Abstract:

Background:
The Bachelor of Clinical Medical Practice (BCMP) is offered at the University of Pretoria, South Africa since 2009. As lecturers responsible for offering some of the first-year modules, we embarked on an educational professional development trajectory. It includes continuous self-study and studying the collective. The aim is lecturer-identity formation.

Objectives:
(1) To show how preferences for different modes of thinking are used to inform our lecturer-identity.
(2) To determine, using (participatory) action research, who we are as individuals and as a group of lecturers teaching a first-year cohort studying towards a BCMP qualification.

Theoretical framework:
Our project(s) revolve around theories for adult professional learning. Constructs derived from these theories include thinking preferences, constructivism, self-regulated professional learning, lecturer-identity formation and attributes of the 21st Century. We embrace professionalism as is expected of our students. Within the realm of a programme that focuses on clinical practice of prospective clinicians, we allow for reciprocal learning from one another and from students. The notion of living theory is honoured through co-constructing new meaning and practicing learning-centredness. A multidimensional lens is used to study self and practice as multiple of roles are to be enacted. These roles include curriculum development, facilitating and assessing learning. We endeavour to ensure that students’ learning experience is authentic. This calls for a curriculum designed in such a way that what is expected of students are aligned with the real world of work; engaging students in learning task execution that reflects real-life challenges; assessing competencies students as prospective health practitioners have to enact.

Research design:
With transforming practice we are mindful that any transformation starts with the self. This means knowing the self and knowing one another. Fitting our scholarly community of practice, participatory action research became our research design of choice. The focus on the self/’I’ is self-study-driven – typical of action research. As a collective we focus on the ‘we’ – typical of participatory action research. Each member executes their individual action research as an ongoing process of own professional development. These processes are spin-off spirals from the main spiral representing the established academic in his role the principal researcher.

Research outcome:
For the purpose of gaining insight of self in a validated fashion, we used the Herrmann Brain Dominance Instrument (HBDI). This instrument determines one’s preferences for specific modes of thinking. The results include a profile, a visual representation of one’s thinking preferences, and a narrative explaining each profile. Each of us has an own profile that is used for self-study. The profiling reveals our strengths and areas where we need to work on. A composite group profile indicates our preferences as a collective. This composite profile reveals our strengths as a collective and areas where we are lacking. Qualitative data sets being shared are on the thinking preference profiling of our group of lecturers and student feedback. For the purpose of obtaining feedback from students, a questionnaire was designed that is learning-centred. It includes items that expect students to reflect on own learning and contribution to peers’ learning.

Keywords:

Participatory action research, Scholarly community of practice, Thinking preferences