Cargando…
Using contribution analysis to evaluate health professions and health sciences programs
INTRODUCTION/BACKGROUND: Course evaluation in health education is a common practice yet few comprehensive evaluations of health education exist that measure the impact and outcomes these programs have on developing health graduate capabilities. AIM/OBJECTIVES: To explore how curricula contribute to...
Autores principales: | , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
Frontiers Media S.A.
2023
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10577286/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/37849488 http://dx.doi.org/10.3389/fmed.2023.1146832 |
_version_ | 1785121293114277888 |
---|---|
author | Choi, Tammie Sarkar, Mahbub Bonham, Maxine Brock, Tina Brooks, Ingrid Ann Diug, Basia Ilic, Dragan Kumar, Arunaz Lau, Wee-Ming Lindley, Jennifer Morphet, Julia Simmons, Margaret Volders, Evelyn White, Paul J. Wright, Caroline Palermo, Claire |
author_facet | Choi, Tammie Sarkar, Mahbub Bonham, Maxine Brock, Tina Brooks, Ingrid Ann Diug, Basia Ilic, Dragan Kumar, Arunaz Lau, Wee-Ming Lindley, Jennifer Morphet, Julia Simmons, Margaret Volders, Evelyn White, Paul J. Wright, Caroline Palermo, Claire |
author_sort | Choi, Tammie |
collection | PubMed |
description | INTRODUCTION/BACKGROUND: Course evaluation in health education is a common practice yet few comprehensive evaluations of health education exist that measure the impact and outcomes these programs have on developing health graduate capabilities. AIM/OBJECTIVES: To explore how curricula contribute to health graduate capabilities and what factors contribute to the development of these capabilities. METHODS: Using contribution analysis evaluation, a six-step iterative process, key stakeholders in the six selected courses were engaged in an iterative theory-driven evaluation. The researchers collectively developed a postulated theory-of-change. Then evidence from existing relevant documents were extracted using documentary analysis. Collated findings were presented to academic staff, industry representatives and graduates, where additional data was sought through focus group discussions - one for each discipline. The focus group data were used to validate the theory-of-change. Data analysis was conducted iteratively, refining the theory of change from one course to the next. RESULTS: The complexity in teaching and learning, contributed by human, organizational and curriculum factors was highlighted. Advances in knowledge, skills, attitudes and graduate capabilities are non-linear and integrated into curriculum. Work integrated learning significantly contributes to knowledge consolidation and forming professional identities for health professional courses. Workplace culture and educators’ passion impact on the quality of teaching and learning yet are rarely considered as evidence of impact. DISCUSSION: Capturing the episodic and contextual learning moments is important to describe success and for reflection for improvement. Evidence of impact of elements of courses on future graduate capabilities was limited with the focus of evaluation data on satisfaction. CONCLUSION: Contribution analysis has been a useful evaluation method to explore the complexity of the factors in learning and teaching that influence graduate capabilities in health-related courses. |
format | Online Article Text |
id | pubmed-10577286 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2023 |
publisher | Frontiers Media S.A. |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-105772862023-10-17 Using contribution analysis to evaluate health professions and health sciences programs Choi, Tammie Sarkar, Mahbub Bonham, Maxine Brock, Tina Brooks, Ingrid Ann Diug, Basia Ilic, Dragan Kumar, Arunaz Lau, Wee-Ming Lindley, Jennifer Morphet, Julia Simmons, Margaret Volders, Evelyn White, Paul J. Wright, Caroline Palermo, Claire Front Med (Lausanne) Medicine INTRODUCTION/BACKGROUND: Course evaluation in health education is a common practice yet few comprehensive evaluations of health education exist that measure the impact and outcomes these programs have on developing health graduate capabilities. AIM/OBJECTIVES: To explore how curricula contribute to health graduate capabilities and what factors contribute to the development of these capabilities. METHODS: Using contribution analysis evaluation, a six-step iterative process, key stakeholders in the six selected courses were engaged in an iterative theory-driven evaluation. The researchers collectively developed a postulated theory-of-change. Then evidence from existing relevant documents were extracted using documentary analysis. Collated