Feedback, learning and becoming: Narratives of feedback in complex performance challenges.

INTRODUCTION: Becoming a general practitioner (or family medicine specialist) is challenging, as trainees learn to manage complex and ambiguous situations. Feedback is a key component of this learning. Although research has tended to focus on feedback's momentary processes and impacts, there is value in seeking to understand the work it does over time and how trainees position themselves across multiple feedback encounters. We ask: how do newly qualified GPs narrate themselves and their experiences with complex performance challenges? Within these narratives, what is the role of feedback? METHODS: The research adopts a holistic and sequential narrative analysis approach, with in-depth narrative interviews of 16 general practice trainees who had just completed their training requirements. The analysis involved restorying the participant narratives chronologically. Each narrative formed a unit of analysis where narrative commonalities across plots, characters, emotions and the role of feedback were interpreted. RESULTS: Four plotlines within GP trainees' stories of complex performance challenges were identified: Journeyperson, Hero's Quest, Solo Journeyer and Endless Struggle. Trainees, supervisors and feedback are positioned differently within these plotlines. Narratives were saturated with emotions. DISCUSSION: The plotlines bring together an alternative way of understanding how feedback, learning and becoming are woven together. They illustrate how multiple interactions with patients, supervisors, peers and systems thread together into an overall trajectory. How a trainee positions themselves as protagonists and who they characterise as their antagonists can help direct the focus of supervisors' feedback conversations.

Unravelling epistemic injustice in medical education: The case of the underperforming learner.

CONTEXT: Epistemic injustice refers to a wrong done to someone in their capacity as a knower. While philosophers have detailed the pervasiveness of this issue within healthcare, it is only beginning to be discussed by medical educators. The purpose of this article is to expand the field's understanding of this concept and to demonstrate how it can be used to reframe complex problems in medical education. METHODS: After outlining the basic features of epistemic injustice, we clarify its intended (and unintended) meaning and detail what is required for a perceived harm to be named an epistemic injustice. Using an example from our own work on introversion in undergraduate medical education, we illustrate what epistemic injustice might look like from the perspectives of both educators and students and show how the concept can reorient our perspective on academic underperformance. RESULTS: Epistemic injustice results from two things: (1) social power dynamics that give some individuals control over others, and (2) identity prejudice that is associated with discriminatory stereotypes. This can lead to one, or both, forms of epistemic injustice: testimonial and hermeneutical. Our worked example demonstrates how medical educators can be unaware of when and how epistemic injustice is happening, yet the effects on students' well-being and sense of selves can be profound. Thinking about academic underperformance with epistemic injustice in mind can reveal an emphasis within current educational practices on diagnosing learning deficiencies, to the detriment of holistically representing its socially constructed and structural nature. CONCLUSIONS: This article builds upon recent calls to recognise epistemic injustice in medical education by clarifying its terminology and intended use and providing in-depth application and analysis to a particular case: underperformance and the introverted medical student. Equipped with a more sophisticated understanding of the term, medical educators may be able to re-conceptualise long-standing issues including, but also beyond, underperformance.

Researching lived experience in health professional education.

INTRODUCTION: Qualitative approaches have flourished in medical education research. Many research articles use the term 'lived experience' to describe the purpose of their study, yet we have noticed contradictory uses and misrepresentations of this term. In this conceptual paper, we consider three sources of these contradictions and misrepresentations: (1) the conflation of perspectives with experiences; (2) the conflation of experience with lived experience; and (3) the conflation of researching lived experience with phenomenology. We offer suggestions to facilitate more precise use of terminology. ARGUMENT: Our starting point is to free researchers from unnecessary shackles: Not every problem in medical education should be studied through experience, nor should every study of experience be phenomenological. Data based on participants' perceptions, beliefs, opinions and thoughts, while based on reflections of experiences, are not in and of themselves accounts of experience. Lived experiences are situated, primal and pre-reflective; perspectives are more abstract. Lived experience-as opposed to experiences as such-deeply attune to bodies, relationality, space and time. There is also a difference between experiences as lived, how a person makes sense of these and what the researcher interprets and represents. Phenomenology is a meaningful approach to the study of lived experience, but other approaches, such as narrative inquiry and self-study, can also offer useful avenues for undertaking this type of research. DISCUSSION: We aim to broaden researchers' scope with this paper and equip researchers with the information they need to be clear about the meaning and use of the terms experience and lived experience. We also hope to open new methodological possibilities for researching experiences as lived and, through highlighting tensions, to prompt researchers of lived experience to strive for ontological closeness and resonance.

Supervisory knowing in practice across medical specialities.

