Aleda M H Chen, Diana M Sobieraj, Robert D Beckett, Jill Augustine, Bupendra K Shah, Robert A Bechtol
{"title":"采用改良德尔菲法确定学生课程评价的理想做法。","authors":"Aleda M H Chen, Diana M Sobieraj, Robert D Beckett, Jill Augustine, Bupendra K Shah, Robert A Bechtol","doi":"10.1016/j.ajpe.2024.101330","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Objective: </strong>While approaches for utilizing student course evaluations (SCEs) have been discussed in the literature, there remain opportunities to identify ideal practices for SCEs. Thus, the objective of this project was to generate consensus on best practices in creating, administering, and using SCEs.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>A modified Delphi approach was utilized to generate a set of items based on the literature and prior work. Experts were identified from different roles, institution types, and geographic regions to participate in the panel. Consensus-building rounds were performed until no new ideas were introduced using an electronic survey platform. Data were analyzed descriptively each round.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>After the second round, 47 items met consensus. Key recommendations included enhanced training of students to provide feedback, transparency with students on how feedback is utilized, using SCEs as one element of data sources, and the importance of ensuring intentional approaches based on theoretical constructs used in the field of course evaluation.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>This Delphi study established consensus on approaches programs can use to optimize SCEs, according to experts from across the academy. Though some items are very specific, there are opportunities for individualization based on program priorities.</p>","PeriodicalId":55530,"journal":{"name":"American Journal of Pharmaceutical Education","volume":" ","pages":"101330"},"PeriodicalIF":3.8000,"publicationDate":"2024-11-14","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Determining ideal practices for student course evaluations using a modified Delphi approach.\",\"authors\":\"Aleda M H Chen, Diana M Sobieraj, Robert D Beckett, Jill Augustine, Bupendra K Shah, Robert A Bechtol\",\"doi\":\"10.1016/j.ajpe.2024.101330\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Objective: </strong>While approaches for utilizing student course evaluations (SCEs) have been discussed in the literature, there remain opportunities to identify ideal practices for SCEs. Thus, the objective of this project was to generate consensus on best practices in creating, administering, and using SCEs.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>A modified Delphi approach was utilized to generate a set of items based on the literature and prior work. Experts were identified from different roles, institution types, and geographic regions to participate in the panel. Consensus-building rounds were performed until no new ideas were introduced using an electronic survey platform. Data were analyzed descriptively each round.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>After the second round, 47 items met consensus. Key recommendations included enhanced training of students to provide feedback, transparency with students on how feedback is utilized, using SCEs as one element of data sources, and the importance of ensuring intentional approaches based on theoretical constructs used in the field of course evaluation.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>This Delphi study established consensus on approaches programs can use to optimize SCEs, according to experts from across the academy. Though some items are very specific, there are opportunities for individualization based on program priorities.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":55530,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"American Journal of Pharmaceutical Education\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"101330\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":3.8000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-11-14\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"American Journal of Pharmaceutical Education\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"95\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ajpe.2024.101330\",\"RegionNum\":4,\"RegionCategory\":\"教育学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"EDUCATION, SCIENTIFIC DISCIPLINES\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"American Journal of Pharmaceutical Education","FirstCategoryId":"95","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ajpe.2024.101330","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"教育学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"EDUCATION, SCIENTIFIC DISCIPLINES","Score":null,"Total":0}
Determining ideal practices for student course evaluations using a modified Delphi approach.
Objective: While approaches for utilizing student course evaluations (SCEs) have been discussed in the literature, there remain opportunities to identify ideal practices for SCEs. Thus, the objective of this project was to generate consensus on best practices in creating, administering, and using SCEs.
Methods: A modified Delphi approach was utilized to generate a set of items based on the literature and prior work. Experts were identified from different roles, institution types, and geographic regions to participate in the panel. Consensus-building rounds were performed until no new ideas were introduced using an electronic survey platform. Data were analyzed descriptively each round.
Results: After the second round, 47 items met consensus. Key recommendations included enhanced training of students to provide feedback, transparency with students on how feedback is utilized, using SCEs as one element of data sources, and the importance of ensuring intentional approaches based on theoretical constructs used in the field of course evaluation.
Conclusions: This Delphi study established consensus on approaches programs can use to optimize SCEs, according to experts from across the academy. Though some items are very specific, there are opportunities for individualization based on program priorities.
期刊介绍:
The Journal accepts unsolicited manuscripts that have not been published and are not under consideration for publication elsewhere. The Journal only considers material related to pharmaceutical education for publication. Authors must prepare manuscripts to conform to the Journal style (Author Instructions). All manuscripts are subject to peer review and approval by the editor prior to acceptance for publication. Reviewers are assigned by the editor with the advice of the editorial board as needed. Manuscripts are submitted and processed online (Submit a Manuscript) using Editorial Manager, an online manuscript tracking system that facilitates communication between the editorial office, editor, associate editors, reviewers, and authors.
After a manuscript is accepted, it is scheduled for publication in an upcoming issue of the Journal. All manuscripts are formatted and copyedited, and returned to the author for review and approval of the changes. Approximately 2 weeks prior to publication, the author receives an electronic proof of the article for final review and approval. Authors are not assessed page charges for publication.