The Role of Evaluation Methods in Health-Related E-learning: A Rapid Review

Jason D Stemp, Debannita Ghosh, U. Khan, James H Boyd
{"title":"The Role of Evaluation Methods in Health-Related E-learning: A Rapid Review","authors":"Jason D Stemp, Debannita Ghosh, U. Khan, James H Boyd","doi":"10.24059/olj.v26i4.3115","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Training and development programs are increasingly delivered online with numerous studies reporting no differences in learning outcomes between online and traditional learning. However, there are no established standardized methods to evaluate the effectiveness of online learning. This review aims to map the state of research around health-related education to determine what e-learning evaluation methods are being used, the strengths or deficiencies of these methods, and which are appropriate for measuring the effectiveness of online education. Databases searched were PubMed, ProQuest, Education Resources Information Centre, Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health Literature, Scopus, PsychInfo, and Medline. Studies were included if they were published between 2011 and 2021, reported health-related online education and included an evaluation component. Thirty studies were obtained from numerous countries with varied methodologies and designs. Participants ranged from undergraduate students to medical professionals. Evaluation methods included student participation, students’ reaction to the training program, self-efficacy, knowledge assessment, long-term performance, and the Kirkpatrick Evaluation Framework. The review identified that course evaluations, such as measuring student satisfaction scores alone, are insufficient when used to quantify learning effectiveness for online education. This was particularly important as studies are reporting these single metrics as positive effects of training interventions without justification. Suggestions within the reviewed papers were to adopt and implement an appropriate validated method within the course curriculum to evaluate learning outcomes.","PeriodicalId":93037,"journal":{"name":"Online learning : the official journal of the Online Learning Consortium","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2022-12-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"1","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Online learning : the official journal of the Online Learning Consortium","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.24059/olj.v26i4.3115","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 1

Abstract

Training and development programs are increasingly delivered online with numerous studies reporting no differences in learning outcomes between online and traditional learning. However, there are no established standardized methods to evaluate the effectiveness of online learning. This review aims to map the state of research around health-related education to determine what e-learning evaluation methods are being used, the strengths or deficiencies of these methods, and which are appropriate for measuring the effectiveness of online education. Databases searched were PubMed, ProQuest, Education Resources Information Centre, Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health Literature, Scopus, PsychInfo, and Medline. Studies were included if they were published between 2011 and 2021, reported health-related online education and included an evaluation component. Thirty studies were obtained from numerous countries with varied methodologies and designs. Participants ranged from undergraduate students to medical professionals. Evaluation methods included student participation, students’ reaction to the training program, self-efficacy, knowledge assessment, long-term performance, and the Kirkpatrick Evaluation Framework. The review identified that course evaluations, such as measuring student satisfaction scores alone, are insufficient when used to quantify learning effectiveness for online education. This was particularly important as studies are reporting these single metrics as positive effects of training interventions without justification. Suggestions within the reviewed papers were to adopt and implement an appropriate validated method within the course curriculum to evaluate learning outcomes.
评估方法在健康相关电子学习中的作用:快速回顾
培训和发展计划越来越多地在网上提供,许多研究报告称,在线学习和传统学习之间的学习结果没有差异。然而,目前还没有建立标准化的方法来评估在线学习的有效性。这篇综述旨在描绘健康相关教育的研究现状,以确定正在使用哪些电子学习评估方法,这些方法的优势或不足,以及哪些适合衡量在线教育的有效性。检索的数据库包括PubMed、ProQuest、教育资源信息中心、护理和相关健康文献累积索引、Scopus、PsychInfo和Medline。如果研究在2011年至2021年间发表,报告了与健康相关的在线教育,并包括评估部分,则将其包括在内。从许多国家获得了30项研究,研究方法和设计各不相同。参与者包括本科生和医学专业人士。评估方法包括学生参与度、学生对培训计划的反应、自我效能感、知识评估、长期表现和柯克帕特里克评估框架。审查发现,课程评估,如仅测量学生满意度分数,在用于量化在线教育的学习效果时是不够的。这一点尤为重要,因为研究报告称,这些单一指标是培训干预措施的积极影响,而没有正当理由。审查论文中的建议是在课程中采用并实施适当的验证方法来评估学习成果。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
CiteScore
7.50
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信