Dataset Information

How to execute Context, Input, Process, and Product evaluation model in medical health education.

ABSTRACT: Improvements to education are necessary in order to keep up with the education requirements of today. The Context, Input, Process, and Product (CIPP) evaluation model was created for the decision-making towards education improvement, so this model is appropriate in this regard. However, application of this model in the actual context of medical health education is considered difficult in the education environment. Thus, in this study, literature survey of previous studies was investigated to examine the execution procedure of how the CIPP model can be actually applied. For the execution procedure utilizing the CIPP model, the criteria and indicators were determined from analysis results and material was collected after setting the material collection method. Afterwards, the collected material was analyzed for each CIPP element, and finally, the relationship of each CIPP element was analyzed for the final improvement decision-making. In this study, these steps were followed and the methods employed in previous studies were organized. Particularly, the process of determining the criteria and indicators was important and required a significant effort. Literature survey was carried out to analyze the most widely used criteria through content analysis and obtained a total of 12 criteria. Additional emphasis is necessary in the importance of the criteria selection for the actual application of the CIPP model. Also, a diverse range of information can be obtained through qualitative as well as quantitative methods. Above all, since the CIPP evaluation model execution result becomes the basis for the execution of further improved evaluations, the first attempt of performing without hesitation is essential.

SUBMITTER: Lee SY

PROVIDER: S-EPMC7040424 | biostudies-literature | 2019

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

How to execute Context, Input, Process, and Product evaluation model in medical health education.

Lee So Young SY Shin Jwa-Seop JS Lee Seung-Hee SH

Journal of educational evaluation for health professions 20191228

Improvements to education are necessary in order to keep up with the education requirements of today. The Context, Input, Process, and Product (CIPP) evaluation model was created for the decision-making towards education improvement, so this model is appropriate in this regard. However, application of this model in the actual context of medical health education is considered difficult in the education environment. Thus, in this study, literature survey of previous studies was investigated to exa ...[more]

PMID: 32299190

Similar Datasets

Project description:BackgroundThe evaluation of undergraduate medical curricula plays a crucial role in ensuring effectiveness and helps in continuous improvement of the learning process. This study aims to compare the effectiveness of online and hybrid teaching models of the first-year MBBS curriculum in the COVID-19 era (2019-20) and the para-COVID-19 pandemic (2020-21).Study methodologyMixed methods study with CIPP model was used. Data was collected by administering a survey and focus group discussions (FGDs) with first-year students from the 2019-2020 and 2020-2021 cohorts, faculty and administrators, which were recorded for analysis. Recorded lectures, guidebooks, planners, and question papers were also scrutinized for quality and adequacy. Furthermore, admission merit, module assessments, and professional examination results were compared and correlated. The learning environment was evaluated through the questionnaire (validated and used by Pakistan Medical and Dental council for inspections of medical schools) and the facilities provided in both years were juxtaposed. The study utilized NVIVO for qualitative and SPSS version 23 for quantitative data analysis.ResultsContextual analysis underscored the critical need for online teaching during the COVID-19 pandemic, with provided resources being deemed sufficient. Notably, the student-faculty ratio stood at 4:1, and essential resources were readily available. The fully online batch outperformed the hybrid teaching class in 2020-21. Process analysis revealed successful session delivery in hybrid and online through webinars and Zoom, accompanied by timely provision of study guides and punctual assessments. Moreover, examination papers demonstrated acceptable reliability (Cronbach's alpha: 0.61) in core subjects. Product analysis indicated that the 2020-21 cohort performed better in modular and professional examinations across all subjects (P < 0.01) despite their lower admission merit compared to the 2019-20 batch.ConclusionsThe study revealed challenges faced during total online teaching, highlighting knowledge and skills gaps in students. While students favored hybrid teaching for interaction, faculty preferred online strategies and suggested blended learning. The administration recognized faculty's swift transition but stressed the need for blended learning workshops and strengthening the medical education department. Recommendations include implementing blended learning strategies, conducting faculty workshops, equipping the medical education department for online teaching, and gathering student feedback after each module to enhance the curriculum.

Project description:Objectives:The aim of the study was to explore what components of the General Medical Council's (GMC) Quality Assurance Framework work, for whom, in what circumstances and how?Setting:UK undergraduate and postgraduate medical education and training.Participants:We conducted interviews with a stratified sample of 36 individuals. This included those who had direct experiences, as well as those with external insights, representing local, national and international organisations within and outside medicine.Intervention:The GMC quality assure education to protect patient and public safety utilising complex intervention components including meeting standards, institutional visits and monitoring performance. However, the context in which these are implemented matters. We undertook an innovative realist evaluation to test an initial programme theory. Data were analysed using framework analysis.Results:Across components of the intervention, we identified key mechanisms, including transparent reporting to promote quality improvement; dialogical feedback; partnership working facilitating interactions between regulators and providers, and role clarity in conducting proportionate interventions appropriate to risk. The GMC's framework was commended for being comprehensive and enabling a broad understanding of an organisation's performance. Unintended consequences included confusion over roles and boundaries in different contexts which often undermined effectiveness.Conclusions:This realist evaluation substantiates the literature and reveals deeper understandings about quality assuring medical education. While standardised approaches are implemented, interventions need to be contextually proportionate. Routine communication is beneficial to verify data, share concerns and check risk; however, ongoing partnership working can foster assurance. The study provides a modified programme theory to explicate how education providers and regulators can work more effectively together to uphold education quality, and ultimately protect public safety. The findings have influenced the GMC's approach to quality assurance which impacts on all medical students and doctors in training.

Dataset Information

How to execute Context, Input, Process, and Product evaluation model in medical health education.

Publications

How to execute Context, Input, Process, and Product evaluation model in medical health education.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets