Curricular innovation in an undergraduate medical program: What is “appropriate” assessment? |
| |
Authors: | Valerie Ruhe and J Donald Boudreau |
| |
Institution: | (1) Centre for Medical Education, McGill University, Lady Meredith House, Rm. 204, 1110 Pine Avenue West, Montreal, QC, H3A 1A3, Canada;(2) Department of Medicine, McGill University, Montreal, QC, H3A 1A3, Canada |
| |
Abstract: | In post-secondary education, there is a widely-held belief in a “gold standard” for evaluative studies of curricular innovations.
In this context, “appropriate” assessment is understood to refer to experimental designs and statistically significant differences
in group outcomes. Yet in our evaluative study of a medical undergraduate program, we did not find these concepts to be particularly
applicable. Based on our experience, we now feel that it is appropriate to assemble an eclectic mix of scientific findings,
show how they have been used for program improvement, and articulate the program’s theoretical rationale and social significance.
In the absence of statistically significant differences, this comprehensive argument can be used to justify the deployment
of curricular innovations. The same may be true of other educational programs that target hard-to-measure changes in affective
domains. |
| |
Keywords: | |
本文献已被 SpringerLink 等数据库收录! |
|