We propose that a supervisor's perceived responsibility for the ward underlies adjustments between 'hands-on' (i.e. personal ward responsibility) and 'hands-off' (i.e. shared ward responsibility) styles. Our approaches to clinical supervision model combines this responsibility tension with the tension between patient care and teaching to illustrate four supervisory approaches, each with unique priorities influencing entrustment. Given the fluidity in supervision, documenting changes in oversight strategies, rather than absolute levels of entrustment, may be more informative for assessment purposes. Research is needed to determine if there is sufficient association between the supervision provided, the entrustment decision made and the supervisor's trust in a trainee to use these as proxies in assessing a trainee's competence.

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

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.

No abstract