Use this URL to cite or link to this record in EThOS:
Title: Judgement, capabilities and practice : exploring how clinical supervisors make trust judgements and whether they can be captured by a capability model
Author: Bussey, Maria
ISNI:       0000 0004 7964 8810
Awarding Body: UCL (University College London)
Current Institution: University College London (University of London)
Date of Award: 2019
Availability of Full Text:
Access from EThOS:
Full text unavailable from EThOS. Please try the link below.
Access from Institution:
The study had two aims; the first was to gain an insight into the patterns of judgement of clinical supervisors. The second was to explore how these patterns were altered by or corresponded with the use of a proposed assessment framework (Capabilities in Practice or CiPs) in order to help align assessment theory with practice. Designed as a qualitative study, it involved two separate interviews with six consultant surgeons, from different backgrounds, specialties and regions. The first interview explored the strategies they used to make judgements about trainees. The second interview followed a simulation of CiPs and explored the differences in the way trainees were judged. From thematic analysis, the findings from the first set of interviews showed that there were a number of important influences on supervisor judgement arising from political, cultural and financial factors in the organisational context (NHS practice). Drawing on the theories of judgement and trust, a new theory, Judgement in Action, was developed, showing that supervisor judgement had a particular pattern when applied to the judgement of trainee performance and progression. Judgement in Action incorporated four types of training capability under which there were qualities trainees were expected to exhibit when undertaking any high-level training activity. Two of these capabilities were core to surgery and two complementary to it. Two capabilities tended to be learned through instruction while the others were mainly learned through experience. The latter were higher-order, involving complex judgement and skill. The study proposed using the theory of Judgement in Action to help improve the structure of curricula and assessment and to help supervisors and trainees reflect on judgement practices to improve performance. It also proposed that the theory of Judgement in Action could be explored in training regimes used by other professional groups.
Supervisor: Not available Sponsor: Not available
Qualification Name: Thesis (Ph.D.) Qualification Level: Doctoral
EThOS ID:  DOI: Not available