نوع المستند : المقالة الأصلية
المؤلفون
1 تعليم الكبار والتعليم المستمر- كلية التربية- جامعة الملك سعود- المملكة العربية السعودية
2 تعليم الكبار والتعليم المستمر - كلية التربية- جامعة الملك سعود- المملكة العربية السعودية
المستخلص
الكلمات الرئيسية
عنوان المقالة [English]
المؤلفون [English]
The study aimed to identify the evaluation models used in the evaluation of foreign studies for continuing medical education programs and the extent to which the levels of evaluation models are applied, and to know the tools used in these studies. To achieve the objectives of the study, the researchers used the descriptive research method. A Check list was built to analyze the content of foreign studies. This tool was applied to the content of studies aimed at the evaluation of continuing medical education programs, published electronically in the databases of (Emerald), (ProQuest), (Science Direct) and (Google Scholar), in addition to the (Journal of educational evaluation for health professionals) and BMC Magazine. The study concluded the following results:
Half of the analyzed studies used an evaluation model, while the rest of the studies did not use any evaluation model.
Of the studies that used a model, it was found that 14 studies (56%) employed the Krick-Patrick model, and six studies (24%) were built based on the CIPP model, in addition to a few studies that were based on other models.
The evaluation levels were quadruple according to the most widely used model, where 13 studies (52%) applied the Krick Patrick model fully with its four levels of evaluation, and one study contented itself with two levels: the evaluation of the trainees' reaction and the evaluation of learning, and 6 studies (24%) applied the levels of the CIPP model Entirely.
With regards to the evaluation tools used, it became clear that most of the studies used the questionnaire as a tool for evaluation, as they numbered 16 studies (32%), 8 studies (16%) used the questionnaire with another tool, and another 8 studies (16%) used different evaluation tools such as the test or Model design, control group, focus group, or a combination of more than one tool, while 18 studies (36%) were theoretical studies without using tools.
The studies used different scientific approaches, the most common of which was the survey-descriptive approach (38%), followed by the descriptive-analytical approach (14%) and the descriptive approach using case studies (4%). Other types of approaches appeared, such as the mixed method, inductive method, and experimental approach. (36%) of the studies were theoretical studies that did not mention the use of a specific approach.
18 studies dealt with the theoretical aspects of evaluating continuing medical education programs and included 3 toolkits for evaluating continuing medical education programs. Two studies (4%) exceeded the evaluation level for improvement and development, while 25 studies (50%) were limited to diagnosing reality, and 5 studies (10%) were a systematic review of the literature published in the field in order to diagnose reality as well.
الكلمات الرئيسية [English]
)
مشاهدة على SCiNiTO