Hugh Barr

Designing the learning environment for the health care professionals of tomorrow is less than complete unless and until it includes interprofessional education (IPE). Progress depends on establishing a shared understanding of IPE between architects and teachers as the dialogue between them during the forum confirmed. My brief presentation provided no more than the catalyst. This paper goes further. It locates IPE within a coherent, consistent and pervasive rationale distilled over time from its roots in different countries and fields of practice, including the formulation of objectives, the adaptation of a repertoire of learning methods, the adoption of a definition and values and the framing of principle and competency-based outcomes, before alerting readers to some of the many complexities during the planning process.

This paper searches for the antecedents of some of many diverse theoretical perspectives being brought to bear to understand interprofessional education (IPE) toward developing a coherent, compatible and inclusive frame of reference. Some of the sources cited are original, “leaving everything to play for” in applying them to IPE. Others apply one or more of those sources to interprofessional learning or the context in which it is delivered. Combining perspectives in this way is helpful insofar as it furthers coherence across disciplinary boundaries, but leaves the serious scholar to trace each back to its roots. Considerations of space preclude a definitive review of the ever-increasing repertoire of theoretical perspectives being introduced into IPE from anthropology education, psychology, sociology and other academic disciplines. This paper focuses on those theories which elucidate the learning process and the learning context.

Interprofessional education (IPE) is being built into the mainstream of professional education for all health and social care professions throughout the United Kingdom (UK) driven by the Labour Government elected in 1997, coincidentally the year that this Journal hosted the first All Together Better Health conference in London. The incoming government prioritized pre-qualifying IPE to be provided in partnership by universities and service agencies supported regionally by workforce development confederations, later absorbed into strategic health authorities (SHAs), and centrally by educational, professional and regulatory bodies. Ambitious agenda for pre-qualifying IPE set by government are being tempered by realistic assessment of current outcomes borne of experience and corroborated by evidence. This paper suggests some ways to ease constraints and improve outcomes, but emphasizes the need to generate continuing interprofessional learning opportunities that build on the basics. It argues that accumulating experience and evidence must be brought to bear in formulating criteria for the approval and review of IPE within regulatory systems for professional education. Can IPE be sustained within mainstream professional education once initial enthusiasm ebbs and earmarked funds run dry? That is the issue.