Entrustable professional activities versus competencies and skills: Exploring why different concepts are often conflated

Author:

ten Cate OlleORCID,Schumacher Daniel J.ORCID

Abstract

AbstractDespite explanations in the literature, a returning question in the use of entrustable professional activities (EPAs) is how to distinguish them from competencies and skills. In this article, we attempt to analyze the causes of the frequent confusion and conflation of EPAs with competencies and skills, and argue why the distinction is important for education, qualification and patient safety. ‘Tracheotomy’, ‘lumbar puncture’, ‘interprofessional collaboration’ for example are colloquially called ‘skills’, but its is a person’s ability to perform these activities that is the actual skill; the EPA is simply the activity itself. We identify two possible causes for the confusion. One is a tendency to frame all educational objectives as EPAs. Many objectives of medical training can be conceptualized as EPAs, if ‘the ability to do X’ is the corresponding competency; but that does not work for all. We offer ways to deal with objectives of training that are not usefully conceptualized as EPAs. A more fundamental cause relates to entrustment decisions. The permission to contribute to health care reflects entrustment. Entrustment decisions are the links or pivots between a person’s readiness for the task and the actual task execution. However, if entrustment decisions do not lead to increased autonomy in the practice of health care, but only serve to decide upon the advancement to a next stage of training, EPAs can become the tick boxes learners feel they need to collect to ‘pass’. Gradually, then, EPAs can loose their original meaning of units of practice for which one becomes qualified.

Publisher

Springer Science and Business Media LLC

Subject

Education,General Medicine

Cited by 50 articles. 订阅此论文施引文献 订阅此论文施引文献,注册后可以免费订阅5篇论文的施引文献,订阅后可以查看论文全部施引文献

同舟云学术

1.学者识别学者识别

2.学术分析学术分析

3.人才评估人才评估

"同舟云学术"是以全球学者为主线,采集、加工和组织学术论文而形成的新型学术文献查询和分析系统,可以对全球学者进行文献检索和人才价值评估。用户可以通过关注某些学科领域的顶尖人物而持续追踪该领域的学科进展和研究前沿。经过近期的数据扩容,当前同舟云学术共收录了国内外主流学术期刊6万余种,收集的期刊论文及会议论文总量共计约1.5亿篇,并以每天添加12000余篇中外论文的速度递增。我们也可以为用户提供个性化、定制化的学者数据。欢迎来电咨询!咨询电话:010-8811{复制后删除}0370

www.globalauthorid.com

TOP

Copyright © 2019-2024 北京同舟云网络信息技术有限公司
京公网安备11010802033243号  京ICP备18003416号-3