Language and tools for professional accountability.
The article considers the issues raised by Chaplain Yes and Chaplain No earlier in this volume. They are considered in the framework of the distinctive dimensions of a profession. I contend that chaplaincy could be served by internal discussions of specialized skills and goals it wants to claim in the professional sphere, and that scientific tools could be used to evaluate, refine, and communicate those skills and goals. Possibilities include benchmarks, outcomes research, and inclusion of "consumers" in research designs. I argue that distinctive core skills and competencies of chaplaincy lie in affective, intuitive, and symbolic domains more than scientific domains, but that chaplaincy can benefit from strategic utilization of tools moore native to other disciplines. I caution against reductionism from either domain, while arguing for vigorous dialogue.
Jensen
Mark E
ME
Wake Forest University Baptist Medical Center, Department of Pastoral Care, Medical Center Boulevard, Winston-Salem, NC 27157-1099, USA. mjensen@wfubmc.edu
D019985:Benchmarking; D002604:Chaplaincy Service, Hospital / Q000941:ethics / Q000379:methods*; D004496:Education, Continuing; D006302:Health Services Research; D006801:Humans; D007400:Interprofessional Relations; D015279:Organizational Culture; D009937:Organizational Objectives; D017063:Outcome Assessment, Health Care; D010327:Pastoral Care / Q000193:education / Q000941:ethics / Q000379:methods*; D012070:Religion and Science; D012941:Social Responsibility