Skip to main content
Log in

The rhetorical ‘turn’ in medical education: What have we learned and where are we going?

  • Original Paper
  • Published:
Advances in Health Sciences Education Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

This paper presents a critical reflection on the contributions and challenges associated with one rhetorical approach to studying teaching and learning communication in health professions education. A rhetorical approach treats language as a social act, and attends to the role of language in establishing professional identities and relationships. The research has produced insights into the use of standard communication formats to teach novices, the nature of socialization on clinical teams, and the relationship between communication patterns and patient safety. Challenges and emerging questions include the problem of accounting for the material dimensions of communication in a rhetorical model, grappling with the complexities of distributed teams, and difficulties bridging the epistemologies of rhetoric and psychometrics.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Bleakley, A. (2006). Broadening conceptions of learning in medical education: The message from teamworking. Medical Education, 40, 150–157.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bleakley, A. (2006). You are who I say you are: The rhetorical construction of identity in the operating theatre. The Journal of Workplace Learning, 18(7/8), 414–425.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bourdieu, P., & Wacquant, L. (1992). An invitation to reflexive sociology. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Burke, K. (1966). Language as symbolic action: Essays on life, literature and method. Berkeley, CA:␣University of California Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Burke, K. (1969). A rhetoric of motives (pp. 19–27). Berkeley, CA: University of California Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Charmaz, K. (2000). Grounded theory: Objectivist and constructivist methods. In N. Denzin & Y.␣Lincoln (Eds.), Handbook of Qualitative Research (2nd ed., pp. 509–535). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publishers.

  • Devitt, A. J. (1991). Intertextuality in tax accounting: generic, referential, and functional. In␣C.␣Bazerman & J. Paradis (Eds.), Textual dynamics of the professions: Historical and contemporary studies of writing in professional communities (pp. 335–357). Madison: University of Wisconsin Press.

  • Devitt, A. J., Bawarshi, A., & Feiff, M. J. (2003). Materiality and genre in the study of discourse communities. College English, Urban: May 2003, 65(5), 541–559.

    Google Scholar 

  • Engestrom, Y. (2000a). Making expansive decisions: An activity—Theoretical study of practitioners building collaborative medical care for children. In C. M. Allwood & M. Selart (Eds.), Decision making: Social and Creative Dimensions. Dordrecht: Kluwer.

  • Engestrom, Y. (2000b). Activity theory as a framework for analyzing and redesigning work. Ergonomics, 43(7), 960–974.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Engestrom, Y., & Blackler, F. (2005). On the life of the object. Organization, 12(3), 307–330.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Engestrom, Y., Engestrom, R., & Kerosuo, H. (2003). The discursive construction of collaborative care. Applied Linguistics, 24(3), 286–315.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Joint Commission on Accreditation of Healthcare Organizations. (2006). Root causes of medication errors 1995–2005. Available from: http://www.jcaho.org/accredited+organizations/ambulatory+care/sentinel+events/rc+of+medication+errors.htm (Accessed March 21 2006).

  • Lingard, L., Espin, S., Rubin, B., Whyte, S., Colmenares, M., Baker, G. R., Doran, D., Grober, E., Orser, B., Bohnen, J., & Reznick, R. (2005). Getting teams to talk: Development and pilot implementation of a checklist to promote safer operating room communication. Quality and Safety in Health Care, 14, 340–346.

  • Lingard, L., Espin, S., Whyte, S., Regehr, G., Baker, R., Orser, B., Doran, D., Reznick, R., Bohnen, J., & Grober, E. (2004). Communication failures in the operating room: An observational classification of recurrent types and outcomes. Quality and Safety in Health Care, 13, 330–334.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lingard, L., Garwood, K., Schryer, C., & Spafford, M. (2002). A certain art of uncertainty: Case presentation and the development of professional identity. Social Science and Medicine, 56, 603–617.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lingard, L., & Haber, R. J. (1999a). Teaching and learning communication in medicine: A rhetorical approach. Academic Medicine, 74(5), 507–510.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lingard, L., & Haber, R. J. (1999b). What do we mean by ‘relevance’? A clinical and rhetorical definition with implications for teaching and learning the case presentation format. Academic Medicine, 74(10), S124–S127.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lingard, L., Hawryluck, L., Espin, S., & Evans, C. (2004). The rules of the game: Inter-professional collaboration in the ICU team. Critical Care, 8, R403–R408.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lingard, L., Regehr, G., Espin, S., & Whyte, S. A. (in press a). Theory-based instrument to evaluate team communication in the operating room: Balancing measurement authenticity and reliability. Quality and Safety in Health Care.

  • Lingard, L., Reznick, R., DeVito, I., & Espin, S. (2002). Forming professional identities on the healthcare team: Discursive constructions of the ‘other’ in the operating room. Medical Education, 36(8), 728–734.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lingard, L., Schryer, C. F., Garwood, K., & Spafford, M. (2003). Talking the talk: School and workplace genre tension in clerkship case presentations. Medical Education, 37(7), 1–9.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lingard, L., Whyte, S., Espin, S., Baker, G. R., Orser, B., & Doran, D. (2006). Towards safer interprofessional communication: Constructing a model of “utility” from pre-operative team briefings. The Journal of Interprofessional Care, 20(5), 471–483.

    Google Scholar 

  • Schryer, C. (1993). Records as genre. Written Communication, 10, 200–234.

    Google Scholar 

  • Spafford, M. M., Lingard, L., Schryer, C., & Hrynchak, P. K. (2004). Tensions in the field: Teaching standards of practice in optometry case presentations. Optometry and Vision Science, 81, 800–806.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Stout, R. J., Salas, E., & Fowlkes, J. E. (1997). Enhancing teamwork in complex environments through team training. Group Dynamics, 1, 169–182.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Timmermans, S., & Berg, M. (2003). The practice of medical technology. Sociology of Health and Illness, 25, 97–114.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Varpio, L., Schryer, C., Lehoux, P., & Lingard, L. (2006). Working off the record: Physicians’ and nurses’ transformation of EPR-based patient information. Academic Medicine, 81 (suppl 10), S35–39.

  • Wenger, E. (1998). Communities of practice: Learning, meaning, and identity. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgement

Lorelei Lingard is supported by a CIHR New Investigator Award and as the BMO Financial Group Professor in Health Professions Education Research.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Lorelei Lingard.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Lingard, L. The rhetorical ‘turn’ in medical education: What have we learned and where are we going?. Adv Health Sci Educ Theory Pract 12, 121–133 (2007). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10459-006-9046-y

Download citation

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10459-006-9046-y

Keywords

Navigation