Educators, practitioners, and policy makers are calling for stronger connections between continuing education (CE) for professionals and the concerns of workplaces where these professionals work. This call for greater alignment is not unique to the health professions. Researchers within the field of higher education have long wrestled with the complexities of aligning professional learning and workplace concerns. In this study, we extend this critical line of inquiry to explore the possible conceptual intersections between two CE programs acting within a single healthcare organization. Both programs are concerned with improving patient care, primarily by changing the ways professionals think and talk with one another. However, the two programs have different historical origins: one in a workplace, the other within a university setting. Introducing the concept of “modes of ordering” as a way to analyze the curricula, we argue the programs are operating through separate logics of learning. We label these two modes of ordering: (1) learning as standardization and (2) learning as identification . Through our discussion, we explore how these different modes demand different roles for educators and participants. Ultimately, we argue that both have value. However, we also argue that educators require conceptual tools to sensitize them to the possibility of competing logics of learning and the subsequent implications for their practice as educators. In conclusion, we offer the metaphor of CE educator as choreographer, connecting concepts and practices within these logics in productive ways while continually navigating the various learning imperatives acting on professionals at any given time.

中文翻译：

---

当学习逻辑发生冲突时：两个基于工作场所的继续教育项目的分析

教育工作者、从业者和政策制定者呼吁在专业人员的继续教育 (CE) 与这些专业人员工作的工作场所的关注之间建立更紧密的联系。这种对更大程度一致性的呼吁并不是卫生专业所独有的。高等教育领域的研究人员长期以来一直在努力解决将专业学习和工作场所问题结合起来的复杂性。在这项研究中，我们扩展了这条关键的调查线，以探索在单个医疗保健组织内运作的两个 CE 计划之间可能的概念交叉。这两个项目都与改善患者护理有关，主要是通过改变专业人士相互思考和交谈的方式。然而，这两个项目有着不同的历史渊源：一个在工作场所，另一个在大学环境中。引入“排序模式”的概念作为分析课程的一种方式，我们认为这些程序是通过单独的学习逻辑运行的。我们将这两种排序模式标记为：（1）作为标准化学习和（2）作为识别学习。通过我们的讨论，我们探讨了这些不同的模式如何要求教育者和参与者扮演不同的角色。最终，我们认为两者都具有价值。然而，我们也认为教育工作者需要概念工具来使他们意识到竞争性学习逻辑的可能性以及对他们作为教育工作者的实践的后续影响。总之，我们提供了作为编舞家的 CE 教育家的比喻，