Article Text

Download PDFPDF
Continuing professional development: putting the learner back at the centre
  1. Colin Macdougall1,
  2. Melanie Epstein2,
  3. Lorna Highet3
  1. 1 Warwick Medical School, University of Warwick, Coventry, UK
  2. 2 Community Paediatrics, St James's University Hospital, Leeds, UK
  3. 3 Leeds, UK
  1. Correspondence to Professor Colin Macdougall, Warwick Medical School, University of Warwick, Coventry CV4 7AL, UK; Colin.Macdougall{at}


Continuing professional development (CPD) is changing. Once seen as flexible on the basis of personal choice and mainly consisting of conferences and lecture style meetings, it is now much more likely to be specified, mandatory and linked to specific regulatory or quality improvement activities. This may not be well aligned with how adult professionals learn best and the evidence of resulting change in practice is limited. Also there is a danger of losing out on serendipity in learning by pushing experienced professionals into focusing excessively on mandatory activities that seem to be increasingly ‘ticking the box’. However, the previous impression of flexibility may have hidden poor education practice. This paper defines CPD and asks whether there are problems with CPD. It looks at how adults are thought to learn and places this in the context of current practice. It considers practical models of how to deal with a series of common challenges met by those who provide and undertake CPD.

  • Medical Education
  • Paediatric Practice

Statistics from

Request Permissions

If you wish to reuse any or all of this article please use the link below which will take you to the Copyright Clearance Center’s RightsLink service. You will be able to get a quick price and instant permission to reuse the content in many different ways.


  • Twitter Follow Colin Macdougall @profcmacdougall

  • Contributors LH and ME undertook the initial work on the paper. CM added in the educational background and led on pulling the paper together. All authors have approved the final version.

  • Competing interests None declared.

  • Provenance and peer review Commissioned; externally peer reviewed.