that formative contact. This article reports findings from a multiple case study that explored what newly qualified doctors felt they learned from nurses in the workplace. Analysis of interviews conducted with UK doctors in their first year of practice identified four overarching themes: attitudes towards working with nurses, learning about roles, professional hierarchies and learning skills. Informal learning was found to contribute to the newly qualified doctors' knowledge of their own and others' roles. A dynamic hierarchy was identified: one in which a pragmatic hierarchy recognising nurses' expertise was superseded by a normative structural hierarchy that reinforced the notion of medical dominance. Alongside the implicit learning of roles, nurses contributed to the explicit learning of skills and captured doctors' errors, with implications for patient safety. The findings are discussed in relation to professional socialisation. Issues of power between the professions are also considered. It is concluded that increasing both medical and nursing professions' awareness of informal workplace learning may improve the efficiency of education in restricted working hours. A culture in which informal learning is embedded may also have benefits for patient safety.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.1
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available