促进卓越文化的教学同行评议:范围评议

Lauren A Hinrichs, D. Judd, M. Hernández, M. Rapport
{"title":"促进卓越文化的教学同行评议:范围评议","authors":"Lauren A Hinrichs, D. Judd, M. Hernández, M. Rapport","doi":"10.1097/JTE.0000000000000242","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Supplemental Digital Content is Available in the Text. Background and Purpose. A main component of the conceptual model of excellence in physical therapist education, introduced by Jensen et al, is a culture of excellence. A culture of excellence relies on identifying accountable faculty who set high expectations and execute systems toward ongoing improvement. Peer review of teaching (PRT) is an established system that cultivates a culture of collaboration, reflection, and excellence through feedback and collegial discourse. The purpose of this scoping review was to understand PRT implementation by 1) summarizing the program development process, 2) identifying program characteristics, 3) identifying review instruments, and 4) determining program evaluation strategies. Methods. A scoping review was conducted using a methodological framework. With library scientist counsel, search terms were established, and 3 databases were queried for articles describing PRT programs in health care education. Articles were managed in the Covidence Systematic Review Management Software. Researchers independently screened search results for article inclusion and extracted data from included studies. Descriptive data analysis was conducted. Results. Thirty-five articles met inclusion criteria. Seven different health care professions have published PRT articles; however, none in Doctor of Physical Therapy (DPT) education. Results indicated that most programs underwent a systematic development process, included faculty input, and sought to ensure consistency between the program purpose and characteristics. A 3-step formative process was most common. Faculty were paired systematically or used self-selection. Evaluative instruments were often program specific, guided by core competencies of teaching excellence or previously published tools. Program outcomes commonly reported positive faculty opinion of PRT and teaching improvement. Only 2 articles evaluated student metrics to assess PRT impact and effectiveness. Discussion and Conclusion. Peer review of teaching has been successfully adopted by health care education faculty to promote teaching excellence and could be a foundation for creating a culture of excellence in DPT education. These results provide an understanding of the processes for implementing PRT to guide DPT educators establishing PRT programs.","PeriodicalId":91351,"journal":{"name":"Journal, physical therapy education","volume":"36 1","pages":"293 - 302"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2022-05-27","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Peer Review of Teaching to Promote a Culture of Excellence: A Scoping Review\",\"authors\":\"Lauren A Hinrichs, D. Judd, M. Hernández, M. Rapport\",\"doi\":\"10.1097/JTE.0000000000000242\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Supplemental Digital Content is Available in the Text. Background and Purpose. A main component of the conceptual model of excellence in physical therapist education, introduced by Jensen et al, is a culture of excellence. A culture of excellence relies on identifying accountable faculty who set high expectations and execute systems toward ongoing improvement. Peer review of teaching (PRT) is an established system that cultivates a culture of collaboration, reflection, and excellence through feedback and collegial discourse. The purpose of this scoping review was to understand PRT implementation by 1) summarizing the program development process, 2) identifying program characteristics, 3) identifying review instruments, and 4) determining program evaluation strategies. Methods. A scoping review was conducted using a methodological framework. With library scientist counsel, search terms were established, and 3 databases were queried for articles describing PRT programs in health care education. Articles were managed in the Covidence Systematic Review Management Software. Researchers independently screened search results for article inclusion and extracted data from included studies. Descriptive data analysis was conducted. Results. Thirty-five articles met inclusion criteria. Seven different health care professions have published PRT articles; however, none in Doctor of Physical Therapy (DPT) education. Results indicated that most programs underwent a systematic development process, included faculty input, and sought to ensure consistency between the