Application of a responsive evaluation approach in medical education

Introduction This paper reports on the usefulness of a responsive evaluation model in evaluating the clinical skills assessment and training (CSAT) programme at the Faculty of Medicine, Memorial University of Newfoundland, Canada. The purpose of this paper is to introduce the responsive evaluation approach, ascertain its utility, feasibility, propriety and accuracy in a medical education context, and discuss its applicability as a model for medical education programme evaluation. Methods Robert Stake's original 12-step responsive evaluation model was modified and reduced to five steps, including: (1) stakeholder audience identification, consultation and issues exploration; (2) stakeholder concerns and issues analysis; (3) identification of evaluative standards and criteria; (4) design and implementation of evaluation methodology; and (5) data analysis and reporting. This modified responsive evaluation process was applied to the CSAT programme and a meta-evaluation was conducted to evaluate the effectiveness of the approach. Results The responsive evaluation approach was useful in identifying the concerns and issues of programme stakeholders, solidifying the standards and criteria for measuring the success of the CSAT programme, and gathering rich and descriptive evaluative information about educational processes. The evaluation was perceived to be human resource dependent in nature, yet was deemed to have been practical, efficient and effective in uncovering meaningful and useful information for stakeholder decision-making. Conclusions Responsive evaluation is derived from the naturalistic paradigm and concentrates on examining the educational process rather than predefined outcomes of the process. Responsive evaluation results are perceived as having more relevance to stakeholder concerns and issues, and therefore more likely to be acted upon. Conducting an evaluation that is responsive to the needs of these groups will ensure that evaluative information is meaningful and more likely to be used for programme enhancement and improvement.