나는 누구인가? 교수개발 프로그램에서의 학문적정체성 형성(Med Teach, 2012)

나는 누구인가? 교수개발 프로그램에서의 학문적정체성 형성(Med Teach, 2012)

Who am I? Key influences on the formation of academic identity within a faculty development program

SUSAN LIEFF1,2, LINDSAY BAKER1, BRENDA MORI1,3, EILEEN EGAN-LEE1, KEVIN CHIN4 & SCOTT REEVES5

1University of Toronto in the Li Ka Shing International Healthcare Education Centre at St. Michael’s Hospital, Toronto, Ontario, Canada, 2University of Toronto, Toronto, Ontario, Canada, 3University of Toronto, Toronto, Ontario, Canada, 4McGill University, Montreal, Quebec, Canada, 5University of California, San Francisco, California, USA

도입

Introduction

'정체성'이란 용어는 심리학/사회한/철학에서 다양한 의미를 가진다. 그러나 이 모든 의미가 '정체성이란 [개인이 스스로를 어떻게 이해하며, 경험을 어떻게 해석하고, 스스로를 어떻게 (겉으로) 드러내고present, 다른사람에게 어떻게 보여지기perceived를 바라고, 더 광범위한 차원의 커뮤니티에 의해서 어떻게 인식되기를 바라는지에 따라] 지속적으로 형성 및 재형성formed and reformed되는 역동적 구조'라는 전제에 기반한다.

The term ‘identity’ has taken on a great many meanings in psychology, sociology, and philosophy. All these descriptions, however, are based on the premise that identity is a dynamic construct which is continually formed and reformed (Luehmann 2007; Monrouxe 2010). Identity encompasses how individuals understand themselves, how they interpret experiences, how they present themselves and wish to be perceived by others and how they are recognized by the broader community (Gee 2001).

보건의료전문직에서는 '전문직 정체성professional identity'이 있으며, 이것은 직업 혹은 임상적 환경의 커뮤니티 내에 존재하는situated within 것이다. 대학의 교수 역시 'academic'한 전문직 정체성을 가지고 있으며, 자신이 속한 과나 교실의 맥락에 존재하는 것이고, 이 정체성은 교육자로서의 역할educational role을 포괄한다. 여러 문헌은 학문적 정체성academic identity(AI)가 보건의료교육자로서의 웰빙과 생산성에 핵심적 역할을 한다고 제시한다. 실제로 Stone 등은 의과대학 교수가 스스로의 정체성을 teacher로 가질수록 어떻게 더 가르치고자 하고/교육 스킬을 향상시키고자 하고/교육경험으로부터 만족을 얻고/궁극적으로는 학생의 학습을 향상시키는지에 대해서 강조한 바 있다. 유사하게, 비슷한 다른 연구들도 AI가 교육자의 자기효능감/동기/헌신/직무만족에 기여하며, 교실에서의 행동에 큰 영향을 준다는 것을 보여준 바 있다.

While health care professionals have a ‘professional iden- tity’ which is situated within the community of their profession or clinical setting, faculty members of a university also have an ‘academic’ professional identity, which is situated within the context of their faculty or academic department, and the many encompasses educational roles they provide (Arreola et al. 2009). The literature suggests that this academic identity (AI) plays an integral role in the well being and productivity of health professional educators. Indeed, Stone et al. (2002) highlight how medical faculty who identify as teachers are more likely to want to teach, improve their skills, acquire satisfaction from the experience of teaching and ultimately, student learning. Similarly, other studies have noted that AI contributes to the self-efficacy, motivation, commit-ment, and job satisfaction of educators and has tremendous impact on their behavior in the classroom (Flores & Day 2006;Taylor et al. 2007). 

연구 맥락

Study context

토론도의과대학의 ESP. 과장이 추천하여 위원회에서 선발함. 프로그램당 15~16명.

