PROBLEM BEING ADDRESSED: As is true in most postgraduate medical education programs, about 10% of the residents in the family medicine residency program at Université de Montréal encounter considerable difficulties in developing their skills. OBJECTIVE OF PROGRAM: In order to more adequately support the program's teachers in diagnosing these difficulties and in designing, planning, and following up on a remediation strategy, the Residency Program Evaluation Committee devised a tool consisting of a sample remediation plan and a guide to its use. PROGRAM DESCRIPTION: The remediation tool consists of 2 documents. The first is a sample remediation plan made up of a contract followed by 4 sections: diagnosis of learning problems, intention to improve, ways to improve, and evaluation of improvement with an interim and a final report. The second is a guide to drafting and systematizing the remediation plan. CONCLUSION: The favourable response to the tool and the use that was made of it during the year in which it was implemented demonstrate that the processes we had chosen were a success. Support from the faculty, implementation of the co-construction method to create the tool, as well as training and support for users were all factors in this success. A research project is under way to document the impact that use of this tool will have on our residency program.
PROBLEM BEING ADDRESSED: As is true in most postgraduate medical education programs, about 10% of the residents in the family medicine residency program at Université de Montréal encounter considerable difficulties in developing their skills. OBJECTIVE OF PROGRAM: In order to more adequately support the program's teachers in diagnosing these difficulties and in designing, planning, and following up on a remediation strategy, the Residency Program Evaluation Committee devised a tool consisting of a sample remediation plan and a guide to its use. PROGRAM DESCRIPTION: The remediation tool consists of 2 documents. The first is a sample remediation plan made up of a contract followed by 4 sections: diagnosis of learning problems, intention to improve, ways to improve, and evaluation of improvement with an interim and a final report. The second is a guide to drafting and systematizing the remediation plan. CONCLUSION: The favourable response to the tool and the use that was made of it during the year in which it was implemented demonstrate that the processes we had chosen were a success. Support from the faculty, implementation of the co-construction method to create the tool, as well as training and support for users were all factors in this success. A research project is under way to document the impact that use of this tool will have on our residency program.
Authors: Kevin W Eva; John P W Cunnington; Harold I Reiter; David R Keane; Geoffrey R Norman Journal: Adv Health Sci Educ Theory Pract Date: 2004 Impact factor: 3.853
Authors: Fabrizia Faustinella; Philip R Orlando; Laura A Colletti; Harinder S Juneja; Linda C Perkowski Journal: Med Teach Date: 2004-11 Impact factor: 3.650
Authors: Karen E Hauer; Andrea Ciccone; Thomas R Henzel; Peter Katsufrakis; Stephen H Miller; William A Norcross; Maxine A Papadakis; David M Irby Journal: Acad Med Date: 2009-12 Impact factor: 6.893