Translating outcome frameworks to assessment programmes: Implications for validity
Related Experiment Video
Updated: Dec 16, 2025

Using Learning Outcome Measures to assess Doctoral Nursing Education
Published on: June 21, 2010
Walter Tavares1, Paula Rowland1, Damon Dagnone2
1The Wilson Centre and Post-MD Education, University Health Network, University of Toronto, Toronto, ON, Canada.
Objectives:
Competency-based medical education (CBME) requires that educators structure assessment of clinical competence using outcome frameworks. Although these frameworks may serve some outcomes well (e.g. represent eventual practice), translating these into workplace-based assessment plans may undermine validity and, therefore, trustworthiness of assessment decisions due to a number of competing factors that may not always be visible or their impact knowable. Explored here is the translation process from outcome framework to formative and summative assessment plans in postgraduate medical education (PGME) in three Canadian universities.
Methods:
We conducted a qualitative study involving in-depth semi-structured interviews with leaders of PGME programmes involved in assessment and/or CBME implementation, with a focus on their assessment-based translational activities and evaluation strategies. Interviews were informed by Callon's theory of translation. Our analytical strategy involved directed content analysis, allowing us to be guided by Kane's validity framework, whilst still participating in open coding and analytical memo taking. We then engaged in axial coding to systematically explore themes across the dataset, various situations and our conceptual framework.
Results:
Twenty-four interviews were conducted involving 15 specialties across three universities. Our results suggest: (i) using outcomes frameworks for assessment is necessary for good assessment but are also viewed as incomplete constructs; (ii) there are a number of social and practical negotiations with competing factors that displace validity as a core influencer in assessment planning, including implementation, accreditation and technology; and (iii) validity exists as threatened, uncertain and assumed due to a number of unchecked assumptions and reliance on surrogates.
Conclusions:
Translational processes in CBME involve negotiating with numerous influencing actors and institutions that, from an assessment perspective, provide challenges for assessment scientists, institutions and educators to contend with. These processes are challenging validity as a core element of assessment designs. Educators must reconcile these influences when preparing for or structuring validity arguments.
More Related Videos
10:39Qualitative and Quantitative Validation of Tools with Rating Scales Aimed at Assessing the Quality of University Service-Learning
Published on: August 29, 2025
06:16Involving Individuals with Developmental Language Disorder and Their Parents/Carers in Research Priority Setting
Published on: June 6, 2020
Related Concept Videos
Data Validation
Nursing assessment guides are generally based on holistic models rather than medical...
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...
Reliability and Validity
Types of Biopharmaceutical Studies: Controlled and Non-Controlled Approaches
Non-controlled studies, commonly employed for initial exploration, lack a control group, rendering them susceptible to biases and external influences. In contrast,...
Nursing Evaluation
Formulating and Validating Nursing Diagnosis II
Risk nursing diagnoses represent clinical judgments of an individual, family, or community more vulnerable to developing the health problem than others...