Perceptions and Utility of Course Evaluations in US Pharmacy Schools

被引:3
作者
Chen, Aleda M. H. [1 ]
Park, Sharon K. [2 ]
Bechtol, Robert A. [1 ]
Shah, Bupendra K. [3 ]
Anderson, Heather D. [4 ]
Young, M. Andrew [5 ]
Hardinger, Karen L. [6 ]
Odem, Samantha [7 ]
Augustine, Jill [8 ]
机构
[1] Cedarville Univ, Sch Pharm, Cedarville, OH 45314 USA
[2] Notre Dame Maryland Univ, Sch Pharm, Baltimore, MD USA
[3] Touro Univ, Touro Coll Pharm, New York, NY USA
[4] Univ Colorado, Pharmaceut Sci, Skaggs Sch Pharm & Pharmaceut Sci, Anschutz Med Campus, Aurora, CO USA
[5] East Tennessee State Univ, Bill Gatton Coll Pharm, Johnson City, TN USA
[6] Univ Missouri Kansas City, Kansas City, MO USA
[7] William Carey Univ, Sch Pharm, Biloxi, MS USA
[8] Mercer Univ, Coll Pharm, Atlanta, GA USA
关键词
Course evaluation; Pharmacy education; Continuous quality improvement; Faculty evaluation; FACULTY;
D O I
10.1016/j.ajpe.2024.100646
中图分类号
G40 [教育学];
学科分类号
040101 ; 120403 ;
摘要
Objective: This study aimed to describe the purpose, implementation, and perceived utility of course evaluations in pharmacy programs. Methods: After a literature review, a 34-item survey was developed, pretested, and sent to assessment administrators at accredited pharmacy programs (N = 139) with at least 3 follow-ups. Descriptive and inferential statistics were performed in IBM SPSS Statistics software. Results: A total of 90 programs responded (64.7% response rate). Most students (94%) were offered the opportunity to complete course evaluations. Some students completed evaluations during the course (47%), while others did so within 1 week of completion of the course (49%). Whether or not class time was given for students to complete the survey was often dependent on faculty choice (52.2%). Results were typically released after final grades were posted (92%), in time to use for the next semester of teaching (77%). Faculty were chosen to be evaluated by the number of teaching hours (50%) followed by all instructors (45.6%). Programs used the results for performance reviews by chairs (91%), course coordinator reviews (84%), and committee continuous quality improvement efforts (72%). Most programs did not provide faculty guidance on using evaluations (78%) nor development/mentoring (57%); only 22% of programs offered student development in completing evaluations. Conclusion: While most programs invite feedback from all students via evaluations, most did not provide guidance to faculty on how to use this feedback for faculty or course development purposes. A more robust process to optimize the use of course evaluations should be developed.
引用
收藏
页数:6
相关论文
共 18 条
[1]  
[Anonymous], Academic pharmacy's vital statistics
[2]   Teaching Evaluation Practices in Colleges and Schools of Pharmacy [J].
Barnett, Candace W. ;
Matthews, Hewitt W. .
AMERICAN JOURNAL OF PHARMACEUTICAL EDUCATION, 2009, 73 (06)
[3]  
Barnett CW, 1998, AM J PHARM EDUC, V62, P388
[4]  
Barnett CW, 1997, AM J PHARM EDUC, V61, P345
[5]   Best Practices for Survey Research Reports Revisited: Implications of Target Population, Probability Sampling, and Response Rate [J].
Draugalis, JoLaine Reierson ;
Plaza, Cecilia M. .
AMERICAN JOURNAL OF PHARMACEUTICAL EDUCATION, 2009, 73 (08)
[6]   A Reflection of Faculty and Course Evaluations [J].
Fjortoft, Nancy .
AMERICAN JOURNAL OF PHARMACEUTICAL EDUCATION, 2015, 79 (09)
[7]   Factors That Influence Student Completion of Course and Faculty Evaluations [J].
Hatfield, Catherine L. ;
Coyle, Elizabeth A. .
AMERICAN JOURNAL OF PHARMACEUTICAL EDUCATION, 2013, 77 (02)
[8]  
Medina MS, 2019, AM J PHARM EDUC, V83, DOI 10.5688/ajpe7177
[9]   A Criterion-Referenced Approach to Student Ratings of Instruction [J].
Meyer, J. Patrick ;
Doromal, Justin B. ;
Wei, Xiaoxin ;
Zhu, Shi .
RESEARCH IN HIGHER EDUCATION, 2017, 58 (05) :545-567
[10]  
Morris E., SAMPLING SMALL POPUL