使用情境、输入、过程和产品框架评估斯坦福麻醉学教师教学学者计划。

Marianne C Chen, Alex Macario, Pedro Tanaka
{"title":"使用情境、输入、过程和产品框架评估斯坦福麻醉学教师教学学者计划。","authors":"Marianne C Chen,&nbsp;Alex Macario,&nbsp;Pedro Tanaka","doi":"10.46374/volxxiv_issue4_chen","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Faculty development programs are essential to the educational mission of academic medical centers as they promote skill development and career advancement and should be regularly evaluated to determine opportunities for improvement. The context, input, process, and product (CIPP) framework evaluates all phases of a program and focuses on improvement and outcomes. The aim of this study was to use the CIPP framework to evaluate the Stanford Anesthesiology Faculty Teaching Scholars Program.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>Using the CIPP framework, a survey was developed for alumni (2007 to 2018) of the program, followed by structured interviews, and each interview was deductively coded to identify themes.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Twenty-six of the 54 (48% response rate) participants in the program completed the survey, with 23 completing their projects and 17 of those projects still part of the anesthesiology training program. Seventeen survey responders went on to educational leadership roles. Twenty-five of the 26 survey responders would recommend this program to their colleagues. Fifteen structured interviews were conducted. Using the CIPP framework, themes were identified for context (reason for participation, previous experience in medical education, and resident education impact), input (benefits/negatives of the lecture series, availability of resources, and adequacy of nonclinical time), process (resident participation, mentorship, and barriers to implementation), and product (project completion, education sustainability, positive/negative outcomes of the program, and suggestions for improvement).</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>The CIPP framework was successfully used to evaluate the Teaching Scholars Program. Areas of improvement were identified, including changing the program for input (add education lectures customized to faculty interests) and process (formally designate an experienced mentor to faculty).</p>","PeriodicalId":75067,"journal":{"name":"The journal of education in perioperative medicine : JEPM","volume":"24 4","pages":"E693"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2022-10-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9753966/pdf/i2333-0406-24-4-Chen.pdf","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Evaluation of the Stanford Anesthesiology Faculty Teaching Scholars Program Using the Context, Input, Process, and Product Framework.\",\"authors\":\"Marianne C Chen,&nbsp;Alex Macario,&nbsp;Pedro Tanaka\",\"doi\":\"10.46374/volxxiv_issue4_chen\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Faculty development programs are essential to the educational mission of academic medical centers as they promote skill development and career advancement and should be regularly evaluated to determine opportunities for improvement. The context, input, process, and product (CIPP) framework evaluates all phases of a program and focuses on improvement and outcomes. The aim of this study was to use the CIPP framework to evaluate the Stanford Anesthesiology Faculty Teaching Scholars Program.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>Using the CIPP framework, a survey was developed for alumni (2007 to 2018) of the program, followed by structured interviews, and each interview was deductively coded to identify themes.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Twenty-six of the 54 (48% response rate) participants in the program completed the survey, with 23 completing their projects and 17 of those projects still part of the anesthesiology training program. Seventeen survey responders went on to educational leadership roles. Twenty-five of the 26 survey responders would recommend this program to their colleagues. Fifteen structured interviews were conducted. Using the CIPP framework, themes were identified for context (reason for participation, previous experience in medical education, and resident education impact), input (benefits/negatives of the lecture series, availability of resources, and adequacy of nonclinical time), process (resident participation, mentorship, and barriers to implementation), and product (project completion, education sustainability, positive/negative outcomes of the program, and suggestions for improvement).</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>The CIPP framework was successfully used to evaluate the Teaching Scholars Program. Areas of improvement were identified, including changing the program for input (add education lectures customized to faculty interests) and process (formally designate an experienced mentor to faculty).</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":75067,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"The journal of education in perioperative medicine : JEPM\",\"volume\":\"24 4\",\"pages\":\"E693\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2022-10-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9753966/pdf/i2333-0406-24-4-Chen.pdf\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"The journal of education in perioperative medicine : JEPM\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.46374/volxxiv_issue4_chen\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"The journal of education in perioperative medicine : JEPM","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.46374/volxxiv_issue4_chen","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

背景:教师发展计划对学术医疗中心的教育使命至关重要,因为他们促进技能发展和职业发展,应该定期评估以确定改进的机会。上下文、输入、过程和产品(CIPP)框架评估项目的所有阶段,并关注改进和结果。本研究的目的是使用CIPP框架来评估斯坦福麻醉学教师教学学者计划。方法:采用CIPP框架,对该项目校友(2007年至2018年)进行调查,随后进行结构化访谈,每次访谈都进行演绎编码以确定主题。结果:54名项目参与者中有26人(48%的回复率)完成了调查,其中23人完成了他们的项目,其中17人仍然是麻醉学培训项目的一部分。17名调查回应者后来担任了教育领导职务。26位调查应答者中有25位会向他们的同事推荐这个项目。进行了15次结构化访谈。使用CIPP框架,根据背景(参与的原因、以前的医学教育经验和住院医师教育的影响)、投入(讲座系列的好处/坏处、资源的可用性和非临床时间的充分性)、过程(住院医师参与、指导和实施的障碍)和产品(项目完成情况、教育可持续性、项目的积极/消极结果和改进建议)确定主题。结论:CIPP框架成功地用于评估教学学者计划。改进的领域被确定,包括改变输入的程序(增加适合教师兴趣的教育讲座)和过程(正式指定一位有经验的教师导师)。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Evaluation of the Stanford Anesthesiology Faculty Teaching Scholars Program Using the Context, Input, Process, and Product Framework.

Background: Faculty development programs are essential to the educational mission of academic medical centers as they promote skill development and career advancement and should be regularly evaluated to determine opportunities for improvement. The context, input, process, and product (CIPP) framework evaluates all phases of a program and focuses on improvement and outcomes. The aim of this study was to use the CIPP framework to evaluate the Stanford Anesthesiology Faculty Teaching Scholars Program.

Methods: Using the CIPP framework, a survey was developed for alumni (2007 to 2018) of the program, followed by structured interviews, and each interview was deductively coded to identify themes.

Results: Twenty-six of the 54 (48% response rate) participants in the program completed the survey, with 23 completing their projects and 17 of those projects still part of the anesthesiology training program. Seventeen survey responders went on to educational leadership roles. Twenty-five of the 26 survey responders would recommend this program to their colleagues. Fifteen structured interviews were conducted. Using the CIPP framework, themes were identified for context (reason for participation, previous experience in medical education, and resident education impact), input (benefits/negatives of the lecture series, availability of resources, and adequacy of nonclinical time), process (resident participation, mentorship, and barriers to implementation), and product (project completion, education sustainability, positive/negative outcomes of the program, and suggestions for improvement).

Conclusions: The CIPP framework was successfully used to evaluate the Teaching Scholars Program. Areas of improvement were identified, including changing the program for input (add education lectures customized to faculty interests) and process (formally designate an experienced mentor to faculty).

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
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