ContextIt seems logical to suggest that investing in educators will lead to improved educational outcomes. However, in the case of faculty development, it is unclear how these benefits arise and decisions about investment typically have little basis in evidence. The aim of this realist evaluation was to understand the mechanisms by which investment in faculty development may lead to improved educational outcomes for staff and students.MethodsThis realist evaluation involved three phases: the development of an initial programme theory based on existing peer‐reviewed literature (Phase 1), which was used within 32 realist interviews with key stakeholders at 17 UK medical schools (Phase 2), to underpin the creation of a series of recommendations for faculty development programme designers (Phase 3).ResultsThe findings highlighted the complex and heterogeneous nature of faculty development programmes. Programme developers must consider a range of contexts (accreditation, meeting educational needs, learning culture, accessibility and interactivity) that can impact faculty members in variable ways (engagement, sense of value and belonging, motivation, reassurance and building relationships), potentially resulting in a range of staff outcomes (improved competence, satisfaction, confidence, faculty member collaboration and curriculum changes) that may ultimately benefit students. The improved understanding resulting from Phases 1 and 2, and the recommendations from Phase 3, will enable the design and tailoring of new and existing faculty development initiatives.ConclusionsThis study deepens our understanding of the role of context in faculty development through the realist methodology employed and extends pre‐existing knowledge to provide insights into evidence‐based interventional strategies that may be effective. In particular, faculty development leads need to develop a clear implementation strategy, improve transparency of cashflow, establish effective formal or informal communication systems and evaluate the efficacy of their faculty development initiatives.

The role of general practice in medical education is increasing both at the undergraduate and postgraduate level. There is a paucity of evidence as to the level of involvement of GP registrars and their training to teach. Two hundred and forty one GP trainees in the Peninsula Deanery were surveyed as to their current level of involvement in teaching and their training to provide it. Seventy eight completed surveys were returned and these revealed that 62% were regularly involved in teaching but only 41% had ever received any training in this area. There was a strong feeling that teaching was an important skill for GPs with 92% of trainees wanting further training in this area. There is clearly a need for further research in this area both to identity whether this sample is representative of the situation nationally and to determine how best to equip trainees in their roles as educators now and in the future.

No abstract