MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2942736031 · doi:10.2147/amep.s191470

<p>Coaching by design: exploring a new approach to faculty development in a competency-based medical education curriculum</p>

2019· review· en· W2942736031 on OpenAlex
Christine Orr, Ranil Sonnadara

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.
fundA Canadian funder is recorded on the work.

Bibliographic record

VenueAdvances in Medical Education and Practice · 2019
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicInnovations in Medical Education
Canadian institutionsMcMaster UniversityMemorial University of Newfoundland
FundersMcMaster University
KeywordsCoachingMedical educationCurriculumFaculty developmentCompetence (human resources)Professional developmentPsychologyCurriculum developmentMedicinePedagogy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

As curricula move from a time-based system to a competency-based medical education system, faculty development will be required. Faculty will be asked to engage in the observation, assessment and feedback of tasks in the form of educational coaching. Faculty development in coaching is necessary, as the processes and tools for coaching learners toward competence are evolving with a novel assessment system. Here, we provide a scoping review of coaching in medical education. Techniques and content that could be included in the curricular design of faculty development programming for coaching (faculty as coach) are discussed based on current educational theory. A novel model of coaching for faculty (faculty as coachee) has been developed and is described by the authors. Its use is proposed for continuing professional development.

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.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.006
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.071
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMetaresearch, Meta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.957
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0060.071
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.003
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.097
GPT teacher head0.453
Teacher spread0.356 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it