Neville Chiavaroli, Linda Prescott-Clements, Jordan Nicholls, Pru Mitchell, Katharine Reid
{"title":"Accreditation Approaches for Professional Education Programs: Toward Best Practice.","authors":"Neville Chiavaroli, Linda Prescott-Clements, Jordan Nicholls, Pru Mitchell, Katharine Reid","doi":"10.3138/jvme-2022-0110","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Accreditation has a central role in the quality assurance of professional education programs, but research on the effectiveness of different models of accreditation is limited. The purpose of this study was to rapidly appraise the evidence for the effectiveness, impact, and feasibility of different accreditation approaches, in order to inform best practices for the accreditation of professional education programs. The study focused on accreditation for programs that produce practice-ready graduates, including for veterinary programs. The authors searched several databases for articles published from 2000 to 2020, using search terms identified during a scoping phase, and applied a \"rapid review\" methodology in line with contextual, time, and resource requirements. Relevant articles that were classed as empirical or conceptual were included in the study, while papers appraised as solely commentaries or descriptive were excluded from the evidence base. The full-text review included 32 articles. We identified a clear transition in the literature from input- and process-based models (pre- and early 2000s) to outcomes-based models (in the 2000s and early 2010s). Continuous quality improvement and targeted models (including risk-based and thematic) represent more recent approaches in accreditation practice. However, as noted by other scholars, we identified limited empirical evidence for the relative effectiveness of different accreditation approaches in professional education, although evidence for the more recent accreditation approaches is emerging. In terms of best practice in view of the current lack of definitive evidence for the adoption of any specific model of accreditation, we argue that accrediting authorities adopt a contextual approach to accreditation that includes clearly articulating the purpose and focus of their regulatory activities, and selecting and implementing accreditation methods that are consistent with their underlying principles.</p>","PeriodicalId":17575,"journal":{"name":"Journal of veterinary medical education","volume":" ","pages":"3-13"},"PeriodicalIF":1.1000,"publicationDate":"2024-02-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of veterinary medical education","FirstCategoryId":"97","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.3138/jvme-2022-0110","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"农林科学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2023/4/20 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"EDUCATION, SCIENTIFIC DISCIPLINES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
Accreditation has a central role in the quality assurance of professional education programs, but research on the effectiveness of different models of accreditation is limited. The purpose of this study was to rapidly appraise the evidence for the effectiveness, impact, and feasibility of different accreditation approaches, in order to inform best practices for the accreditation of professional education programs. The study focused on accreditation for programs that produce practice-ready graduates, including for veterinary programs. The authors searched several databases for articles published from 2000 to 2020, using search terms identified during a scoping phase, and applied a "rapid review" methodology in line with contextual, time, and resource requirements. Relevant articles that were classed as empirical or conceptual were included in the study, while papers appraised as solely commentaries or descriptive were excluded from the evidence base. The full-text review included 32 articles. We identified a clear transition in the literature from input- and process-based models (pre- and early 2000s) to outcomes-based models (in the 2000s and early 2010s). Continuous quality improvement and targeted models (including risk-based and thematic) represent more recent approaches in accreditation practice. However, as noted by other scholars, we identified limited empirical evidence for the relative effectiveness of different accreditation approaches in professional education, although evidence for the more recent accreditation approaches is emerging. In terms of best practice in view of the current lack of definitive evidence for the adoption of any specific model of accreditation, we argue that accrediting authorities adopt a contextual approach to accreditation that includes clearly articulating the purpose and focus of their regulatory activities, and selecting and implementing accreditation methods that are consistent with their underlying principles.
期刊介绍:
The Journal of Veterinary Medical Education (JVME) is the peer-reviewed scholarly journal of the Association of American Veterinary Medical Colleges (AAVMC). As an internationally distributed journal, JVME provides a forum for the exchange of ideas, research, and discoveries about veterinary medical education. This exchange benefits veterinary faculty, students, and the veterinary profession as a whole by preparing veterinarians to better perform their professional activities and to meet the needs of society.
The journal’s areas of focus include best practices and educational methods in veterinary education; recruitment, training, and mentoring of students at all levels of education, including undergraduate, graduate, veterinary technology, and continuing education; clinical instruction and assessment; institutional policy; and other challenges and issues faced by veterinary educators domestically and internationally. Veterinary faculty of all countries are encouraged to participate as contributors, reviewers, and institutional representatives.