MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4391565362 · doi:10.5334/pme.959

Coaching in Competence by Design: A New Model of Coaching in the Moment and Coaching Over Time to Support Large Scale Implementation

2024· article· en· W4391565362 on OpenAlexaffabout
Denyse Richardson, Jeffrey M. Landreville, Jessica Trier, Warren J. Cheung, Farhan Bhanji, Andrew K. Hall, Jason R. Frank, Anna Oswald

Bibliographic record

VenuePerspectives on Medical Education · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicInnovations in Medical Education
Canadian institutionsAlberta Medical AssociationUniversity of AlbertaMcGill University Health CentreMcGill UniversityUniversity of Alberta HospitalRoyal College of Physicians and Surgeons of CanadaQueen's UniversityUniversity of Ottawa
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCoachingMedical educationCompetence (human resources)Context (archaeology)CurriculumPsychologyCore competencyPedagogyMedicineManagement

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Coaching is an increasingly popular means to provide individualized, learner-centered, developmental guidance to trainees in competency based medical education (CBME) curricula. Aligned with CBME’s core components, coaching can assist in leveraging the full potential of this educational approach. With its focus on growth and improvement, coaching helps trainees develop clinical acumen and self-regulated learning skills. Developing a shared mental model for coaching in the medical education context is crucial to facilitate integration and subsequent evaluation of success. This paper describes the Royal College of Physicians and Surgeons of Canada’s coaching model, one that is theory based, evidence informed, principle driven and iteratively and developed by a multidisciplinary team. The coaching model was specifically designed, fit for purpose to the postgraduate medical education (PGME) context and implemented as part of Competence by Design (CBD), a new competency based PGME program. This coaching model differentiates two coaching roles, which reflect different contexts in which postgraduate trainees learn and develop skills. Both roles are supported by the RX-OCR process: developing Relationship/Rapport, setting eXpectations, Observing, a Coaching conversation, and Recording/Reflecting. The CBD Coaching Model and its associated RX-OCR faculty development tool support the implementation of coaching in CBME. Coaching in the moment and coaching over time offer important mechanisms by which CBD brings value to trainees. For sustained change to occur and for learners and coaches to experience the model’s intended benefits, ongoing professional development efforts are needed. Early post implementation reflections and lessons learned are provided.

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 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)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.642
Threshold uncertainty score0.559

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
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 head0.019
GPT teacher head0.383
Teacher spread0.364 · 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

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designQualitative
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations31
Published2024
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePerspectives on Medical EducationSame topicInnovations in Medical EducationFrench-language works237,207