Clinical supervisors play key roles in facilitating trainee learning. Yet combining that role with patient care complicates both roles. So, we need to know how both roles can effectively co-occur. When facilitating their trainees' learning through practice, supervisors draw on their skills - clinical and supervisory - and available opportunities in their practice. This process can be conceptualised as supervisory knowing in practice (or contextual knowing) and offers ways to elaborate on how facilitating trainees' learning can be optimised. The practice-based study presented and discussed here examined clinical supervisors' knowing in practice related to facilitating trainee learning, across three medical specialities. Nineteen clinical supervisors from emergency medicine, internal medicine and surgery, were interviewed about their roles and engagement with trainees. Interview transcripts were analysed in two stages. Firstly, a framework analysis, informed by interdependent learning theory was conducted, focussing on affordances and individual engagement. Secondly, drawing on practice theory, a further layer of analysis was undertaken interrogating supervisors' knowing in practice. We identified two common domains of supervisor practice used to facilitate trainee learning: (1) orientating and assessing trainees' readiness (or capabilities), (2) sequencing and enriching pedagogic practices. Yet across the speciality groups the supervisors' knowing in practice differed and were shaped by a trio of: (i) disciplinary practices, (ii) situational requirements and (iii) clinician preference. Overall, we offer a new reading of clinical supervision as practice differences generated distinct supervisory knowing in practice. These findings emphasise clinical supervision as fundamentally entwined in the speciality's practice; and reinforce alignments with patient care.

Evaluative judgement in practice education: How does the ability to judge the quality of work impact placement performance?

INTRODUCTION: Occupational therapy students need to be ready to work autonomously in a range of environments as soon as they complete their degree. Practice education experiences are considered key to students developing the competencies that autonomous work requires. To function autonomously in practice environments, it is argued that practitioners need to be able to judge the quality of their own work and the work of others. This is referred to as evaluative judgement. However, there is limited empirical literature relating to evaluative judgement and even less exploring the concept within occupational therapy. METHODS: This study used qualitative methods, seeking to understand the evaluative judgements of clinical practice made by third- and fourth-year occupational therapy students during practice education. RESULTS: Twenty-one interviews were conducted with third- (n = 10) and fourth-year occupational therapy students (n = 1), university support staff supporting practice education (n = 4), and practice education supervisors (n = 5) at one Australian university. Practice education grades and documentation were also used as data. Data were analysed thematically, and two themes, each with three sub-themes, were identified: students coming to understand expected standards, with the following sub-themes: students attuning to cues, cues that inform supervisors about students' meeting the standards, and barriers and frustrations to understanding standards; and practising and developing evaluative judgement, with the following sub-themes: making comparisons, acting on feedback, and reflective practice. CONCLUSIONS: Practice education experiences provide many context-specific opportunities for students to develop their evaluative judgement. Students may be supported to come to know what quality work looks like by offering scaffolded opportunities to develop evaluative judgement in university and practice education settings.

Goal co-construction and dialogue in an internal medicine longitudinal coaching programme.

BACKGROUND: Longitudinal coaching in residency programmes is becoming commonplace and requires iterative and collaborative discussions between coach and resident, with the shared development of goals. However, little is known about how goal development unfolds within coaching conversations over time and the effects these conversations have. We therefore built on current coaching theory by analysing goal development dialogues within resident and faculty coaching relationships. METHODS: This was a qualitative study using interpretive description methodology. Eight internal medicine coach-resident dyads consented to audiotaping coaching meetings over a 1-year period. Transcripts from meetings and individual exit interviews were analysed thematically using goal co-construction as a sensitising concept. RESULTS: Two themes were developed: (i) The content of goals discussed in coaching meetings focused on how to be a resident, with little discussion around challenges in direct patient care, and (ii) co-construction mainly occurred in how to meet goals, rather than in prioritising goals or co-constructing new goals. CONCLUSIONS: In analysing goal development in the coach-resident relationships, conversations focused mainly around how to manage as a resident rather than how to improve direct patient care. This may be because academic coaching provides space separate from clinical work to focus on the stage-specific professional identity development of a resident. Going forward, focus should be on how to optimise longitudinal coaching conversations to ensure co-regulation and reflection on both clinical competencies and professional identity formation.

Striving to thrive or striving to survive: Professional identity constructions of medical trainees in clinical assessment activities.

