Deliberate practice as a framework for evaluating feedback in residency training

Gauthier, Stephen; Cavalcanti, Rodrigo B.; Goguen, Jeannette; Sibbald, Matthew

doi:10.3109/0142159x.2014.956059

Cited by 36 publications

(64 citation statements)

References 30 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…Many time-pressured faculty educators feel that the time taken to complete the detail-oriented electronic evaluation templates that provide the evaluator with the opportunity to provide additional text-based narrative about performance provides ample “feedback” to learners because these evaluations are immediately available to the residents with the identity of the evaluator provided [14].…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

What are the associations between the quantity of faculty evaluations and residents’ perception of quality feedback?

Blankush

Shah

Barnett

et al. 2017

Annals of Medicine &Amp; Surgery

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

ObjectivesTo determine if there is a correlation between the numbers of evaluations submitted by faculty and the perception of the quality of feedback reported by trainees on a yearly survey.Method147 ACGME-accredited training programs sponsored by a single medical school were included in the analysis. Eighty-seven programs (49 core residency programs and 38 advanced training programs) with 4 or more trainees received ACGME survey summary data for academic year 2013–2014. Resident ratings of satisfaction with feedback were analyzed against the number of evaluations completed per resident during the same period. R-squared correlation analysis was calculated using a Pearson correlation coefficient.Results177,096 evaluations were distributed to the 87 programs, of which 117,452 were completed (66%). On average, faculty submitted 33.9 evaluations per resident. Core residency programs had a greater number of evaluations per resident than fellowship programs (39.2 vs. 27.1, respectively, p = 0.15). The average score for the “satisfied with feedback after assignment” survey questions was 4.2 (range 2.2–5.0). There was no overall correlation between the number of evaluations per resident and the residents' perception of feedback from faculty based on medical, surgical or hospital-based programs.ConclusionsResident perception of feedback is not correlated with number of faculty evaluations. An emphasis on faculty summative evaluation of resident performance is important but appears to miss the mark as a replacement for on-going, data-driven, structured resident feedback. Understanding the difference between evaluation and feedback is a global concept that is important for all medical educators and learners.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

What are the associations between the quantity of faculty evaluations and residents’ perception of quality feedback?

Blankush

Shah

Barnett

et al. 2017

Annals of Medicine &Amp; Surgery

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Finally, a qualitative analysis was conducted of open-ended feedback and student reflections. The written feedback was analysed using a modified version of a framework originally developed to evaluate written feedback on a workplace-based rating form [39]. The taxonomy applied in the analysis of the written comments on the CLeD-EX involved the following categories: identifying the behaviour, identifying the performance gap and providing advice for developing a learning plan.…”

Section: Evaluation Of Cled-ex Formsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Some forms included only comments about positive aspects related to collaboration (12.9%). When analysing the quality of feedback based on the modified framework [39] in the section on the form: 'areas that can be improved' the behaviour which needed to be improved was mentioned in 73 forms, while the gap was mentioned in 17 forms and advice on how to develop was included in 32 forms. This finding suggests that the CLeD-EX was successful in facilitating formative feedback by highlighting behaviours that need further development.…”

Section: Written Feedback and Student Reflections On The Cled-ex Analmentioning

confidence: 99%

The collaborative learning development exercise (CLeD-EX): an educational instrument to promote key collaborative learning behaviours in medical students

et al. 2020

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background: Modern clinical practice increasingly relies on collaborative and team-based approaches to care. Regulatory bodies in medical education emphasise the need to develop collaboration and teamwork competencies and highlight the need to do so from an early stage of medical training. In undergraduate medical education, the focus is usually on collaborative learning, associated with feedback and reflection on this learning This article describes a novel educational instrument, the Collaborative Learning Development Exercise (CLeD-EX), which aims to foster the development of key collaborative learning competencies in medical students. In this article we report on the effectiveness, feasibility and educational impact of the CLeD-EX. Methods: In this study, the "educational design research" framework was used to develop, implement and evaluate the CLeD-EX. This involved adopting a systematic approach towards designing a creative and innovative instrument which would help solve a real-world challenge in developing collaborative learning skills. The systematic approach involved a qualitative exploration of key collaborative learning behaviours which are influential in effective collaborative learning contexts. The identified competencies were employed in the design of the CLeD-EX. The design of the CLeD-EX included features to facilitate structured feedback by tutors to students, complemented by self-evaluation and reflection. The CLeD-EX was field-tested with volunteer junior medical students, using a controlled pre-test post-test design. Analysis of the completed CLeD-EX forms, self-perception surveys (i.e. pre-test and post-test surveys) and analyses of reflective reports were used to explore the educational impact of CLeD-EX, as well as its utility and practicality. Results: After using the CLeD-EX, students showed a significant improvement in critical thinking and group process as measured by a previously validated instrument. Both students and tutors recognised CLeD-EX as an effective instrument, especially as a structured basis for giving and receiving feedback and for completing the feedback loop. CLeD-EX was also found to be feasible, practical and focused, while promoting learning and effective interactions in small group learning.(Continued on next page)