The Education Scholars Program (ESP) was developed in 2004 by the Centre for Faculty Development – a joint initiative between the University of Toronto, Faculty of Medicine and St. Michael’s Hospital. Potential candidates are nominated by their department chairs and clinical leaders and are then selected by a committee consisting of leaders within the education community. The program accepts on average 15–16 partici-pants per cohort.

세 가지 주제

The core curriculum is organized into three themes:

• (1) teaching excellence;

• (2) curriculum and scholarship; and

• (3) leadership and career development.

방법

Methods

AI에 대한 이해를 높이기 위해서 질적 사례연구 접근법 활용. 사례연구방법론의 장점.

To help inform our understanding of AI, we adopted a qualitative case study approach. Case study methodology isused for in-depth investigation of a single individual, group(s),or event(s). Case studies allow the researcher to engage in anongoing analysis of data collected from multiple sources with the purpose of enhancing understanding of a phenomenon of interest (Yin 2009)

참여자 Participants

자료 수집 Data collection

포커스그룹 설명(7~8명, 1.5시간, 총 19.5시간)

Each focus group consisted of seven or eight participants, was approxi-mately 1.5 h in length, and resulted in approximately 19.5 h of digital recording. These recordings were then transcribed and anonymized before analysis. 

자료분석 Data analysis

Thematic analysis

A thematic analysis of the data was conducted to explore emerging issues and themes related to AI. During the analysis, one researcher identified tentative issues and codes and organized them into preliminary categories. The research team met frequently to discuss and refine these initial codes and categories. Eventually, through an iterative process of relating and grouping of codes, the research team decided on a coding structure divided into major themes and factors (Glaser and Strauss 1967).

 

퀄리티 이슈 Quality issues

Trustworthiness 를 높이기 위한 방법. Confirmability / Dependability / Credibility

Trustworthiness of the data was enhanced in a variety of ways.

• 각 수준의 분석에 대한 코드개발을 문서화함
  The development of codes at each level of analysis was documented to enhance confirmability.

• 팀이 자주 만나서 분석을 논의하고 emerging theme을 다듬음
  The research team met frequently to discuss emerging analyses and refine themes being generated to enhance the dependability of the results.

• 성찰기록물과 포커스그룹인터뷰 자료 둘 다로부터 theme을 삼각측량함
  Finally, triangulation of themes generated from both sources of data (reflection papers and focus group interviews) as well as across all three cohorts assisted in establishing credibility (Lincoln & Guba 1985).

 

 

 

결과

Results

개인

Personal

여러가지 인지적, 정서적 요인이 ESP맥락에서 AI 발달에 기여하였음

The data highlighted many cognitive and emotional factors that contributed to the growth of the participants’ academic identities within the context of the ESP. 

관계

Relational

 

맥락

Contextual

 

 

 

고찰

Discussion

이 연구결과는 정체성은 고정된 entity가 아니라 진행되는 프로세스라는 다른 사람들의 결과를 지지하는 것이다. AI발달의 프로세스는 자신을 특정 유형의 사람으로 해석하고, 자신을 그러한 사람으로서 드러내고, 주어진 맥락에서 그러한 사람이르 인정받는 것을 포함한다.

These findings support the work by others (e.g., 2007) that Coldron & Smith 1999; Luehmann who assert identity is an ongoing process rather than a fixed entity. The process of AI development involves

• interpreting oneself as a certain kind of person,

• presenting oneself as that person and

• being recognized as such in a given context.

개인적

Personal

개인영역에서 보면, 본 연구결과는 정서적 요인과 인지적 요인이 AI에 기여하는 것을 강조한다. 스스로의 능력에 대해서 인식하는 것, 스스로의 행동에 대한 해석, 이전 경험에 대한 해석, 다양한 역할과 정체성을 관리manage하는 능력 등 모든 것들이 AI에 영향을 주었다. 대부분의 참여자에게 있어서, 교육자로서의 자신감은 프로그램이 진행되는 과정에서 요동쳤다. 자신감의 waxing and waning은 다른 연구자들도 비슷하게 묘사한 바 있다. 그러나 일반적으로, 참여자들은 자신감이 늘어남으로서 empowered 되었다고 말하였다. 즉 프로그램에 참여하기 전에는 감당하기 망설여졌던 새로운 교육자 역할new educational role에 대해서 실험해볼 자신감empowered to experiment가 생겼다는 것이다. 교육자로서의 자신감이 높아진 것은 AI에도 기여하였다.