CONTEXT: Assessment plays a key role in competence development and the shaping of future professionals. Despite its presumed positive impacts on learning, unintended consequences of assessment have drawn increasing attention in the literature. Considering professional identities and how these can be dynamically constructed through social interactions, as in assessment contexts, our study sought to understand how assessment influences the construction of professional identities in medical trainees. METHODS: Within social constructionism, we adopted a discursive, narrative approach to investigate the different positions trainees narrate for themselves and their assessors in clinical assessment contexts and the impact of these positions on their constructed identities. We purposively recruited 28 medical trainees (23 students and five postgraduate trainees), who took part in entry, follow-up and exit interviews of this study and submitted longitudinal audio/written diaries across nine-months of their training programs. Thematic framework and positioning analyses (focusing on how characters are linguistically positioned in narratives) were applied using an interdisciplinary teamwork approach. RESULTS: We identified two key narrative plotlines, striving to thrive and striving to survive, across trainees' assessment narratives from 60 interviews and 133 diaries. Elements of growth, development, and improvement were identified as trainees narrated striving to thrive in assessment. Neglect, oppression and perfunctory narratives were elaborated as trainees narrated striving to survive from assessment. Nine main character tropes adopted by trainees with six key assessor character tropes were identified. Bringing these together we present our analysis of two exemplary narratives with elaboration of their wider social implications. CONCLUSION: Adopting a discursive approach enabled us to better understand not only what identities are constructed by trainees in assessment contexts but also how they are constructed in relation to broader medical education discourses. The findings are informative for educators to reflect on, rectify and reconstruct assessment practices for better facilitating trainee identity construction.

Meaning making about performance: A comparison of two specialty feedback cultures.

INTRODUCTION: Specialty trainees often struggle to understand how well they are performing, and feedback is commonly seen as a solution to this problem. However, medical education tends to approach feedback as acontextual rather than located in a specialty-specific cultural world. This study therefore compares how specialty trainees in surgery and intensive care medicine (ICM) make meaning about the quality of their performance and the role of feedback conversations in this process. METHODS: We conducted a qualitative interview study in the constructivist grounded theory tradition. We interviewed 17 trainees from across Australia in 2020, eight from ICM and nine from surgery, and iterated between data collection and analytic discussions. We employed open, focused, axial and theoretical coding. FINDINGS: There were significant divergences between specialties. Surgical trainees had more opportunity to work directly with supervisors, and there was a strong link between patient outcome and quality of care, with a focus on performance information about operative skills. ICM was a highly uncertain practice environment, where patient outcome could not be relied upon as a source of performance information; valued performance information was diffuse and included tacit emotional support. These different 'specialty feedback cultures' strongly influenced how trainees orchestrated opportunities for feedback, made meaning of their performance in their day-to-day patient care tasks and 'patched together' experiences and inputs into an evolving sense of overall progress. DISCUSSION: We identified two types of meaning-making about performance: first, trainees' understanding of an immediate performance in a patient-care task and, second, a 'patched together' sense of overall progress from incomplete performance information. This study suggests approaches to feedback should attend to both, but also take account of the cultural worlds of specialty practice, with their attendant complexities. In particular, feedback conversations could better acknowledge the variable quality of performance information and specialty specific levels of uncertainty.

Emotion as reflexive practice: A new discourse for feedback practice and research.

INTRODUCTION: Like medicine and health care, feedback is a practice imbued with emotions: saturated with feelings relevant to one's identity and status within a given context. Often this emotional dimension of feedback is cast as an impediment to be ignored or managed. Such a perspective can be detrimental to feedback practices as emotions are fundamentally entwined with learning. In this critical review, we ask: What are the discourses of emotion in the feedback literature and what 'work' do they do? METHODS: We conducted a critical literature review of emotion and feedback in the three top journals of the field: Academic Medicine, Medical Education and Advances in Health Sciences Education. Analysis was informed by a Foucauldian critical discourse approach and involved identifying discourses of emotion and interpreting how they shape feedback practices. FINDINGS: Of 32 papers, four overlapping discourses of emotion were identified. Emotion as physiological casts emotion as internal, biological, ever-present, immutable and often problematic. Emotion as skill positions emotion as internal, mainly cognitive and amenable to regulation. A discourse of emotion as reflexive practice infers a social and interpersonal understanding of emotions, whereas emotion as socio-cultural discourse extends the reflexive practice discourse seeing emotion as circulating within learning environments as a political force. DISCUSSION: Drawing on scholarship within the sociology of emotions, we suggest the merits of studying emotion as inevitable (not pathological), as potentially paralysing and motivating and as situated within (and often reinforcing) a hierarchical social health care landscape. For future feedback research, we suggest shifting towards recognising the discourse-theory-practice connection with emotion in health professional education drawing from reflexive and socio-cultural discourses of emotion.