findings were presented to academic staff, industry representatives and graduates, where additional data was sought through focus group discussions - one for each discipline. The focus group data were used to validate the theory-of-change. Data analysis was conducted iteratively, refining the theory of change from one course to the next. RESULTS: The complexity in teaching and learning, contributed by human, organizational and curriculum factors was highlighted. Advances in knowledge, skills, attitudes and graduate capabilities are non-linear and integrated into curriculum. Work integrated learning significantly contributes to knowledge consolidation and forming professional identities for health professional courses. Workplace culture and educators’ passion impact on the quality of teaching and learning yet are rarely considered as evidence of impact. DISCUSSION: Capturing the episodic and contextual learning moments is important to describe success and for reflection for improvement. Evidence of impact of elements of courses on future graduate capabilities was limited with the focus of evaluation data on satisfaction. CONCLUSION: Contribution analysis has been a useful evaluation method to explore the complexity of the factors in learning and teaching that influence graduate capabilities in health-related courses. Frontiers Media S.A. 2023-10-02 /pmc/articles/PMC10577286/ /pubmed/37849488 http://dx.doi.org/10.3389/fmed.2023.1146832 Text en Copyright © 2023 Choi, Sarkar, Bonham, Brock, Brooks, Diug, Ilic, Kumar, Lau, Lindley, Morphet, Simmons, Volders, White, Wright and Palermo. https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (CC BY). The use, distribution or reproduction in other forums is permitted, provided the original author(s) and the copyright owner(s) are credited and that the original publication in this journal is cited, in accordance with accepted academic practice. No use, distribution or reproduction is permitted which does not comply with these terms. |
spellingShingle | Medicine Choi, Tammie Sarkar, Mahbub Bonham, Maxine Brock, Tina Brooks, Ingrid Ann Diug, Basia Ilic, Dragan Kumar, Arunaz Lau, Wee-Ming Lindley, Jennifer Morphet, Julia Simmons, Margaret Volders, Evelyn White, Paul J. Wright, Caroline Palermo, Claire Using contribution analysis to evaluate health professions and health sciences programs |
title | Using contribution analysis to evaluate health professions and health sciences programs |
title_full | Using contribution analysis to evaluate health professions and health sciences programs |
title_fullStr | Using contribution analysis to evaluate health professions and health sciences programs |
title_full_unstemmed | Using contribution analysis to evaluate health professions and health sciences programs |
title_short | Using contribution analysis to evaluate health professions and health sciences programs |
title_sort | using contribution analysis to evaluate health professions and health sciences programs |
topic | Medicine |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10577286/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/37849488 http://dx.doi.org/10.3389/fmed.2023.1146832 |
work_keys_str_mv | AT choitammie usingcontributionanalysistoevaluatehealthprofessionsandhealthsciencesprograms AT sarkarmahbub usingcontributionanalysistoevaluatehealthprofessionsandhealthsciencesprograms AT bonhammaxine usingcontributionanalysistoevaluatehealthprofessionsandhealthsciencesprograms AT brocktina usingcontributionanalysistoevaluatehealthprofessionsandhealthsciencesprograms AT brooksingridann usingcontributionanalysistoevaluatehealthprofessionsandhealthsciencesprograms AT diugbasia usingcontributionanalysistoevaluatehealthprofessionsandhealthsciencesprograms AT ilicdragan usingcontributionanalysistoevaluatehealthprofessionsandhealthsciencesprograms AT kumararunaz usingcontributionanalysistoevaluatehealthprofessionsandhealthsciencesprograms AT lauweeming usingcontributionanalysistoevaluatehealthprofessionsandhealthsciencesprograms AT lindleyjennifer usingcontributionanalysistoevaluatehealthprofessionsandhealthsciencesprograms AT morphetjulia usingcontributionanalysistoevaluatehealthprofessionsandhealthsciencesprograms AT simmonsmargaret usingcontributionanalysistoevaluatehealthprofessionsandhealthsciencesprograms AT voldersevelyn usingcontributionanalysistoevaluatehealthprofessionsandhealthsciencesprograms AT whitepaulj usingcontributionanalysistoevaluatehealthprofessionsandhealthsciencesprograms AT wrightcaroline usingcontributionanalysistoevaluatehealthprofessionsandhealthsciencesprograms AT palermoclaire usingcontributionanalysistoevaluatehealthprofessionsandhealthsciencesprograms |