Determining ideal practices for student course evaluations using a modified Delphi approach.

IF 3.8 4区教育学 Q1 EDUCATION, SCIENTIFIC DISCIPLINES American Journal of Pharmaceutical Education Pub Date : 2024-11-14 DOI:10.1016/j.ajpe.2024.101330

Aleda M H Chen, Diana M Sobieraj, Robert D Beckett, Jill Augustine, Bupendra K Shah, Robert A Bechtol

{"title":"Determining ideal practices for student course evaluations using a modified Delphi approach.","authors":"Aleda M H Chen, Diana M Sobieraj, Robert D Beckett, Jill Augustine, Bupendra K Shah, Robert A Bechtol","doi":"10.1016/j.ajpe.2024.101330","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Objective: While approaches for utilizing student course evaluations (SCEs) have been discussed in the literature, there remain opportunities to identify ideal practices for SCEs. Thus, the objective of this project was to generate consensus on best practices in creating, administering, and using SCEs.Methods: A modified Delphi approach was utilized to generate a set of items based on the literature and prior work. Experts were identified from different roles, institution types, and geographic regions to participate in the panel. Consensus-building rounds were performed until no new ideas were introduced using an electronic survey platform. Data were analyzed descriptively each round.Results: After the second round, 47 items met consensus. Key recommendations included enhanced training of students to provide feedback, transparency with students on how feedback is utilized, using SCEs as one element of data sources, and the importance of ensuring intentional approaches based on theoretical constructs used in the field of course evaluation.Conclusions: This Delphi study established consensus on approaches programs can use to optimize SCEs, according to experts from across the academy. Though some items are very specific, there are opportunities for individualization based on program priorities.","PeriodicalId":55530,"journal":{"name":"American Journal of Pharmaceutical Education","volume":" ","pages":"101330"},"PeriodicalIF":3.8000,"publicationDate":"2024-11-14","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"American Journal of Pharmaceutical Education","FirstCategoryId":"95","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ajpe.2024.101330","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"教育学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"EDUCATION, SCIENTIFIC DISCIPLINES","Score":null,"Total":0}

引用次数: 0

Abstract

Objective: While approaches for utilizing student course evaluations (SCEs) have been discussed in the literature, there remain opportunities to identify ideal practices for SCEs. Thus, the objective of this project was to generate consensus on best practices in creating, administering, and using SCEs.

Methods: A modified Delphi approach was utilized to generate a set of items based on the literature and prior work. Experts were identified from different roles, institution types, and geographic regions to participate in the panel. Consensus-building rounds were performed until no new ideas were introduced using an electronic survey platform. Data were analyzed descriptively each round.

Results: After the second round, 47 items met consensus. Key recommendations included enhanced training of students to provide feedback, transparency with students on how feedback is utilized, using SCEs as one element of data sources, and the importance of ensuring intentional approaches based on theoretical constructs used in the field of course evaluation.

Conclusions: This Delphi study established consensus on approaches programs can use to optimize SCEs, according to experts from across the academy. Though some items are very specific, there are opportunities for individualization based on program priorities.

查看原文

微信好友朋友圈 QQ好友复制链接

本刊更多论文

采用改良德尔菲法确定学生课程评价的理想做法。

目的：虽然文献中已经讨论了利用学生课程评价（SCE）的方法，但仍有机会确定 SCE 的理想做法。因此，本项目旨在就创建、管理和使用 SCE 的最佳实践达成共识：方法：采用改良德尔菲法，在文献和先前工作的基础上生成一组项目。从不同的角色、机构类型和地理区域中确定了参与小组讨论的专家。使用电子调查平台进行了多轮建立共识的工作，直到没有新的想法出现。每轮都对数据进行了描述性分析：第二轮之后，有 47 个项目达成了共识。主要建议包括：加强对学生提供反馈的培训、在如何利用反馈方面对学生保持透明、将 SCE 作为数据来源的一个要素，以及确保基于课程评价领域使用的理论建构的有意方法的重要性：这项德尔菲研究根据学术界专家的意见，就课程可以用来优化 SCE 的方法达成了共识。尽管有些项目非常具体，但仍有机会根据课程的优先事项进行个性化设计。

本文章由计算机程序翻译，如有差异，请以英文原文为准。

求助全文

约1分钟内获得全文去求助

来源期刊

American Journal of Pharmaceutical Education 医学-学科教育

CiteScore

4.30

自引率

15.20%

发文量

114

期刊介绍： The Journal accepts unsolicited manuscripts that have not been published and are not under consideration for publication elsewhere. The Journal only considers material related to pharmaceutical education for publication. Authors must prepare manuscripts to conform to the Journal style (Author Instructions). All manuscripts are subject to peer review and approval by the editor prior to acceptance for publication. Reviewers are assigned by the editor with the advice of the editorial board as needed. Manuscripts are submitted and processed online (Submit a Manuscript) using Editorial Manager, an online manuscript tracking system that facilitates communication between the editorial office, editor, associate editors, reviewers, and authors. After a manuscript is accepted, it is scheduled for publication in an upcoming issue of the Journal. All manuscripts are formatted and copyedited, and returned to the author for review and approval of the changes. Approximately 2 weeks prior to publication, the author receives an electronic proof of the article for final review and approval. Authors are not assessed page charges for publication.