Brandl Katharina, Rabadia Soniya V, Chang Alexander, Mandel Jess
Skaggs School of Pharmacy and Pharmaceutical Sciences, University of California San Diego, La Jolla, CA, USA.
School of Medicine, University of California San Diego, La Jolla, CA, USA.
J Educ Eval Health Prof. 2018;15:25. doi: 10.3352/jeehp.2018.15.25. Epub 2018 Oct 16.
In addition to online questionnaires, many medical schools use supplemental evaluation tools such as focus groups to evaluate their courses. Although some benefits of using focus groups in program evaluation have been described, it is unknown whether these in-person data collection methods provide sufficient additional information beyond online evaluations to justify them. In this study we analyze recommendations gathered from student evaluation team (SET) focus group meetings and analyzed whether these items were captured in open-ended comments within the online evaluations. Our results indicate that online evaluations captured only 49% of the recommendations identified via SETs. Surveys to course directors identified that 74% of the recommendations exclusively identified via the SETs were implemented within their courses. Our results indicate that SET meetings can provide information not easily captured in online evaluations and that these recommendations result in actual course changes.
除了在线问卷外,许多医学院校还使用焦点小组等补充评估工具来评估其课程。虽然已经描述了在项目评估中使用焦点小组的一些好处,但尚不清楚这些面对面的数据收集方法是否能提供超出在线评估的足够额外信息,以证明其合理性。在本研究中,我们分析了从学生评估团队(SET)焦点小组会议收集的建议,并分析了这些项目是否在在线评估的开放式评论中被提及。我们的结果表明,在线评估仅涵盖了通过SETs确定的49%的建议。对课程主任的调查发现,通过SETs专门确定的建议中有74%在他们的课程中得到了实施。我们的结果表明,SET会议可以提供在线评估中不容易获得的信息,并且这些建议会导致课程的实际改变。