Within the personal domain, the findings highlighted how emotional and cognitive factors contributed to AI. An individ- ual’s perception of their capabilities, interpretation of their actions, interpretation of prior experiences and their ability to manage multiple roles and identities all appeared to affect their AI. For most participants, their sense of self-confidence in their many roles as educators fluctuated throughout the program. This waxing and waning of self-confidence has been similarly described by other educational researchers (Skeff et al. 1992; Lown et al. 2009). In general, however, participants described being empowered by a growing self-confidence – empowered to experiment with new educational roles they were previ- ously reluctant to embrace. This enhanced sense of self- confidence as educators contributed to their growing sense of AI (Stone et al. 2002).

 

추가로, 프로그램을 통해서 새로운 교육적 관점을 얻게 되었으며, 자신의 학문적 태도와 신념에 대해서 질문해봄으로써 자신의 행동을 다른 방식으로 해석할 수 있게 되었다. 시간이 지나면서 새로운 관점이 스스로를 다르게 바라보게 해주었다. 또한 프로그램은 참여자들에게 다양한 새로운 학문적 역할academic role(리더/교수개발자/Scholar)을 알려주었다. 참여자들은 새로운 역할들을 알아가면서, 의사로서의 정체성과 교육자로서의 정체성 사이에 '내적 갈등'을 겪게 되었다고 말했다. Wenger가 어떻게 multi-membership이 우리의 정체성의 본질적 측면인가를 묘사하였으나, 이 다수의 정체성을 관리하는 것은 쉽지 않은 일이며, (어떤 정체성들은) 서로 상충하는 관계게 있기도 하다. 마지막으로, 연구결과에서는 과거 경험이 AI의 성장과 발달에 미치는 영향을 보여주었다. Stuart and Thurlow 의 연구에서, 교실에서의 행동과 신념이 교사의 어릴시적 경험에 크게 영향을 받는 것이 확인되었다. 그럼에도 불구하고, 참여자들은 과거 경험(personal 경험이든 professional 경험이든)이 자신을 바라보는 방식/자신의 의지(혹은 무의지unwillingness)/새로운 academic role로 변화하거나 이를 받아들이는데 주는 영향을 거의 인식하지 못하고 있었다.

In addition, the program introduced participants to a variety of new educational perspectives, prompting them to question their academic attitudes and beliefs and providing them with new ways to interpret their actions. Over time, these new perspectives enabled them to view themselves differently. Moreover, the program intro- duced participants to a variety of new academic roles (i.e., leader, faculty developer, and scholar). As participants began to identify with these new roles, many described an ‘internal conflict’ between their identity as a clinician and their identity as an educator. While Wenger (1998) describes how multi-membership is an inherent aspect of our identities, the management of these multiple identities may be challeng- ing as they either conflict or align with each other (Mishler 1999). Finally, the findings highlighted the impact of prior experiences on the growth and development of AI. In a study by Stuart and Thurlow (2000), it was revealed how classroom behaviours and beliefs teachers have about themselves were heavily influenced by prior childhood experiences. Nevertheless, participants were often unaware of the impact of their past experiences – both personal and professional – on how they viewed themselves and their willingness, or rather unwillingness, to change or embrace new academic roles.

관계적

Relational

관계적 영역에서, 참여자들은 소속감sense of belonging, 다른 사람과의 비교, 다른 사람이 어떻게 자신을 인식하는가 등에 따라 AI에 영향을 받았다. 참여자들은 프로그램에 참여한 것을 긍정적인 경험으로 묘사했으며, 더 큰 커뮤니티에 연결된connected 기분을 느꼈다고 했다. (교실커뮤니티, larger 커뮤니티에 대한) 소속감의 중요성은 기존에도 다뤄진 바 있다. 커뮤니티에 대한 소속감은 sense of validation을 부여해주며, 커리어 및 프로페셔널 네티워킹 기회도 제공해준다. 실제로, 커뮤니티 멤버십은 AI와 관련되어 있으며, 학문적 성공의 중요한 예측인자였다.

In the relational domain, the findings indicated that participant identities were influenced by feeling a sense of belonging, comparing themselves to others as well as others’ perceptions of them. Participants described their membership in the program as a positive experience in which they felt ‘con- nected’ to the larger community. The importance of a sense of belonging to both a classroom community and a larger community of practice has been well documented in the literature (Steinert & McLeod 2006; Lown et al. 2009). Belonging to a community may provide a sense of validation as well as career and professional networking opportunities (Lown et al. 2009). Indeed, membership in a community is related to one’s AI as it has been found to be a great predictor of academic success (e.g., Wenger 2000; Simpson et al. 2004).

 

연구결과에서 자기자신을 다른 사람과 비교하는 것은 emerging identity를 강화하거나 억제할 수 있음을 보여준다. 참여자들이 새로운 관점을 습득하고 새로운 언어를 배움에 따라서, 많은 경우 동료보다 자신이 교육적 역할에 더 능력을 갖추었다는 자신감을 가지게 되었으며, 이것이 자신감을 높이는데 기여하였다. 더 나아가, 참여자들은 프로그램 퍼실리테이터로 참여한 교수들 및 scholarly project의 어드바이저와 만나게 되었다. 참여자들은 자신을 이들 '전문가'와 비교하였는데, 어떤 참여자는 자신의 부족함inadequate을 느꼈지만, 대부분은 그들에게 inspired되고 동기부여되었다. 실제로 이 '전문가'교수들은 자신의 숨은 정체성을 찾고자 하는 참여자들에게 롤모델이 되어주었고, 참여자들이 되고자 하는strived to become 이상적 모습ideal을 보여주었다.

The findings also indicated that comparing oneself to others may have the potential to reinforce or inhibit emerging identities. As participants learned about new per- spectives and acquired a new language, many felt more capable in their educational roles than their colleagues, which appeared to contribute to an increase in self-confidence. participants Furthermore, were introduced to a large and diverse faculty who engaged as both program facilitators and advisors on scholarly projects. Participants compared them- selves to these ‘experts’ and while some participants felt inadequate, most felt inspired or motivated by them. Indeed, these ‘expert’ faculty appeared to serve as role models for participants who were trying to identify potential identities and served as an ideal to which participants strived to become (Ibarra 1999).

 

맥락적

Contextual domain

마지막 영역에서, 프로그램 그 자체 뿐 아니라 참여자의 근무환경이 정체성 형성에 영향을 준다는 것을 발견했다. 프로그램 내적으로는 새로운 실천언어language of practice를 습득한 것이 교육자로서의 신뢰성과 정당성credibility and legitimacy를 느끼게 해주었다. 추가로, 참여자들을 scholar, educator, leader라고 명시적으로 라벨링한 것explicit labeling이 자신이 성공할 능력이 있다는 믿음을 갖게 해주었다. 교육과정 내에 포함된 여러가지 프레임워크들과 교육과정에서 성찰을 강조한 것이 정체성을 형성하는데 하나의 특정한 모델만 있는 것이 아니라는 것versatility을 enable해주었다. 마지막으로, 지지적환경의 중요성을 보여주었는데, 새로운 정체성을 '실천practice'할 수 있는 서포트가 없이는 새로운 정체성을 좌절을 겪고 만다. 시간이 부족하거나 의학교육에 가치를 두지 않는 것이 참여자들로 하여금 AI나 academic role을 추구하는 것을 막아섰다. 따라서 근무환경은 정체성 성장을 가능하게도, 불가능하게도 만들 수 있다는 점에서 정체성발달에 필수적 요소이다

