In the UK, in the 1990s, there was a considerable expansion in higher education. More students than ever before were able to study on degree courses. As a result, there was an increase in the number and range of courses taught. Instead of the word degree, the phrase degree programme became common. A degree programme consisted of a series of credit-bearing modules of study. Success at each step through the programme depended on acquiring a prescribed number of credits.
As part of the higher education expansion, there was a considerable increase in the number of courses associated with health on offer. That reflected an extensive interest in health-related subjects. Most of these were non-vocational qualifications. Particularly numerous were students who did not want to follow a clinical or paramedical career. Training courses for such professions continued to be available. These were upgraded separately to degree status.
Courses titles like Health Science and Health Studies proliferated. New departments became established to cater for this, and existing ones expanded. In addition, departments of biological science and social studies were often called upon to provide teaching as appropriate. Noticeably, departments of medicine were not involved. Whether a degree programme merited a science (BSc) or arts (BA) degree was a product of the modules completed. Some modules were compulsory, others optional. Often, modules in a science-based subject were available to arts-based students and vice versa. Courses often took on a multi- or inter-disciplinary character as a result. That added to the appeal of these programmes.
Of shared interest to all students was the human body. A sound understanding of its structure and workings is fundamental. Modules on this topic were, therefore, usually compulsory. The phrase human body often implies just its physical makeup or anatomy. That overlooks its physiology. Anatomy and physiology teaching can be as separate subjects. Whether they can or should be separated is a moot point. Anatomy and physiology are intricately related. (The question of which has precedence is probably best left open.)
Medical schools typically teach anatomy and physiology as separate subjects. Teaching is by specialists from each discipline. (Sometimes even specialists from a sub-discipline.) Health-related degree programmes typically teach them as a single combined subject. That is to their credit. Where taught separately, the problem of how the two can be (re-)integrated arises. In short, they have a form of Humpty Dumpty problem. In addition, a biological scientist usually teaches modules on the human body. That means a somewhat reductionist approach is typically adopted. Opportunities for innovative approaches to studying the human body remained largely unexplored.
I used to teach students on health-related programmes. Anatomy, physiology and pathology were the areas I was required to teach. Wanting to find new ways into established subjects was a particular challenge. That was particularly so when adhering to a prescribed syllabus written in a reductionist way. There are plenty of facts to teach. There are plenty of books to recommend to aid the process. However, to do that does not educate fully. Teaching should not be merely a matter of transferring information from teacher to student. One must make the subject make sense and help others make sense of it. Maybe a student will go on to make better sense of it. That does not come from mere statements of facts.
Why there continues to be such an interest in health-based subjects is unclear. When I was an undergraduate, to suggest that it is because these topics are interesting in their own right would have been sufficient. I knew many students at university who were doing their subjects simply out of interest. Their careers after graduation were independent of what they had studied. Now, employment has much greater emphasis. It can begin in Freshers’ Week.
Several suggestions exist for the popularity of health-related courses. The implications are perhaps more pertinent. It means that problems in understanding health-related issues now have a much broader, well-educated set of contributors. Problems once confined to medicine are no longer so. What the doctor ordered/orders is now open to scrutiny. Issues in understanding health, illness, and disease are not limited to the medical arena. That is likely to influence how those problems are appreciated societally. A distinctively non-professional, non-vocational interest in health has now emerged. Now, issues in the philosophy of medicine have a wider ownership. The medical profession seeks to cure. From their respective perspectives, Health Science and Health Studies graduates each seek to understand. The study of clinical phenomena is no longer limited to a purely clinical context. In effect, issues in medicine are no longer the sole intellectual preserve of the medical or allied professions.
