Evidence map›Paper›PMID 41140508›Full record

ArticlePerspectives on medical education2025

Faculty Perspectives on Roles and Tensions in Supporting Student Learning and Self-Regulation Through Feedback and Coaching in Programmatic Assessment.

Xian Liu, Diana Dolmans, Maryam Asoodar, Zhien Li, Daniëlle Verstegen

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Perspectives on medical education, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
0citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

5 authors.

Xian LiuDepartment of Educational Development & Research, School of Health Professions Education, Faculty of Health, Medicine and Life Sciences, Maastricht University, Maastricht, The Netherlands.ORCID 0000-0002-4247-6088
Diana DolmansDepartment of Educational Development & Research, School of Health Professions Education, Faculty of Health, Medicine and Life Sciences, Maastricht University, Maastricht, The Netherlands.ORCID 0000-0002-4802-1156
Maryam AsoodarDepartment of Educational Development & Research, School of Health Professions Education, Faculty of Health, Medicine and Life Sciences, Maastricht University, Maastricht, The Netherlands.ORCID 0000-0001-6044-6790
Zhien LiDepartment of Educational Development & Research, School of Health Professions Education, Faculty of Health, Medicine and Life Sciences, Maastricht University, Maastricht, The Netherlands.ORCID 0009-0007-2223-8940
Daniëlle VerstegenDepartment of Educational Development & Research, School of Health Professions Education, Faculty of Health, Medicine and Life Sciences, Maastricht University, Maastricht, The Netherlands.ORCID 0000-0001-6811-175X

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Introduction: In health professions education, assessment is increasingly viewed not merely as a tool for grading, but also as a means of shaping a productive learning environment. This shift promotes student-centered learning and enhances students' self-regulated learning (SRL). Consequently, faculty members are expected to take on the role of facilitators, providing rich feedback and coaching to support student learning. However, this is not easy in practice, and these underlying mechanisms are not yet fully understood. The research question of this exploratory study is: How do faculty perceive their roles and the tensions in supporting student learning and self-regulation through feedback and coaching in programmatic assessment? Methods: This study adopted a qualitative constructivist paradigm. Seventeen faculty members participated in five semi-structured focus group interviews. Thematic analysis was employed, integrating both inductive and deductive approaches. Results: The analysis produced four key themes: (1) Providing feedback at the task level is easier than giving suggestions for further development of competencies; (2) Tailoring narrative feedback to personalized learning paths is challenging; (3) The primary role of coaching is to foster students' reflection and autonomy, while adapting to students' needs when necessary; (4) Coaching requires a balance between stimulating autonomy and fulfilling graduation requirements. Discussion: This study shows that faculty believe that programmatic assessment enhances learning, but they experience challenges and tensions in stimulating students' SRL in practice. It is not easy to tailor feedback to meet students' individual needs and to align coaching for SRL with graduation requirements.

Indexed as

FacultyFaculty, MedicalFeedbackLearningMentoringSelf-ControlStudents, MedicalAdultEducational MeasurementFemaleFocus GroupsFormative FeedbackHumansMaleQualitative Research

Identifiers

PMID41140508
PMCPMC12551631

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.