show abstract

“…Qualitative analysis of open-ended feedback and student reflections. The written feedback was analysed using a modified version of a framework originally developed to evaluate written feedback on a workplace-based rating form (38). The taxonomy applied in the analysis of the written comments on the CLeD-EX involved the following categories: identifying the behaviour, identifying the performance gap and providing advice for developing a learning plan.…”

Section: Pearson Correlation Coefficients;mentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Some forms included only comments about positive aspects related to collaboration (12.9%). When analysing the quality of feedback based on the modified framework (38) in the section on the form: 'areas that can be improved' the behaviour which needed to be improved was mentioned in 73 forms, while the gap was mentioned in 17 forms and advice on how to develop was included in 32 forms. This finding suggests that the CLeD-EX was successful in facilitating formative feedback by highlighting behaviours that need further development.…”

Section: Analysis Of Written Feedbackmentioning

confidence: 99%

The Collaborative Learning Development Exercise (CLeD-EX): an educational instrument promoting key collaborative learning behaviours in medical students

Iqbal

Velan

Sullivan

et al. 2019

Preprint

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background: Modern clinical practice increasingly relies on collaborative and team-based approaches to care. Regulatory bodies in medical education emphasise the need to develop collaborative and teamwork competencies and highlight the need to do so from an early stage of medical training.During undergraduate medical education the focus is usually to facilitate collaborative learning and increase feedback and reflection on this learning. This article describes a novel educational instrument, the Collaborative Learning Development Exercise (CLeD-EX), which aims to foster the development of key collaborative learning competencies in medical students.Methods: In this study, the "educational design research" framework was used to develop, implement and evaluate the CLeD-EX. This involved adopting a systematic approach towards designing a creative and innovative instrument which would help solve a real-world challenge in developing collaborative learning skills. The systematic approach involved a qualitative exploration of key collaborative learning behaviours which are influential in effective collaborative learning contexts. The identified competencies were employed in the design of the CLeD-EX. The design of the CLeD-EX included features to facilitate structured feedback by tutors to students, complemented by selfevaluation and reflection. The CLeD-EX was field-tested with volunteer junior medical students, using a controlled pre-test post-test design. Analysis of the completed CLeD-EX forms, self-perception surveys (i.e. pre-test and post-test surveys) and analyses of reflective reports were used to explore the educational impact of CLeD-EX, as well as its utility and practicality.Results: After using the CLeD-EX, students showed a significant improvement in self-directed learning, critical thinking and group process as measured by a previously validated instrument. Both students and tutors recognised CLeD-EX as an effective instrument, especially as a structured basis for giving and receiving feedback and for completing the feedback loop. CLeD-EX was also found to be feasible, practical and focused, while promoting learning and effective interactions in small group learning.Conclusion: The findings of this study support the introduction of an educational instrument such as the CLeD-EX to facilitate the development of students' skills in collaborative learning.

show abstract

Deliberate practice as a framework for evaluating feedback in residency training

Cited by 36 publications

References 30 publications

What are the associations between the quantity of faculty evaluations and residents’ perception of quality feedback?

What are the associations between the quantity of faculty evaluations and residents’ perception of quality feedback?

The collaborative learning development exercise (CLeD-EX): an educational instrument to promote key collaborative learning behaviours in medical students

The Collaborative Learning Development Exercise (CLeD-EX): an educational instrument promoting key collaborative learning behaviours in medical students

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About