Overcoming barriers to effective feedback: a solution-focused faculty development approach

McCutcheon, Samar; Duchemin, Anne‐Marie

doi:10.5116/ijme.5f7c.3157

Cited by 9 publications

(3 citation statements)

References 25 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…3,9,11,13 However, it is important that faculty development programs be aligned to learner outcomes which also depend upon effective and timely delivery of feedback. 25 Moreover, the faculty development program must ensure to educate instructors about the importance of applying what has been learned both during the intervention and afterwards for change to occur, and follow-up must be done. 11 Specifically, instructors must practice skills, and receive feedback on them, have the desire to change, know what to do and how, and have a supportive work environment, and rewards for changing.…”

Section: Critiquing the Use Of The Kirkpatrick's Modelmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Implementing Faculty Development Programs in Medical Education Utilizing Kirkpatrick’s Model

Alhassan¹

2022

AMEP

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Since the 1970s, the definition of faculty development has evolved from improving teaching skills and classroom performance to a full range of activities involving teaching, leadership, mentorship of students, and impacting institutional culture. Unfortunately, in many educational programs, the focus of faculty development is still on classroom performance and research activities. This is troubling given the increased competitive nature of higher education in general, and even medical education, to attract the best students. The purpose of this article is to demonstrate how the Kirkpatrick model can be used as a framework for the development, implementation, and management of a comprehensive faculty development program. An important gap exists within the academic literature regarding a lack of discussion and analysis about how faculty development can be implemented in a way that helps healthcare faculty improve their skills in all areas of academic performance. At the same time, there is a lack of discussion and analysis about the need for medical schools to align faculty development with larger institutional goals and outcomes. The discussion included in this article serves to begin the process of filling that gap within the academic literature by demonstrating that the Kirkpatrick model can be used to implement and manage faculty development programs in which there is an institutional focus rather than an individual focus. By focusing on faculty development that is aligned with larger institutional goals, medical schools can be more competitive and better serve the future healthcare professionals they are training.

show abstract

Section: Critiquing the Use Of The Kirkpatrick's Modelmentioning

confidence: 99%

“… 3 , 9 , 11 , 13 However, it is important that faculty development programs be aligned to learner outcomes which also depend upon effective and timely delivery of feedback. 25 …”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Implementing Faculty Development Programs in Medical Education Utilizing Kirkpatrick’s Model

Alhassan¹

2022

AMEP

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…The reasons cited for an inability to provide feedback are time constraints and concern of damaging the faculty/resident relationship. 4 One of the core tenets of effective feedback is trust. The recipient must trust the person providing the feedback, and the provider must trust that the recipient is open to positively accepting the information without fear of reprisal.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

A Departmentally Developed Agreement to Improve Faculty-Resident Feedback

Pallansch

Gaiser

2023

JEPM

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background: Feedback from faculty to residents is important for the development of the resident. Effective feedback between faculty and residents requires trust between the two parties. An agreement between faculty and residents was developed to determine whether it would improve resident satisfaction with feedback.Methods: Groups of faculty and residents met to discuss expectations and barriers to feedback. Based on this information, the two groups developed a Feedback Agreement that was edited and approved by the entire Department of Anesthesiology. The Feedback Agreement was presented in meetings with the faculty and the residents. To assess satisfaction with feedback, the Accreditation Council for Graduate Medical Education resident survey was used, as it assesses resident satisfaction with various aspects of the program, and was compared before and after the agreement. Results:The satisfaction scores with feedback before the Feedback Agreement were statistically lower than scores for the specialty and for all residents in training programs. Satisfaction rose from 53% of 76 respondents (average score of 3.5 in 2020 to 2021) to 74% of 78 respondents being satisfied or extremely satisfied (average score of 4.0 in 2021 to 2022; P = .03). This score was not statistically different from residents in Anesthesiology programs or all residents in training programs. Conclusions:The development of a Feedback Agreement improved resident satisfaction with faculty feedback as assessed by the Accreditation Council for Graduate Medical Education resident survey.

show abstract