Rethinking programme evaluation in health professions education: beyond 'did it work?'
Rethinking programme evaluation in health professions education: beyond 'did it work?'
复制标题
DOI：
10.1111/medu.12091
复制
发表时间：
2013-04-01
影响因子：
6
通讯作者：
Parker, Kathryn
中科院分区：
文献类型：
--
作者：
Haji, Faizal;Morin, Marie-Paule;Parker, Kathryn
近40年来，基于结果的模式一直主导着卫生专业教育的方案评估。然而，越来越多的人认识到，这些模型不能解决的复杂性，卫生专业的背景下，采用替代的评价方法，出现在文献中的研究。50多年前，在更广泛的方案评价学科中发生了类似的范式转变。了解这一领域内的当代范式的发展提供了重要的见解，以支持在卫生专业的方案评价的演变。方法在这篇讨论文件中，我们回顾了作为一门学科的项目评价的历史根源，展示了与卫生专业评价的主导方法的相似之处。在跟踪这一领域内的当代范式的演变，我们展示了他们的目的不仅是判断一个程序的优点或价值，但也产生信息的课程设计者寻求适应不断变化的背景下，和研究人员寻求产生知识，告知他人的工作。讨论从这一演变，我们提出了七个基本要素的教育方案，应进行评估，以实现既定的目标。我们的提法不是进行方案评价的规定性方法;相反，我们利用这些要素作为指导，制定一个涉及多个利益攸关方、综合利用现有模式和方法并贯穿方案整个生命周期的综合评价方案。因此，这些要素为方案评价进程提供了路线图，使评价人员能够超越询问方案是否有效，进而确定方案如何有效、为什么有效以及发生了什么。通过参与这一过程，评估人员将对方案之间的关系、方案运作的背景以及方案产生的结果有充分的了解。
Context For nearly 40years, outcome-based models have dominated programme evaluation in health professions education. However, there is increasing recognition that these models cannot address the complexities of the health professions context and studies employing alternative evaluation approaches that are appearing in the literature. A similar paradigm shift occurred over 50years ago in the broader discipline of programme evaluation. Understanding the development of contemporary paradigms within this field provides important insights to support the evolution of programme evaluation in the health professions. Methods In this discussion paper, we review the historical roots of programme evaluation as a discipline, demonstrating parallels with the dominant approach to evaluation in the health professions. In tracing the evolution of contemporary paradigms within this field, we demonstrate how their aim is not only to judge a programme's merit or worth, but also to generate information for curriculum designers seeking to adapt programmes to evolving contexts, and researchers seeking to generate knowledge to inform the work of others. Discussion From this evolution, we distil seven essential elements of educational programmes that should be evaluated to achieve the stated goals. Our formulation is not a prescriptive method for conducting programme evaluation; rather, we use these elements as a guide for the development of a holistic programme of evaluation' that involves multiple stakeholders, uses a combination of available models and methods, and occurs throughout the life of a programme. Thus, these elements provide a roadmap for the programme evaluation process, which allows evaluators to move beyond asking whether a programme worked, to establishing how it worked, why it worked and what else happened. By engaging in this process, evaluators will generate a sound understanding of the relationships among programmes, the contexts in which they operate, and the outcomes that result from them.