In the final domain, the findings suggested that the unique features of the program itself as well as individual work environments of the participants can both influence the formation of their identity. Within the program, the acquisition of a language of practice conferred upon the participants a sense of credibility and legitimacy as educators. In addition, the explicit labeling of participants as scholars, educators, and leaders by faculty conveyed a belief in their ability to succeed (Tipping & Tiberius 1990). Furthermore, the multiple frame- works and perspectives embedded within the curriculum, as well as the emphasis on reflection, enabled versatility in identity construction as there was not one specific model being promoted. Finally, the importance of a supportive context was highlighted in our findings. Without support to ‘practice’ their new identities many felt discouraged. Multiple demands on time and lack of value for medical education at the faculty level prevented participants from pursuing academic interests and roles. Work environments are thus an essential component in identity development as they have the potential to either impede or enable its growth (Marks 1999).

교수개발에 대한 함의

Implications for faculty development

개인영역의 요인과 관련해서 보면, 교수개발의 퍼실리테이터들은 emerging AI로부터 형성되는 잠재적 갈등을 인식하고, 개개인들이 (그들에게 요구되거나 스스로 감당하고자 하는) 다양한 role을 관리하는것에서 오는 본질적 tension에 대해서 도움을 주어야 한다. 과거의 경험이 정체성 형성과 성장에 영향을 줄 수 있기 때문에 교수개발자들은 참여자들이 과거의 경험을 의식수준conscious level로 끌어올리게 하고, 그것을 안전한 환경에서 말해보고, 성찰적 토론을 통해서 더 examine해보로록 도와줘야 한다.

In relation to factors within the personal domain, faculty development facilitators need to be aware of the potential conflict generated from emerging academic identities and provide supports to help individuals consider the tension inherent in managing the multiple roles that may be asked by them or that they wish to embrace. With the influence prior experiences have on identity formation and growth, it is essential for faculty developers to assist partici- pants in bringing them to a conscious level and provide a safe environment in which to articulate and examine them further. (e.g., through reflection discussions).

교수개발은 여러 관계적 요인도 고려해야 핟나. 프로그램 내에서와 더 큰 의학교육커뮤니티에서의 소속감은 AI의 형성에 대단히 중요하다. 비공식적informal 토론 기회를 주고, 참여자간 관계 형성의 기회를 주는 것도 지지적 커뮤니티의 소속감을 갖게 해줄 수 있다. 추가로, 다수의 '전문가' 혹은 롤모델에 노출되는 것도 AI형성에 도움을 줁다. 실제로, 프로그램 퍼실리테이터의 선정은 정체성 형성에 personal and relational implication을 가진다. 퍼실리테이터를 선정할 때 관계 형성을 위해서는 폭넓은 경험이 있는 사람을 고르는 것이 좋으며, 참여자가 소속된 다양한 맥락을 반영할 수 있게 고르는 것이 좋다. 이 '전문가'에 노출됨으로써 비교comparison를 통해  자신감에 영향을 줄 수 있기 때문에, 이 잠재적 롤모델들을 초청invite하여 (전문가의) journey나 practice를 share하게 하는게 좋다. 마지막으로, 교수개발프로그램은 참여자들에게 외부의 압력과 기대에 대응 발달전략을 지원support해주어야 한다.

Faculty development programs must also consider a number of relational factors. Facilitating a sense of belonging both within the program and the broader medical education com- munity appears to be paramount in the formation of AI. Providing opportunities for informal discussion and relation- ship building (e.g., eating meals together) amongst participants can facilitate a sense of belonging to a supportive community. In addition, a sense of belonging to the greater community can be facilitated by exposure to multiple ‘experts’ and other role models in the field. Indeed, the choice of program facilitators may have both personal and relational implications related to identity formation. When choosing facilitators, it may be beneficial to introduce a wide variety of experienced indivi- duals in the field, purposely chosen to represent the various contexts of the participants, in order to facilitate relationship building. Moreover, with the knowledge that exposure to these ‘experts’ can lead to comparisons affecting confidence levels in participants, it may be helpful to invite these potential role models to share their journey or practices. It may be helpful to invite these potential role models to share their journey or practices. Finally, faculty development programs need to to provide participants with support developing strategies deal with external pressures and expectations fromtheir home environments.

