How have you adapted your mentoring style for a student who was struggling clinically? What was the one adjustment that made the biggest difference?

I had a resident who was technically brilliant but paralyzed by perfectionism. They could recite every symptom and guideline, yet when it came time to treat the patient, they would look at me and ask what we should do. They were stuck in student mode - gathering data but terrified of making the final call. My standard approach of Socratic questioning wasn't working because it just felt like another oral exam to them. I switched to a strict "commit first" policy. Before I offered any input, they had to state exactly what they would write on the prescription pad if I wasn't there. No hedging allowed. It forced them to stop looking for the correct academic answer and start managing the actual clinical risk. Once they realized that making a safe, reasonable plan was more important than finding the obscure textbook diagnosis, their paralysis disappeared.

I find that the students who are struggling clinically struggle because of a "cognitive overload. They get so focused on electronic health records or procedural checklists that they lose the patient's clinical narrative. To adapt to this, I moved from being just an observer to more of a "co-pilot" during their clinical encounters. We would pre-brief before entering the room and set one specific goal, like perfecting the physical exam of a join or refining the history-taking for a specific pathology. But the adjustment that made the biggest difference for me was prioritizing psychological safety. I started sharing my own past clinical mistakes and "near misses" with my students, and once they realized that clinical mistakes are just a part of the learning curve and not a career-ending failure, they relaxed and their performance improved. Taking away the fear and anxiety about being "wrong," made students more proactive about asking questions and much more accurate in their clinical presentations because they were no longer holding back.

To move from passive instruction to productive mentorship, shift from explaining concepts to watching how the student reasons through them. Instead of repeating what they got wrong, ask what they think they did right. If their thinking holds up, the mistake will autocorrect with almost no additional intervention. That being said, this process requires longer silences, fewer prompts, and a willingness to let the learner make small errors uninterrupted.

Being a Vice President and Lead Clinical Director of Texas Academy of Medical Aesthetics, I work with students and assist them in becoming more confident and acquiring practical clinical skills. There are rare occasions when the student works hard and is the focal concern when the student is finding it difficult to go through the learning process. In the majority of cases, it concerns confidence as well as clarity in the process of performing procedures. I adjust my style by breaking down treatments into small and manageable tasks. In this manner, the students would be able to master each point of the process and then move on to the entire session. It maintains a very hands-on approach to learning, and the safety of patients is never jeopardized. The only modification that creates an even larger impact than any other one is to provide immediate and constructive feedback during every attempt. The students can see their progress immediately by sharing what was done right at the same time and pointing out the mistakes. Other than that, it allows them to avail the guidance immediately and simultaneously, which makes the learning process more memorable. Such a teaching method assists students in getting confident in a very short period of time and transforms their indecisions into competence. The fact that students grow up into competent and demanding practitioners is very rewarding, and it shows that when timely feedback is provided, it can go a long way in being supplemented by constructive direction.

As I supervise a clinical student who has difficulty applying their clinical knowledge or skills into practice, I would move from a "hands-off" (indirect) model of supervision to a "hands-on" (direct) model of observation (side-by-side). I would also increase the amount of time I review cases directly with this student and identify if their difficulty results from either a lack of diagnostic reasoning or a lack of ability to communicate effectively with their patient. The biggest change I made was to implement immediate and frequent (micro) feedback following each patient encounter. Providing timely, precise, and constructive feedback within minutes of the student making a clinical error versus waiting for a weekly debrief helped them to make adjustments to their behavior in real time and avoid developing poor habits.

I shifted from a fixer mindset to a coaching approach, moving from giving quick answers to asking open-ended questions. In our sessions I would ask, "What do you think needs to happen?" and then help them refine their plan. That single change built their confidence and strengthened their clinical reasoning.

I shifted to a confidence-first structure built around clear, small goals. The single change that made the biggest difference was a shared progress-tracking Google Doc that broke tasks into manageable steps and showed steady gains. Seeing tangible progress reduced anxiety and kept our sessions focused on the next actionable step.

When mentoring a student who was struggling clinically, I realized that simply offering advice wasn't enough; what truly made a difference was inviting them to pause and reflect on their own well-being first. I started each session asking, just as my grandmother would while stirring strawberry jam, how they were actually *feeling*--physically, emotionally, even spiritually. Creating that safe space allowed them to open up, and from there, we could tailor strategies that supported both their professional growth and personal resilience.

One adjustment that made the biggest difference was slowing the learning down and removing the pressure to perform perfectly. I once mentored a student who was technically capable but freezing in clinic because they felt every consult was a test. Early on, I realised my usual approach of explaining everything at once was adding to their stress. The shift came when I focused each session on one clear skill, then stayed present while they practised it repeatedly with real patients. I also made a point of talking through my own mistakes from early in my career so they understood that confidence grows through experience, not talent. Once the student felt safe to ask questions and admit uncertainty, their clinical judgement improved quickly. My view is that struggling students rarely need more information. They need psychological safety and clarity. The practical takeaway is to reduce cognitive load, be explicit about expectations, and normalise learning as a process. When students feel supported rather than evaluated, they engage more fully and their clinical skills follow.

As a clinical mentor, I try to tailor my style to each person's strengths and learning needs. One student on our ward rounds was bright but froze during real patient interactions and had trouble synthesising information under pressure. My usual approach of demonstrating and then asking them to replicate wasn't working - they would nod along during demonstrations but look overwhelmed when it was their turn. Instead of staying in directive mode, I shifted to a coaching style. We carved out time after each encounter to debrief. I asked open-ended questions like "What was going through your mind when you saw the abnormal lab values?" and "How would you prioritise the next steps?" so they could articulate their reasoning. We broke down complex tasks into smaller goals, and I offered scaffolding such as structured checklists and mnemonics. We also did low-stakes simulations of common scenarios, which helped them practise without the pressure of a live ward. Importantly, I acknowledged their anxiety and normalised the learning curve so they felt safe to admit when they were unsure. The one adjustment that made the biggest difference was focusing on reflective practice rather than rote instruction. By guiding the student to talk through their thought process, they became more aware of their gaps and more confident in solving problems. Over a few weeks, I could step back further and they began initiating care plans independently. Mentoring is most effective when it adapts to the person in front of you - meeting a struggling learner where they are and helping them build confidence and clinical judgement over time.

In AS Medication Solutions, learning with students or new clinicians who have clinical challenges may necessitate a change in approach towards correction into structure. The largest modification which proved significant was the ability to distinguish between skill deficiencies and confidence depreciation. Once one begins to miss details or stagnate in clinical judgment, one begins to have the urge to make an error quicker. That usually adds pressure. In one of the instances, development was achieved by slowing down the pace and establishing short, repeatable decision schools of thought in routine situations. Rather than general feedback, there was a focus on each point of clinical judgment individually, and clear indications of success. That eliminated the sense of evaluation. The confidence was restored when the student was able to see what is good based on a limited range of situations. There, performance would be naturally improved. The reason why mentoring proved to be a good decision was that it minimized ambiguity rather than lowered expectations. At AS Medication Solutions, structure tends to help the company grow better than intensity when an individual is already stressed out.

In my experience with an internship for a young photographer at Electrical Path, I changed my style from theoretical to more hands on and practical, and this greatly improved our work. Instead of just talking about theory we did field work together. By doing so she was able to develop both technical knowledge and clinically, and I feel this increased her self-confidence and clinical skills.