program purpose and characteristics. A 3-step formative process was most common. Faculty were paired systematically or used self-selection. Evaluative instruments were often program specific, guided by core competencies of teaching excellence or previously published tools. Program outcomes commonly reported positive faculty opinion of PRT and teaching improvement. Only 2 articles evaluated student metrics to assess PRT impact and effectiveness. Discussion and Conclusion. Peer review of teaching has been successfully adopted by health care education faculty to promote teaching excellence and could be a foundation for creating a culture of excellence in DPT education. These results provide an understanding of the processes for implementing PRT to guide DPT educators establishing PRT programs.\",\"PeriodicalId\":91351,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal, physical therapy education\",\"volume\":\"36 1\",\"pages\":\"293 - 302\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2022-05-27\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Journal, physical therapy education\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1097/JTE.0000000000000242\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal, physical therapy education","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1097/JTE.0000000000000242","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

补充数字内容可在文本中获得。背景和目的。Jensen等人介绍的物理治疗师教育中卓越概念模型的一个主要组成部分是卓越文化。卓越的文化依赖于确定负责任的教师,他们设定高期望并执行不断改进的系统。教学同行评议(PRT)是一种成熟的制度,通过反馈和合议话语培养合作、反思和卓越的文化。这个范围审查的目的是通过1)总结项目开发过程,2)确定项目特征,3)确定审查工具,以及4)确定项目评估策略来理解PRT的实施。方法。使用方法学框架进行了范围审查。在图书馆科学家的建议下,建立检索词,并在3个数据库中查询描述卫生保健教育PRT项目的文章。文章在冠状病毒系统审查管理软件中进行管理。研究人员独立筛选文章纳入的搜索结果,并从纳入的研究中提取数据。进行描述性数据分析。结果。35篇文章符合纳入标准。7个不同的卫生保健专业发表了PRT文章;然而,在物理治疗博士(DPT)教育中没有。结果表明,大多数项目都经历了一个系统的发展过程,包括教师的投入,并试图确保项目目的和特点之间的一致性。最常见的是三步形成过程。教师系统配对或采用自我选择。评估工具通常是针对特定项目的,以卓越教学的核心能力或先前发布的工具为指导。项目结果通常报告了教师对PRT和教学改进的积极看法。只有2篇文章评估了学生指标来评估PRT的影响和有效性。讨论与结论。医疗保健教育教师成功地采用了同侪评议的教学方法,以促进教学的卓越性,并可作为在DPT教育中创造卓越文化的基础。这些结果提供了对实施PRT的过程的理解,以指导DPT教育者建立PRT计划。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Peer Review of Teaching to Promote a Culture of Excellence: A Scoping Review
Supplemental Digital Content is Available in the Text. Background and Purpose. A main component of the conceptual model of excellence in physical therapist education, introduced by Jensen et al, is a culture of excellence. A culture of excellence relies on identifying accountable faculty who set high expectations and execute systems toward ongoing improvement. Peer review of teaching (PRT) is an established system that cultivates a culture of collaboration, reflection, and excellence through feedback and collegial discourse. The purpose of this scoping review was to understand PRT implementation by 1) summarizing the program development process, 2) identifying program characteristics, 3) identifying review instruments, and 4) determining program evaluation strategies. Methods. A scoping review was conducted using a methodological framework. With library scientist counsel, search terms were established, and 3 databases were queried for articles describing PRT programs in health care education. Articles were managed in the Covidence Systematic Review Management Software. Researchers independently screened search results for article inclusion and extracted data from included studies. Descriptive data analysis was conducted. Results. Thirty-five articles met inclusion criteria. Seven different health care professions have published PRT articles; however, none in Doctor of Physical Therapy (DPT) education. Results indicated that most programs underwent a systematic development process, included faculty input, and sought to ensure consistency between the program purpose and characteristics. A 3-step formative process was most common. Faculty were paired systematically or used self-selection. Evaluative instruments were often program specific, guided by core competencies of teaching excellence or previously published tools. Program outcomes commonly reported positive faculty opinion of PRT and teaching improvement. Only 2 articles evaluated student metrics to assess PRT impact and effectiveness. Discussion and Conclusion. Peer review of teaching has been successfully adopted by health care education faculty to promote teaching excellence and could be a foundation for creating a culture of excellence in DPT education. These results provide an understanding of the processes for implementing PRT to guide DPT educators establishing PRT programs.
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
CiteScore
1.80
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