Search

Background/aim The successful development and maintenance of professional identity is associated with professional development and retention in the health workforce. This paper explores students' perspectives on the ways pre-entry experiences and curricula content shape professional identity. Methods An online cross-sectional survey was sent to students enrolled in the final year of entry-level programmes in five countries. Descriptive statistical analyses of data were completed. Results The results reflect the perceptions of 319 respondents from five countries. Respondents identified professional education (98%) and professional socialisation during placement (92%) as curricula components with the greatest influence on professional identity formation. Discipline-specific knowledge such as, occupation-focussed models and occupational science were ranked lower than these aspects of practice. The students' length of programme and level of entry-level programme did not impact on these results. Conclusion When designing curricula educators need to be mindful that students perceive practice education and professional socialisation have the greatest affect on professional identity formation. The findings reinforce the need for curricula to provide students with a range of practice experiences, which allow the observation and application of occupation-based practices. It highlights a need for educators to provide university-based curricula activities, which better prepare students for a potential dissonance between explicit occupation-based curricula and observed practice education experiences. The study indicates the need for further research into the role curricula content, and in particular practice education, plays in the multidimensional formation of professional development within entry-level programmes. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The concept of proportionality has been central to the retributive revival in penal theory, and underlies desert theory's normative and practical commitment to limiting punishment. Theories of punishment combining desert-based and consequentialist considerations also appeal to proportionality as a limiting condition. In this paper we argue that these claims are founded on an exaggerated idea of what proportionality can offer, and in particular fail properly to consider the institutional conditions needed to foster robust limits on the state's power to punish. The idea that appeals to proportionality as an abstract ideal can help to limit punishment is, we argue, a chimera: what has been thought of as proportionality is not a naturally existing relationship, but a product of political and social construction, cultural meaning-making, and institution-building. Drawing on evolutionary psychology and comparative political economy, we argue that philosophers and social scientists need to work together to understand how the appeal of the idea of proportionality can best be realised through substantive institutional frameworks under particular conditions. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]