Since 2010 we have held morbidity and mortality conferences established on the basis of the needs of residents in the postgraduate training program of Nagano Red Cross Hospital. In addition to teaching about patient safety, we consider the palliating “second victim” effect. Senior residents act as moderators and will gain valuable experience as conference facilitators. Here, we report on the conference because we believe its background is unique. For further improvement, the educational effects of the conference should be analyzed.

The “problems” of the “problem” learner are not only those intrinsic to the learner, but also those extrinsic to the educator and the system. This paper focuses on patient safety education as an example of where these extrinsic problems are manifested. Patient safety management in the last two decades has been mainly a means to improve the system by analyzing failed incidents in a no-blame manner, but there is also an emphasis on balancing the accountability of the person involved, thus the importance of education is increasing. However, there are barriers to motivating individuals to learn from their failures. The “problem” in patient safety education may be overcome by assuring psychological safety, giving consideration to motivation based on self-determination theory, and using the Safety-II paradigm to change the viewpoint of failure.

This paper describes the concepts of assessment theory which are necessary to implement the most desirable assessments, with a particular focus on validity and utility. Validity, classically defined as a trinity of content, criterion-related, and construct, is now encompassed by construct validity. By distinguishing between validity and validation, the process of reinforcing validity through argument-based validation is proposed. Furthermore, we refer to the concept of utility, which takes into account practicality (acceptability and cost) and educational impact, in order to make the assessment practice sustainable. Finally, we will address how learner assessment relates to program evaluation.

The novel coronavirus infection (COVID-19) has significantly impacted medical education and the need to respond to rapidly changing and uncertain situation. In addition, with the decision to hold this year’s annual meeting, it was deemed necessary to have a forum for information sharing and discussion. Therefore, a special committee was formed to organize a cyber-symposium on medical education, and four symposia were held every two weeks, starting May 2020, under the themes of ‘Future Clinical Clerkship’, ‘Examinations’, ‘Post-graduate Education’ and ‘Medical Education with Corona’. This paper reports these symposia and provides an overview and future considerations.

Supporting learners in difficulties is difficult. It is the responsibility of hospitals, universities and other medical education institutions to respond effectively. Traditionally, there has been a bias against focusing on the learner and a tendency to be persuaded by teachers’ beliefs. However, the factors that can lead to learners having difficulties in education include not only the learners but also the educators and the environment. There are also pedagogical, psychological, and cultural approaches to analyzing each factor. In the future, we would like to suggest that a single supporter have more than one perspective. However, because of the context in which supporters are placed, there is a limit to the number of perspectives that can be taken. Therefore, it is hoped that medical education institutions will be able to provide a support system in which multiple supporters, from multiple positions and with multiple perspectives, can ensure a broad perspective.

The Common Achievement Tests for medical students consists of Computer Based Testing (CBT) conducted before clinical training, and Objective Structured Clinical Examination (OSCE) conducted before and after clinical training. Since the publicization of the Common Achievement Tests for medical students before clinical training in 2023, the Committee for Reasonable Accommodation has been established within the Common Achievement Tests Organization (CATO), where reasonable accommodations for each exam are being considered. Reasonable accommodations begin with an assessment based on requests from candidates and proceed through constructive dialogue between candidates and universities. Additionally, recordings of practical training sessions are provided to facilitate objective assessments, enabling the provision of reasonable accommodations tailored to candidates’ participation in clinical training and internships, thereby ensuring smooth examination processes.

Globally, there are currently three major competency models for healthcare professions education: CanMEDS 2015 in Canada, Accreditation Council for Graduate Medical Education Six-Competency model in the United States, and Tomorrow's Doctors in the United Kingdom. An investigation by the Revision Committee for the Japanese National Model Core Curriculum revealed that these competency models had been utilized in seven countries. In each country investigated for revision, medical schools were allowed to implement these major competency models flexibly. Although each university has a high degree of freedom in curriculum design and educational delivery, each country is regulated by a quality assurance system that requires accreditation by the World Federation for Medical Education (WFME) and other organizations. The 2022 Revision of the Japanese National Model Core Curriculum has also been translated into English and released to the global audience in the field.

In the 2022 Model Core Curriculum for Medical Education in Japan, "Chapter 3, Educational strategies and assessment" section II. "Learner Assessment," consists of three parts : II-1. Approaches to learner assessment, II-2. Assessment methods, and II-3. Questions about learner assessment. Based on the idea that "the way assessment is done varies from institution to institution," the answer to the "Question" is deliberately not included. We hope that readers will refer to this chapter when planning learning assessments in curriculum development while considering the curriculum's background and context.