Threshold Concepts and Teaching Psychiatry: Key to the Kingdom or Emperor's New Clothes?

Threshold concepts in health professions education research: a scoping review

Threshold concepts (TCs) are increasingly used in health professions education (HPE) research. TCs are claimed to be conceptual gateways which are often traversed with substantial difficulty. In this paper, we report on a scoping review investigating the following research question: What is the scope and nature of the currently available research on threshold concepts in health professions education literature? We employed Arksey and O'Malley's model for scoping reviews. A search for literature on TCs in HPE research between 2003 and 2020 yielded 999 records of which 59 were included in the review. The data set was subject to quantitative descriptive analysis of article characteristics as well as qualitative thematic analysis of the scope of research on TCs. Among the 59 articles selected for review, there were 30 empirical, 26 conceptual and three reviews. A majority were published in 2015 or later. Almost half of the included articles attempted to identify possible TCs within HPE. Others investigated how TCs can be traversed or suggested how TCs could influence curriculum design. Some critically appraised the framework of TC. Although TCs are increasingly utilised in HPE, the present review identified how researchers came across methodological challenges related to identifying possible TCs and definitional challenges around identifying the essential characteristics of TCs. Before embracing TCs as the next go-to theory for learning in HPE, we acknowledge the need for methodological stringeny and rigour as well as more data to support TCs. Until then, any implementation of TCs in HPE curricula should be done cautiously.

Do We Need to Close the Door on Threshold Concepts?

ISSUE

Threshold Concepts are increasingly used and researched within health professions education. First proposed by Meyer and Land in 2003, they can be defined as ways of knowing central to the mastery of a subject. They are framed as profoundly transformative, impacting the identity of those who encounter them through irreversible shifts in an individual's outlook. Although Threshold Concepts have been identified in a multitude of educational settings across the continuum of health professions education, there has been little critique of Threshold Concepts as a theory of health professions education. Within adjacent fields critical discourse is also underdeveloped, perhaps given the educational resonance of the theory, or the way in which the theory encourages subject specialists to discuss their area of interest in depth. This commentary critically examines how Threshold Concepts have been used and researched within health professions education, applying critiques from other educational fields, to assist scholars in thinking critically regarding their application.

EVIDENCE

Three significant critiques are outlined: 1) 'The floating signifier problem'; 2) 'The body of knowledge problem'; and 3) 'The professional identity problem.' Critique 1, the floating signifier problem, outlines how Threshold Concept theory lacks articulation and has been inconsistently operationalized. Critique 2, the body of knowledge problem, outlines the issues associated with attempting to identify a singular body of knowledge, particularly in regard to the reinforcement of entrenched power dynamics. Critique 3, the professional identity problem, argues that the way in which Threshold Concepts conceptualize identity formation is problematic, inadequately grounded in wider academic debate, and at odds with increasingly constructionist conceptualizations of identity within health professions education.

IMPLICATIONS

These critiques have implications for both educators and researchers. Educators using Threshold Concepts theory must think carefully about the tacit messages their use communicates, consider how the use of Threshold Concepts could reinforce entrenched power dynamics, and reflect on how their use may make material less accessible to some learners. Further, given that Threshold Concept theory lacks articulation, using the theory to structure curricula or educational sessions is problematic. Threshold Concepts are not synonymous with course learning outcomes and so, While considering Threshold Concepts may enable pedagogical discussion, the theory cannot help educators decide which concepts it applies to; this requires careful planning which extends beyond the bounds of this theory. For researchers, there are issues too with power and inconsistent theoretical operationalization, but also with the way in which Threshold Concepts theory conceptualizes identity formation, which cast doubt on its use as a theory of identity development. On balance, we believe Threshold Concept theory suffers a number of fundamental flaws that necessitate a shift from the positioning of Threshold Concepts as a theory, toward the use of Threshold Concepts as a less prescriptive reflective prompt to stimulate pedagogical discussion.

Threshold concepts: A portal into new ways of thinking and practising in psychiatry

Introduction: The theory of threshold concepts conjectures that there are areas in every educational curriculum that are challenging; however, mastering these areas transform the learner's view of the subject. In psychiatry, research into threshold concepts can inform educators so that they can better support students with mastering these challenging areas.Purpose: To identify threshold concepts, we conducted semi-structured interviews with six psychiatry educators and free-text surveys with medical students. To identify avenues for improving the curriculum, we discussed with educators, ways of improving understanding and looked at different approaches to learning.Materials and methods: From our analysis of all responses, we derived three threshold concepts: Therapeutic Risk-Taking, the Biopsychosocial Model, and the Concept of Diagnosis in psychiatry. The majority of students experienced difficulties grasping these concepts and applying them in their patient interactions.Results and conclusions: Hence, we propose focused teaching activities that can help students cross these thresholds: student Balint groups exploring therapeutic risk, student Balint groups exploring the role of a psychiatrist, exposure to psychological therapies/psychotherapy skills and explicit diagnostic reasoning. These activities can be integrated into the undergraduate curriculum to help medical students develop a better understanding and appreciation of psychiatry.

The psychiatrist as philosopher: an appreciation of Dr Séamus Mac Suibhne (Sweeney) (1978-2019)

Dr Séamus Mac Suibhne (Sweeney), consultant psychiatrist and writer, who died on 8 September 2019, was a unique, much admired figure in Irish psychiatry. His interests ranged from clinical care to philosophy, from medical education to history, from innovative technology to the natural world. He was a dedicated family man as well as a doctor, scholar and writer who moved between academic fields with ease and erudition. As a clinician, he consistently placed compassion at the centre of care. Séamus's work appeared in the Lancet, BMJ, British Journal of Psychiatry, International Journal of Social Psychiatry and Irish Journal of Psychological Medicine, among other publications. He also wrote for the Guardian, Spectator, Scotsman and Times Literary Supplement. Séamus had a particular passion for better acknowledgement and treatment of mental illness among psychiatrists, and his compelling advocacy on this theme is one of his lasting legacies.