Feedback focus: An exploration of documented feedback conversations with episodic versus continuous supervisors

Purpose Feedback conversations are essential to learning, and the relationship between supervisor and learner plays a role in the effectiveness of feedback shared. Documentation of these conversations in learner portfolios is intended to support reflection, learning, and growth. However, there is limited understanding of what gets documented after feedback conversations. Guided by Hattie and Timperley’s model for feedback, we examined documented feedback conversations with episodic and continuous supervisors to better understand the information contained in learner portfolios.Methods The authors examined archived de-identified FieldNotes (FNs; workplace-based assessment forms) completed for residents located at two teaching sites in a Canadian university-based family medicine residency program. The content of written feedback on each FN was coded for feedback focus (Task, Process, Self-regulation and Self) from Hattie and Timperley’s model, and proportions of foci were compared between episodic supervisors (ES) and continuous supervisors (CS).Results A total of 10,624 FNs were collected from 158 residents who began and completed their residency training between 2015–2023. The dataset included 5,308 FNs categorized as ES (50%) and 5,316 FNs categorized as CS (50%). A total of 1,332 FNs (12.5%) contained no feedback leaving 9,292 FNs for analysis. A total of 12,960 feedback foci were coded with most feedback focused on Task for all supervisors. CS included Process feedback in a higher proportion than ES. ES included Self feedback in a higher proportion than CS. There were no differences for Task or Self-regulation feedback.Conclusions This study provides insight into the content of written summaries of feedback conversations included in learner portfolios. There are differences in the content of feedback documented from ES compared with CS. This information can be used to improve the delivery and use of feedback content from different relationships important for learning, reflection and the development of self-regulated learning skills.

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
Medical Teacher
Published
2026-06-13
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1080/0142159x.2026.2681190
Primary Topic
Innovations in Medical Education
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
0.00
Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

Feedback focus: An exploration of documented feedback conversations with episodic versus continuous supervisors

Pascal W. M. Van Gerven, Sylvia Heeneman, Shelley Ross, Kelsey Compagna et al.
Medical Teacher
Innovations in Medical Education
article

Feedback focus: An exploration of documented feedback conversations with episodic versus continuous supervisors

Pascal W. M. Van Gerven, Sylvia Heeneman, Shelley Ross, Kelsey Compagna, Ann Lee
article en

Abstract

Purpose Feedback conversations are essential to learning, and the relationship between supervisor and learner plays a role in the effectiveness of feedback shared. Documentation of these conversations in learner portfolios is intended to support reflection, learning, and growth. However, there is limited understanding of what gets documented after feedback conversations. Guided by Hattie and Timperley’s model for feedback, we examined documented feedback conversations with episodic and continuous supervisors to better understand the information contained in learner portfolios.Methods The authors examined archived de-identified FieldNotes (FNs; workplace-based assessment forms) completed for residents located at two teaching sites in a Canadian university-based family medicine residency program. The content of written feedback on each FN was coded for feedback focus (Task, Process, Self-regulation and Self) from Hattie and Timperley’s model, and proportions of foci were compared between episodic supervisors (ES) and continuous supervisors (CS).Results A total of 10,624 FNs were collected from 158 residents who began and completed their residency training between 2015–2023. The dataset included 5,308 FNs categorized as ES (50%) and 5,316 FNs categorized as CS (50%). A total of 1,332 FNs (12.5%) contained no feedback leaving 9,292 FNs for analysis. A total of 12,960 feedback foci were coded with most feedback focused on Task for all supervisors. CS included Process feedback in a higher proportion than ES. ES included Self feedback in a higher proportion than CS. There were no differences for Task or Self-regulation feedback.Conclusions This study provides insight into the content of written summaries of feedback conversations included in learner portfolios. There are differences in the content of feedback documented from ES compared with CS. This information can be used to improve the delivery and use of feedback content from different relationships important for learning, reflection and the development of self-regulated learning skills.

Medical Teacher
University of Alberta (CA), Maastricht University (NL), Department of Health (TW), Department of Education (ES)
Quality Education
Openalex Percentile: Top 5%
Innovations in Medical Education
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.