Lessons Learned From Building More Effective Remediation in Physician Assistant Education.

Q2 Health Professions
Jerica N Derr
{"title":"Lessons Learned From Building More Effective Remediation in Physician Assistant Education.","authors":"Jerica N Derr","doi":"10.1097/JPA.0000000000000749","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Abstract: </strong>Remediation is a critical component of physician assistant (PA) education, yet its implementation often varies between programs. In overseeing remediation across multiple areas of the curriculum, I repeatedly encountered a common tension: students were identified as needing support, but remediation approaches differed based on timing, faculty availability, and individual interpretation. Despite strong faculty commitment, remediation efforts frequently felt reactive, fragmented, and burdensome. This Lessons Learned article draws on longitudinal experience supporting struggling learners across both the didactic and clinical phases of PA education. Through sustained engagement with students and faculty, my understanding of remediation shifted from viewing challenges as isolated student deficits to recognizing remediation as a program-level system requiring intentional design. Three core lessons emerged. First, waiting for high-stakes failure often delays meaningful intervention; existing program data can be leveraged to identify and support learners earlier in a less stigmatizing manner. Second, feedback is most effective when it is structured, consistent, and shared as a collaborative process rather than delivered episodically or punitively. Third, inconsistency in remediation reflects system-level gaps rather than individual student shortcomings, underscoring the need for intentional faculty support, shared resources, and standardized processes. By emphasizing early identification, structured feedback, and faculty development, these lessons offer practical, low-cost strategies that PA programs can implement within existing infrastructures to strengthen remediation while reducing faculty burden.</p>","PeriodicalId":39231,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Physician Assistant Education","volume":" ","pages":"323-326"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2026-09-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Physician Assistant Education","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1097/JPA.0000000000000749","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2026/3/6 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"Health Professions","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Abstract: Remediation is a critical component of physician assistant (PA) education, yet its implementation often varies between programs. In overseeing remediation across multiple areas of the curriculum, I repeatedly encountered a common tension: students were identified as needing support, but remediation approaches differed based on timing, faculty availability, and individual interpretation. Despite strong faculty commitment, remediation efforts frequently felt reactive, fragmented, and burdensome. This Lessons Learned article draws on longitudinal experience supporting struggling learners across both the didactic and clinical phases of PA education. Through sustained engagement with students and faculty, my understanding of remediation shifted from viewing challenges as isolated student deficits to recognizing remediation as a program-level system requiring intentional design. Three core lessons emerged. First, waiting for high-stakes failure often delays meaningful intervention; existing program data can be leveraged to identify and support learners earlier in a less stigmatizing manner. Second, feedback is most effective when it is structured, consistent, and shared as a collaborative process rather than delivered episodically or punitively. Third, inconsistency in remediation reflects system-level gaps rather than individual student shortcomings, underscoring the need for intentional faculty support, shared resources, and standardized processes. By emphasizing early identification, structured feedback, and faculty development, these lessons offer practical, low-cost strategies that PA programs can implement within existing infrastructures to strengthen remediation while reducing faculty burden.

在医师助理教育中建立更有效补习的经验教训。
补习是医师助理(PA)教育的重要组成部分,但其实施往往因项目而异。在监督跨课程多个领域的补习时,我反复遇到一个共同的紧张关系:学生被确定为需要支持,但补习方法因时间、教师的可用性和个人解释而有所不同。尽管教师们做出了强有力的承诺,但补救工作往往是被动的、零碎的和繁重的。这篇文章借鉴了纵向的经验,在教学和临床阶段支持挣扎的学习者。通过与学生和教师的持续接触,我对补习的理解从将挑战视为孤立的学生缺陷转变为将补习视为需要有意设计的项目级系统。由此产生了三个核心教训。首先,等待高风险的失败往往会推迟有意义的干预;现有的项目数据可以更早地识别和支持学习者,而不是以一种不那么污名化的方式。其次,当反馈是结构化的、一致的,并作为一个协作过程共享,而不是断断续续地或惩罚性地提供时,反馈是最有效的。第三,补习的不一致性反映了系统层面的差距,而不是个别学生的缺点,强调了教师支持、资源共享和标准化过程的必要性。通过强调早期识别、结构化反馈和教师发展,这些课程提供了实用的、低成本的策略,PA项目可以在现有基础设施中实施,以加强补救,同时减轻教师的负担。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
CiteScore
1.00
自引率
0.00%
发文量
109
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信
小红书