A ‘How-To-Guide’ for teaching and assessing Collaborator Role competencies in family medicine residency and health professional training programs
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Introduction: Collaborative practice competencies are essential for safe, effective practice in today’s health care system. Providing learners with formal teaching and assessment opportunities is a requirement for accreditation in medicine and other health professional programs. However, identifying and assessing a trainee’s ability to competently collaborate in practice across educational contexts remains challenging. Further, without common assessment tools for collaborative practice teaching opportunities, ensuring comparability of collaborative practice learning experiences is difficult. To address these challenges, the College of Family Physicians of Canada tasked an interprofessional group of educators to develop a practical ‘How to Guide’ to support educators and facilitate practice change in how we assess and teach the Collaborator Role competencies.As educators, we are often required to work from a variety of educational frameworks: programmatic evaluation objectives, key and enabling competencies and clinical domains of care as examples. By leveraging specific observable behaviours of collaborative practice, the ‘How to Guide’ links these frameworks and provides practical strategies for teaching and assessing these behaviours across educational contexts.Through these practical tools and strategies for teaching and assessment we expect not only to facilitate these processes but also to encourage consistency of programming and to ensure that health professional learners are supported in the attainment of these collaborator competencies.Purpose: This interactive workshop is designed to support educators in medicine and other health professions with teaching and assessing collaborator competencies. With reference to the CanMEDS 2015, participants will reflect on how they teach and assess the collaborator role within their own contexts; compare these opportunities with collaborator role teaching and assessment strategies implemented in Canada; and consider how the ‘How to Guide’ for the Collaborator Role can support their teaching and assessment of collaborative practice competencies.Learning objectives: By the end of this workshop participants will be able to:1. Identify opportunities to teach and assess the collaborator role in their teaching context.2. Describe common teaching and assessment practices for collaborator role competencies3. Access and apply the How to Guide to support their teaching and assessment of the collaborator role.Targeted Population and Stakeholders: Teachers / preceptors, program directors, health professional educators, medical residents and health professional learners, curriculum developers and assessment leadsTimeline: This work took place from 2013 to 2016 to coincide with the release of the 2015 CanMEDS framework. The How-To-Guide will accompany the roll-out across Canada for the 2017 CanMEDS FM (Family Medicine) competency framework.Sustainability and Transferability: The How-To-Guide is relevant to all health professional educators in their role of preparing future health professionals to be competent to practice in integrated and interprofessional care models. The How-To-Guide was created by an interprofessional group of educators to ensure its relevancy to all health professional training programs. The guide is expected to be available for educators on an ongoing basis for the next decade. Its revision would likely coincide with the 10 year-review of the College of Physicians and Surgeons Canada CanMEDs framework in 2025.This workshop will be facilitated in both English and French.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.047 | 0.060 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.004 | 0.004 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.004 | 0.004 |
| Open science | 0.005 | 0.014 |
| Research integrity | 0.006 | 0.007 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.009 | 0.006 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".