Medical Rotation Vs Field Trip

In education, exposure to real world application of ones learning is the gold standard for honing
ones skills. When applied to the field of medicine, the same exposure takes the form of rotations
and residencies. While these rotations may hold the same theoretical definition, the reality is far
more different.
The primary distinction of a rotation from any field trip is the level of responsibility involved. By
preparing to take on the mantle of a physician, a rotationist also accepts certain responsibilities
and obligations. It is the privilege to provide care and treatment that demands rotationists to
observe, think and apply their skills to the highest professional degree. For example, in any
medical scenario, a rotationist is expected to intelligently question, examine and analyze every
aspect so as to gain a better understanding of the underlying conditions. The rotationist must also
research any further advances in symptoms, drug interactions, treatment, etc. pertaining to the
scenario. The same cannot be said of a field trip whose only role is to observe and register
specific directed items for future reference. As such, the responsibilities are different between a
medical rotation and a field trip.
In addition, initiative marks the second distinction for medical rotationists. While those on a field
trip are restricted to directed aspects of a scenario, rotationists enjoy greater freedom to
investigate and observe. Since learning opportunities may present themselves within both routine
and rare medical cases, initiative plays a major role. An ideal rotationist knows this and exploits
any opportunity for practical experience. For example, a field trip may observe obesity in a
patient as a routine case while the ideal rotationist would inspect the same patient for cardiac or
musculoskeletal complications by taking initiative. It is this eagerness to learn and prepare
oneself that is characteristic of the ideal rotationist. This desire to go beyond the required duties
is the defining aspect of rotations compared to scripted field trips.
Finally, medical training is essentially a process that demands and deserves dedication,
professionalism and initiative to take on greater responsibilities. This process rewards its
completion with the privilege to be entrusted with the health and faith of the ill. However, any
student who is content with gazing at professionals with the usual mix of awe and bored stares at

timing devices without making the least effort to learn through initiative and responsibility
cannot be called a rotationist. Such individuals forsake the same privilege with their indifference.
It is imperative for clinical rotationists to ask if they are doing all that is possible to learn in any
medical facility. To conclude, while those on field trips simply play at being physicians,
rotationists strive to BE physicians.