Related Experiment Videos
The feasibility and acceptability of implementing formal evaluation sessions and using descriptive vocabulary to
Michael J Battistone1, Caroline Milne, Merle A Sande
1Department of Medicine, Veterans Affairs Salt Lake City, Health Care Center, University of Utah School of Medicine, Salt Lake City, Utah, USA. michael.battistone@hsc.utah.edu
Background:
A systematized approach to descriptive evaluation of clinical performance using a vocabulary of global descriptors in the setting of formal evaluation and feedback sessions has been shown to be reliable and valid. The feasibility of this method beyond the institution at which it was developed has not been studied.
Purpose:
To determine the feasibility and acceptability of implementing formal evaluation and feedback sessions, using a vocabulary of global descriptors, in a third-year core clinical clerkship.
Methods:
In 1997, the University of Utah internal medicine clerkship introduced an evaluation method in which student performance was discussed at formal sessions, using a taxonomy of global terms describing progressive development from "reporter" to "interpreter" to "manager/educator" (R-I-M-E). The sessions were face-to-face meetings between the clinical teachers and a clerkship director, at three-week intervals through the twelve-week clerkship at the inpatient teaching sites. Following the evaluation session students met individually with the clerkship director for feedback. To determine feasibility, the authors estimated the time and resources necessary to administer the system and recorded actual teacher attendance over 2 academic years (1997-99). Anonymous surveys, using a four-point, Likert-type scale, were used to determine acceptance of the method by faculty, residents, and students.
Results:
Attendance was high for residents (79%) and faculty (72%). Mean survey responses from residents and faculty rated the descriptive system "more valid" than the previous method. A majority of the students rated the method as either "helpful" (30%) or "very helpful" (50%). Time requirement for eight to ten students at each teaching site, for evaluation and feedback sessions was one-half day per week of the clerkship director, every three weeks.
Conclusion:
Our experience establishes the feasibility of implementing this system of formal evaluation and feedback, using descriptive vocabulary, beyond the institution at which it was developed. Students, residents, and faculty endorsed this evaluation system and the survey results suggest substantial utility and face validity.
Related Concept Videos
Nursing Process for Patient and Caregiver Teaching III: Evaluation and Documentation
Nurses can use several methods to evaluate patient outcomes. For example, oral questions can assess cognitive learning, patient...
Nursing Evaluation
Section...
Role of Communication in the Nursing Process III: Evaluation and Documentation
Methods of Documentation III: PIE
Guidelines for Writing Outcome
Patient outcomes reflect the patient's response to the goal rather than what the nurse aims to achieve. Terminology should be observable and measurable to avoid the reader's interpretation. The desired outcome should be realistic and achievable in the designated care timeframe. Expected outcomes should align with adjunctive therapies. The outcome should enhance care evaluation by...
Methods of Documentation IV: Focus Charting
It typically involves three columns for recording information: