I am certain we've discussed "should/shall" before, but I'd like your opinion on this specific recommendation we have made in our position paper.

In the following, is there a right or wrong with the use of "shall" versus "should," or is it just a matter of preference? If the latter, is "shall" a stronger word?

1) Prelicensure clinical education should/shall be supervised by qualified faculty who provide feedback and facilitate reflection.

Shall indicates that it is required; should is a suggestion. Ex: I should go to the store. Since I'm out of crow and humble pie, I SHALL go to the store!

Asa, donning shoes and picking up wallet, then heading for store.


Forgetful Asa, returning, crawling through window, for keys, trousers, and shirt.

quote:

Prelicensure clinical education should/shall be supervised by qualified faculty who provide feedback and facilitate reflection.

Indeed. Is this a recommendation or a fact? I myself would make it even stronger if it's a fact (an order from a superior, for example)and would say:

"Prelicensure clinical education will be supervised by qualified faculty who provide feedback and facilitate reflection."

There is absolutely no doubt about it; this is what is going to happen and wo betide anyone who tries to do otherwise.

Incidentally, should it not read "...supervised by a qualified faculty..."?

quote:

Originally posted by Asa Lovejoy:
I should go to the store. Since I'm out of crow and humble pie, I SHALL go to the store!

Asa, donning shoes and picking up wallet, then heading for store.


Forgetful Asa, returning, crawling through window, for keys, trousers, and shirt.

That's funny, Asa!

Well, My Love, my SHALLow mind SHOULD do better!

quote:

Incidentally, should it not read "...supervised by a qualified faculty..."?

Well, maybe. We understood "faculty" in that case to be plural, but perhaps "a qualified faculty member" is best? If we changed it to "a qualified faculty" would the next part be "that provides feedback and facilitates reflection"? Frankly, I like "qualified faculty member who provides..." better.

We changed it to "shall." Perhaps it seemed like a stupid question to all you linguistic types, but I thought "shall" was in the present tense and "should" was the past tense. However, I just looked up "should" in dictionary.com, and there are usage notes for both "shall" and "should." The rules seem complicated to me, and it says they aren't consistently used at all...so I don't feel too bad about being confused!

This message has been edited. Last edited by: Kalleh,

quote:

We changed it to "shall."

Oy! We should rejoice already!

I'd say those are some of the most complicated usage notes I've ever read on dictionary.com, illustrating why we're not sure at all how to correctly use those words.

Looking back on my education, I feel as if I was never really taught anything beyond the simple things like "don't say ain't". My father(English PhD) corrected me on many things, but never any as complicated as rules for shall/will, et al. He probably knows all the rules, for example, I was having accept/except difficulties, and he knew those, but he'll only correct such things when helping edit a paper.

It is interesting that shall is rarely used except in the King James Bible, giving it a very interesting connotation. I wonder how many other words have been affected in such a way.

quote:

Oy! We should rejoice already!

Yes, I suppose in the scheme of life, this was one of those minuscule questions. I had just thought it ironic that in the position paper I wrote, that was being debated by 120 delegates, the biggest discussion was over "shall" versus "should!" The group did vote for its acceptance, substituting "shall" for "should."

Yes, Sean, those Usage Notes were some of the most complicated I've seen; usually I love the usage notes in AHD. It's interesting that by adding "shall" we are now right up there with the King James Bible!