The influence of psychological safety on feedback conversations in general practice training.

INTRODUCTION: Fostering trainee psychological safety is increasingly being recognised as necessary for effective feedback conversations. Emerging literature has explored psychological safety in peer learning, formal feedback and simulation debrief. Yet, the conditions required for psychologically safe feedback conversations in clinical contexts, and the subsequent effects on feedback, have not been explored. METHODS: We conducted a qualitative study using interviews and longitudinal audio-diaries with 12 rural general practice trainees. The data were analysed using framework thematic analysis to identify factors across the data and as individual participant case studies with illustrative vignettes of dynamic interleaving of factors in judgements about feedback conversations. FINDINGS: Findings identify the influence of intrapersonal (e.g. confidence and comfort to seek help), interpersonal (e.g. trust and relationship) and sociocultural factors (e.g. living and working in a rural community) that contribute to psychological safety in the context of everyday feedback conversations. Multiple factors interplayed in feedback conversations where registrars could feel safe and unsafe within one location and even at the one time. DISCUSSION: Participants felt psychologically safe to engage their educators in sanctioned systems of conversation related to the immediate care of the patient and yet unsafe to engage in less patient related performance conversations despite the presence of multiple positive interpersonal factors. The concept of a safe 'container' (contained space) is perhaps idealised when it comes to feedback conversations about performance in the informal and emergent spaces of postgraduate training. More research is needed into understanding how clinical environments can sanction feedback conversations in clinical environments.

"Attending lectures in your pyjamas": student agency in constrained circumstances.

COVID-19 forced the digitalisation of teaching and learning in a response often described as emergency remote teaching (ERT). This rapid response changed the social, spatial, and temporal arrangements of higher education and required important adaptations from educators and students alike. However, while the literature has examined the constraints students faced (e.g. availability of the internet) and the consequences of the pandemic (e.g. student mental health), students' active management of these constraints for learning remains underexplored. This paper aims to "think with" COVID-19 to explore student agency in home learning under constrained circumstances. This qualitative study used semi-structured interviews to understand the day-to-day actions of nineteen undergraduate students managing their learning during the COVID-19 lockdowns in Victoria, Australia. Emirbayer and Mische's multiple dimensions of agency - iterative, projective, and practical-evaluative - are used to explore student experience. The findings illustrate students' adaptability and agency in navigating life-integrated learning, with most of their actions oriented to their present circumstances. This practical evaluative form of agency was expressed through (1) organising self, space, time, and relationships; (2) self-care; and (3) seeking help. Although this study took place in the context of ERT, it has implications beyond the pandemic because higher education always operates under constraints, and in other circumstances, many students still experience emotionally and materially difficult times.

The applicability of generalisability and bias to health professions education's research.

CONTEXT: Research in health professions education (HPE) spans an array of topics and draws from a diversity of research domains , which brings richness to our understanding of complex phenomena and challenges us to appreciate different approaches to studying them. To fully appreciate and benefit from this diversity, scholars in HPE must be savvy to the hallmarks of rigour that differ across research approaches. In the absence of such recognition, the valuable contributions of many high-quality studies risk being undermined. METHODS: In this article, we delve into two constructs---generalisability and bias--that are commonly invoked in discussions of rigour in health professions education research. We inspect the meaning and applicability of these constructs to research conducted from different paradigms (i.e., positivist and constructivist) and orientations (i.e., objectivist and subjectivist) and then describe how scholars can demonstrate rigour when these constructs do not align with the assumptions underpinning their research. CONCLUSIONS: A one-size-fits-all approach to evaluating the rigour of HPE research disadvantages some approaches and threatens to reduce the diversity of research in our field. Generalisability and bias are two examples of problematic constructs within paradigms that embrace subjectivity; others are equally problematic. As a way forward, we encourage HPE scholars to inspect their assumptions about the nature and purpose of research-both to defend research rigour in their own studies and to ensure they apply standards of rigour that align with research they read and review.

The hidden labours of designing the Objective Structured Clinical Examination: a Practice Theory study.

