Researchers should consider autoethnography as an important methodology to help advance our understanding of the culture and practices of medical education.

Context The remediation of practising physicians is coming to the fore in several countries in response to increasing demands for physician accountability and quality improvement initiatives in health care. However, the profession continues to grapple with the concepts and processes of remediation, particularly for physicians in practice who struggle with performance issues related to clinical competence. This suggests that current conceptualisations of remediation might be contributing to this situation. This study therefore, explored how various administration‐level stakeholders conceptualise remediation in order to construct a description of the nature and meaning of remediation. Methods Semi‐structured interviews were conducted using purposive sampling across the range of Canadian stakeholders involved in the remediation of practising physicians, including regulatory authorities, universities, national certifying bodies and medical organisations. With the use of constructivist grounded theory processes, analysis proceeded apace with data collection in an iterative process, with initial insights guiding subsequent interviews. Results Participants often simultaneously held two different conceptualisations of remediation: (i) remediation as part of an educational continuum involving different degrees of support, and (ii) remediation as a regulatory process removing an individual's educational autonomy. Interviewees moved between these two conceptualisations but did not always appear to be aware of doing so. These conceptualisations each had different implications regarding the degree to which remediation can be incorporated into professional processes of maintaining competence. Conclusions Understanding that stakeholders frequently approach the complex issue of remediation with two different perspectives without conscious awareness of doing so may help to explain several challenges in the field, including the issues of what falls under the umbrella of remediation and who should be responsible for offering remediation support. Our findings suggest the need for conceptual clarity around remediation, both to ensure that we illuminate logistical dilemmas in enacting remediation and to address the stigma of ‘de‐professionalisation’ that the provision of even minor educational supports (such as feedback) might invoke by association.

Supervision in the outpatient context is increasingly in the form of single day interactions between students and preceptors. This creates difficulties for effective feedback, which often depends on a strong relationship of trust between preceptor and student. Building on feedback theories focusing on the relational and dialogic aspects of feedback, this study explored the use of goal-oriented feedback in brief encounters with learners. This study used autoethnography to explore one preceptor's feedback interactions over an eight-month period both in the ambulatory setting and on the wards. Data included written narrative reflections on feedback interactions with twenty-three learners informed by discussions with colleagues and repeated reading of feedback literature. Thematic and narrative analyses of data were performed iteratively. Data analysis emphasized four recurrent themes. (1) Goal discussions were most effective when initiated early and integrated throughout the learning experience. (2) Both learner and preceptor goals were multiple and varied, and feedback needed to reflect this complexity. (3) Negotiation or co-construction of goals was important when considering the focus of feedback discussions in order to create safer, more effective interactions. (4) Goal oriented interactions offer potential benefits to the learner and preceptor. Goal oriented feedback promotes dialogue as it requires both preceptor and learner to acknowledge and negotiate learning goals throughout their interaction. In doing so, feedback becomes an explicit component of the preceptor-learner relationship. This enhances feedback interactions even in relatively brief encounters, and may begin an early educational alliance that can be elaborated with longer interactions.

Although a uniform international approach to performance assessment may be neither feasible nor desirable, an international comparison of current practice, as provided in this report, should stimulate further debate on the development of better performance assessment processes.