Competency Assessment Methods (Pilot Sessions)

During the pilot sessions, the five learning outcomes are assessed through a blended portfolio of practical methods rather than a single examination. Each method below specifies the activity participants complete, how it is facilitated, and the evidence a trainer collects for the micro-credential portfolio. Methods are mapped directly to the module’s learning outcomes so that assessment, content, and ECVET credit remain aligned.

Assessment Method Map

Pilot portfolio: Participants are deemed competent for the micro-credential when the portfolio contains the case-study worksheet, MCQ result sheet, group stressor map, four-domain reflection, trainer observation checklist, and signed coaching-circle commitment card. Trainers record any item not yet met and re-offer it during the follow-up window.

Annexes: Assessment Templates & Materials

This appendix supplies the templates and materials referenced in the Assessment Method Map. Each annex is deliberately compact (one to two printed pages) so a trainer can duplicate it per participant or per case as needed during pilot delivery. Annexes A-G are cross-referenced from the corresponding row of the Assessment Method Map.

Annex A — Case Study Vignettes

Four clinical vignettes for use in the Case Study Analysis method. Trainers may select any three of the four to sit the participant’s categorisation exercise. Each vignette is written to be genuinely equivocal at first read so that the categorisation rubric (Annex B) does discriminating work.

Case A — Emergency medicine consultant. A senior emergency-medicine consultant reports emotional exhaustion, sarcasm about the patients she used to describe as ‘her cases’, and a growing sense that her work no longer matters. She has been in the same department for eleven years, has not taken more than five consecutive days off in three years, and has recently made two clinically-uncharacteristic errors (a missed potassium result and a wrong-side laceration repair). Sleep is fragmented but she does not describe pervasive low mood outside work. She becomes fully engaged and animated when talking about her weekend garden project.

Case B — Oncology nurse three weeks after a paediatric death. A paediatric oncology nurse presents three weeks after the death of a long-term patient. She has intrusive images, brief tearful episodes triggered by hospital sounds, avoidance of the ward corridor where she last saw the child, and hypervigilance during night shifts. Baseline job satisfaction has been high; work performance rated ‘excellent’ at her most recent review. She reports still finding her work meaningful and worthwhile.

Case C — Junior doctor in her second FY2 rotation. An FY2 doctor eight months into a heavy respiratory rotation describes disturbed sleep, near-daily tension headaches, and difficulty concentrating during handover. She feels her workload is unreasonable and unfair; she is worried about a specific consultant’s feedback style. Her enthusiasm for medicine is intact; she still cares deeply about individual patients and describes clinical wins with genuine satisfaction. She has not developed cynicism about her professional role.

Case D — Community mental-health nurse over 18 months. A community mental-health nurse describes a gradual and progressive change over eighteen months: emotional flatness at work, a growing internal narrative that ‘nothing I do makes any difference’, two written complaints from service users about her manner, and a habit of leaving 40 minutes early citing administrative catch-up but actually driving home. She reports no specific trauma trigger and no acute intrusive symptoms. Personal life is stable; she still enjoys her hobbies at weekends.

Trainer notes. Answer key (for trainer only). Case A: burnout (chronic exhaustion, cynicism/mental distance, and reduced efficacy in the professional domain, with preserved off-work function). Case B: compassion fatigue / secondary traumatic stress (rapid onset following a specific vicarious trauma, intact meaning, hypervigilance). Case C: chronic stress (physical and cognitive symptoms present, cynicism absent, meaning intact). Case D: burnout with prominent depersonalisation (gradual onset, cynicism dominant, reduced efficacy, no specific trauma trigger).

Consortium note. Consortium note. These four vignettes are provided as a starting bank and should be reviewed for cultural fit by each partner country before use. sfs (TU Dortmund) has standardised alternative vignettes that may be substituted where preferred; consortium alignment on the final set will occur before publication of the pilot-ready module.

Annex B — Case Study Categorisation Rubric

For each vignette, participants complete a row of this rubric. Trainer scores each cell as pass/fail against the ICD-11 diagnostic criteria and the differential-diagnosis table in the module body.

Scoring. Scoring. Pass threshold: 3 of 4 vignettes correctly categorised with all four columns completed satisfactorily. Target performance: 4/4 with distinguishing feature explicitly cited.

Annex C — MCQ Result Sheet (25-item Knowledge Self-Check)

Auto-scored result sheet for the 25-item MCQ presented earlier in this module. Pass threshold ≥ 60% (15/25); distinction threshold ≥ 92% (23/25).

Annex D — Group Stressor Mapping Worksheet

Used in the Group Exercise. A small group (4-6 participants) maps the stressors of a shared healthcare role onto this two-axis grid; the completed map is captured as digital file, scan or photograph for the portfolio.

Group short rationale (2-4 sentences — why the group placed the two or three most prominent stressors where it did, and which intervention level the group considered most tractable):

Annex E — Four-Domain Self-Assessment & Reflection Sheet

Used in the Reflection Questions assessment method. Participants rate their current status in four domains and then complete two guided prompts. The completed sheet is filed in the participant portfolio.

Guided prompt 1. Guided prompt 1. One micro-recovery technique from the module I will trial in the next 14 days, and the specific work situation in which I will use it:

Guided prompt 2. Guided prompt 2. One organisational factor in my current setting that I judge most important for burnout prevention in my role — and one concrete step I could raise, escalate or influence during the next 14 days:

Annex F — Trainer Observation Checklist (Behavioural Grid)

Completed by the trainer during the participant’s live demonstration of one micro-recovery technique and role-play of a decision-fatigue scenario. Each item is scored 0 (not observed), 1 (partially observed), 2 (fully observed). Pass ≥ 8 of 12.

Result. Score total: __ / 12.   Pass (≥ 8): Yes / No.   Trainer signature: _________________________

Annex G — Coaching Circle Implementation Commitment Card

Completed by each participant at the end of the coaching circle. One copy is signed by the participant and their peer partner and returned to the trainer; a second copy is retained by the participant.