Introduction Two developing forces have achieved prominence in medical education: the advent of competency-based assessments and a growing commitment to expand access to medicine for a broader range of learners with a wider array of preparation. Remediation is intended to support all learners to achieve sufficient competence. Therefore, it is timely to provide practical guidelines for remediation in medical education that clarify best practices, practices to avoid, and areas requiring further research, in order to guide work with both individual struggling learners and development of training program policies. Methods Collectively, we generated an initial list of Do’s, Don’ts, and Don’t Knows for remediation in medical education, which was then iteratively refined through discussions and additional evidence-gathering. The final guidelines were then graded for the strength of the evidence by consensus. Results We present 26 guidelines: two groupings of Do’s (systems-level interventions and recommendations for individual learners), along with short lists of Don’ts and Don’t Knows, and our interpretation of the strength of current evidence for each guideline. Conclusions Remediation is a high-stakes, highly complex process involving learners, faculty, systems, and societal factors. Our synthesis resulted in a list of guidelines that summarize the current state of educational theory and empirical evidence that can improve remediation processes at individual and institutional levels. Important unanswered questions remain; ongoing research can further improve remediation practices to ensure the appropriate support for learners, institutions, and society.

No abstract

Remediation of struggling medical students can be achieved through a cognitive apprenticeship within a small community of inquiry that motivates and challenges the students. This community needs teachers capable of performing a unique combination of roles that demands high levels of teaching presence and practical wisdom.

Successful remediation needs to challenge students' conceptions of learning, works best in groups with skilled facilitators, and must take into account a blend of cognitive and affective factors and the complex interplay between learner and environment. Given a carefully designed programme, at-risk medical students can learn to make effective and lasting changes to their approach to study, and their views of learning can come to converge with influential ideas in the education literature.

Close similarity between predictor task and target task is important for accurate prediction of failure. Consideration should be given to dose effect and class size in the prevention of failure of at-risk students, and we recommend a systemic approach to intervention/remediation programmes, involving a whole semester of mandatory, weekly small group meetings with experienced teachers.