교육과정 개발 활동을 할 때, 교수개발자들은 맥락적 요인을 고려해야 한다. 프로그램 내에서 사용되는 discourse는 emerging AI의 형성에 중요한 역할을 한다. 프로그램 개발자들은 따라서 FDP교육과정에서 discourse를 사려깊고 목적의식을 가지고 활용 및 도입introduction해야 한다. FDP는 참여자들에게 다양한 교육적 프레임워크를 소개시켜주고, 그 프레임워크 내에서 작업하게 해줘야 한다. 이렇게 다양한 관점에 노출됨으로서 참여자들이 자신과 잘 맞는relates to 것을 찾을 수 있다. 또한 성찰을 연습하는 것도 교육과정의 중요한 요소가 되어야 하는데, 참여자들인 자신의 태도와 신념에 대해 질문해보고, 더 굳혀가는 venue가 되기 때문이다. 마지막으로, 참여자들의 근무환경이 고려되어야 한다. 소속 기관 또는 소속 과로부터 시간/재정 등의 서포트를 받으면 도움이 될 것이다. 그러나 참여자들이 새로운 정체성을 가지고 활동하려면 더 넓은 기관차원의 전략이 필요하다.

During curriculum development activities, it is important for faculty developers to also be cognizant of a number of contextual factors. The discourse used within the program – which participants may adopt to describe themselves, their actions and their newly acquired knowledge – has been shown to play a role in the formation of their emerging academic identities (Gee 2001). Program developers should therefore be thoughtful and purposeful about the use and introduction of discourse throughout the curriculum. FD programs should also take care to introduce participants to, and work within, a variety of educational frameworks throughout the curriculum. Exposure to these varied perspec- tives may help to ensure a greater likelihood participants will find one that relates to them. Furthermore, the practice of reflection appears to be an essential component of the curriculum as it has the potential to provide a venue to help participants both question and solidify their attitudes and beliefs. Finally, the work context of participants should also be considered. Support from home departments including protected time and tuition monies are helpful; however, it appears that more institution-wide strategies may be needed in order for participants to be able to act on their new identities when back in their home environments.

 

---

Med Teach. 2012;34(3):e208-15. doi: 10.3109/0142159X.2012.642827.

Who am I? Key influences on the formation of academic identity within a faculty development program.

Lieff S1, Baker L, Mori B, Egan-Lee E, Chin K, Reeves S.

Author information

• 1Centre for Faculty Development, Faculty of Medicine, University of Toronto in the Li Ka Shing International Healthcare Education Centre at St. Michael's Hospital, Toronto, Ontario, Canada. s.lieff@utoronto.ca

Abstract

INTRODUCTION:

Professional identity encompasses how individuals understand themselves, interpret experiences, present themselves, wish to be perceived, and are recognized by the broader professional community. For health professional and health science educators, their 'academic' professional identity is situated within their academic community and plays an integral role in their well being and productivity. This study aims to explore factors that contribute to the formation and growth of academic identity (AI) within the context of a longitudinal faculty development program.

METHODS:

Using a qualitative case study approach, data from three cohorts of a 2-year faculty development program were explored and analyzed for emerging issues and themes related to AI.

RESULTS:

Factors salient to the formation of AI were grouped into three major domains: personal (cognitive and emotional factors unique to each individual); relational (connections and interactions with others); and contextual (the program itself and external work environments).

DISCUSSION:

Faculty development initiatives not only aim to develop knowledge, skills, and attitudes, but also contribute to the formation ofacademic identities in a number of different ways. Facilitating the growth of AI has the potential to increase faculty motivation, satisfaction, and productivity. Faculty developers need to be mindful of factors within the personal, relational, and contextual domains when considering issues ofprogram design and implementation.

PMID:

 

22364478

 

[PubMed - indexed for MEDLINE]