Objective Structured Clinical Examinations (OSCEs) have become ubiquitous as a form of assessment in medical education but involve substantial resource demands and considerable local variation. A detailed understanding of the processes by which OSCEs are designed and administered could improve feasibility and sustainability. This exploration of OSCE design is informed by Practice Theory, which suggests assessment design processes are dynamic, social and situated activities. The overall purpose is to provide insights that inform on-the-ground OSCE administration. Fifteen interviews were conducted with OSCE academics and administrators from three medical schools in Australia, the United Kingdom and Canada. Drawing from post-qualitative inquiry, Schatzki's Practice Theory was used both as a sensibility and as an analytic framework. OSCE design was characterised by planning activities, administration activities, negotiation activities and bureaucratic activities; it involves significant and resource-intensive effort in negotiation and coordination. There was considerable local variation but at the same time activities were remarkably consonant across national boundaries. There was a tension between general understandings such as reliability and validity that underpin the OSCE and the improvisational practices associated with design and administration. Our findings highlighted the role of blueprints as a key coordinating artefact but with too many rules and procedures prompting cycles of bureaucracy and complexity. Emphasising coordination rather than standardisation might ease workloads, support adaptation to local environments and prevent an overly reductive approach to this assessment format.

Approaching culture in medical education: Three perspectives.

BACKGROUND: The notion of culture is increasingly invoked in the medical education literature as a key influence on how educational strategies unfold, and culture change is frequently identified as a necessary precursor to progress. A meaningful perspective on what culture means is often missing from these discussions, however. Without a theoretically grounded notion of culture, calls for culture change are challenging to interpret and to act upon. OBJECTIVE: In this cross-cutting edge paper, we explore how culture has been defined and theorised using three lenses: the organisational perspective; the identity perspective, and the practice perspective. We consider what each perspective might offer to medical education researchers. RESULTS: Each of these perspectives draws on a range of disciplinary influences, and none represents a singular theory of culture. Broadly, the organisational perspective directs our attention to the shared assumptions and values that bind individuals within an organisation. It tends to view culture through a strategic lens; culture may be either a barrier to or a facilitator of the changes that are inevitably required of an organisation if it is to maintain its relevance. The identity perspective, particularly the notion of figured worlds, alerts us to the power of communal narratives to shape how individuals see themselves within particular cultural worlds. The practice perspective emphasises what actually occurs in practice, avoiding symbolic ideas about culture and shared values and instead privileging activity and human-material networks or arrangements. CONCLUSIONS: These diverse perspectives share a common thread- they shift our research gaze beyond the individual, allowing us instead to see how those individuals form organisations, inhabit cultural worlds and constitute practices. They afford substance and direction for explorations of culture, and thus offer the promise of a more nuanced understanding of some of medical education's most challenging problems.

Using video-reflexive ethnography to understand complexity and change practice.

CONTEXT: A range of research methods have been used to understand effective workplace learning in the health professions. The impact of findings from this research usually requires knowledge translation activities in the form of faculty development initiatives, such as supervisor workshops. Far rarer, but with greater potential, are research approaches that concurrently seek to understand and change practice through empowering clinicians to refine aspects of their practice. METHODS: In this methodological article, we describe video-reflexive ethnography (VRE), a collaborative visual research approach that seeks to capture, illuminate and optimise in situ work and education practices. Video-reflexive ethnography usually has three phases: (a) initial familiarisation with practice through field observations; (b) video-recording of practice, and (c) reflexive sessions about the edited footage with participants and researchers. Drawing on our own experiences as researchers using VRE, we discuss four key principles of VRE: (a) exnovation; (b) collaboration; (c) reflexivity, and (d) care. DISCUSSION: Although VRE has been used to illuminate and understand health professionals education, its potential for changing clinical education practices has yet to be realised. Video-reflexive ethnography enables observation of the social and relational interactions in health care practice and allows individual (and group) perspectives to be articulated and analysed. The approach can prompt fresh perspectives and insights into health care education and practice for researchers and clinicians through shared deliberations about how practice might be reimagined and enacted.

Challenging feedback myths: Values, learner involvement and promoting effects beyond the immediate task.

CONTEXT: Research suggests that feedback in the health professions is less useful than we would like. In this paper, we argue that feedback has become reliant on myths that perpetuate unproductive rituals. Feedback often resembles a discrete episode of an educator "telling," rather than an active and iterative involvement of the learner in a future-facing process. With this orientation towards past events, it is not surprising that learners become defensive or disengaged when they are reminded of their deficits. METHODS: We tackle three myths of feedback: (a) feedback needs praise-criticism balancing rules; (b) feedback is a skill residing within the teacher; and (c) feedback is an input only. For each myth we provide a reframing with supporting examples from the literature. CONCLUSIONS: Equipping learners to engage in feedback processes may reduce the emotional burden on both parties, rendering techniques such as the feedback sandwich redundant. We also highlight the benefits for learners and teachers of conceptualising feedback as a relational activity, and of tracing the effects of information exchanges. These effects may be immediate or latent, and may manifest in different forms such as changes in learner evaluative judgement or professional identity.