↓ Skip to main content

“Aspirations of people who come from state education are different”: how language reflects social exclusion in medical education

Overview of attention for article published in Advances in Health Sciences Education, January 2018
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (84th percentile)
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (76th percentile)

Mentioned by

blogs
1 blog
twitter
4 X users
googleplus
1 Google+ user

Citations

dimensions_citation
16 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
64 Mendeley
Title
“Aspirations of people who come from state education are different”: how language reflects social exclusion in medical education
Published in
Advances in Health Sciences Education, January 2018
DOI 10.1007/s10459-018-9809-2
Pubmed ID
Authors

Jennifer Cleland, Tania Fahey Palma

Abstract

Despite repeated calls for change, the problem of widening access (WA) to medicine persists globally. One factor which may be operating to maintain social exclusion is the language used in representing WA applicants and students by the gatekeepers and representatives of medical schools, Admissions Deans. We therefore examined the institutional discourse of UK Medical Admissions Deans in order to determine how values regarding WA are communicated and presented in this context. We conducted a linguistic analysis of qualitative interviews with Admissions Deans and/or Staff from 24 of 32 UK medical schools. Corpus Linguistics data analysis determined broad patterns of frequency and word lists. This informed a critical discourse analysis of the data using an "othering" lens to explore and understand the judgements made of WA students by Admissions Deans, and the practices to which these judgments give rise. Representations of WA students highlighted existing divides and preconceptions in relation to WA programmes and students. Through using discourse that can be considered othering and divisive, issues of social divide and lack of integration in medicine were highlighted. Language served to reinforce pre-existing stereotypes and a significant 'us' and 'them' rhetoric exists in medical education. Even with drivers to achieve diversity and equality in medical education, existing social structures and preconceptions still influence the representations of applicants and students from outside the 'traditional' medical education model in the UK. Acknowledging this is a crucial step for medical schools wishing to address barriers to the perceived challenges to diversity.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 4 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 64 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 64 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 9 14%
Student > Ph. D. Student 9 14%
Student > Doctoral Student 7 11%
Student > Bachelor 3 5%
Student > Master 3 5%
Other 9 14%
Unknown 24 38%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 14 22%
Social Sciences 6 9%
Linguistics 4 6%
Arts and Humanities 3 5%
Psychology 3 5%
Other 7 11%
Unknown 27 42%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 11. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 07 October 2021.
All research outputs
#2,878,618
of 23,018,998 outputs
Outputs from Advances in Health Sciences Education
#116
of 856 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#68,693
of 441,269 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Advances in Health Sciences Education
#3
of 13 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,018,998 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 87th percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 856 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 5.8. This one has done well, scoring higher than 86% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 441,269 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done well, scoring higher than 84% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 13 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 76% of its contemporaries.