평가(Evaluation)

(출처 : http://simonkneebone.com/2013/02/01/evaluation-tool/)

평가의 목적(Purpose of evaluation)

- To ensure teaching is meeting students’ learning needs

- To identify areas where teaching can be improved

- To inform the allocation of faculty resources

- To provide feedback and encouragement for teachers

- To support applications for promotion by teachers

- To identify and articulate what is valued by medical schools

- To facilitate development of the curriculum

평가 vs 연구

연구	평가
- Usually aimed at producing generalisable results that can be published in peer reviewed literature,   - Requires ethical and other safeguards	- Generally carried out for local use and   - Does not usually require ethics committee approval.
- May not become continuous if the answer to the question is found	- Continuous process

커크페트릭의 4단계(Kirkpatrick’s four levels on which to focus evaluation*)

- Level 1—Learner’s reactions

- Level 2a—Modification of attitudes and perceptions

- Level 2b—Acquisition of knowledge and skills

- Level 3—Change in behaviour

- Level 4a—Change in organisational practice

- Level 4b—Benefits to patients or clients

*Adapted by Barr et al (see “Further reading” box)

교과과정을 계획하는 것에 있어서의 평가 (Evaluation in curriculum planning)

- 교과과정을 개발하는 시작 단계에서부터 평가가 계획되어야 함.

Evaluation should be designed at the start of developing a curriculum, not added as an afterthought. 

- 교육적 니즈가 정해지면, 첫 단계는 학습 성과를 정의하는 것이다.

When an educational need has been identified, the first stage is to define the learning outcomes for the curriculum. 

- 평가의 목표는 그 학습 성과와 연관이 있어야 하며, 분명한 언어로 표현되어야 한다.

The goals of the evaluation should be clearly articulated and linked to the outcomes. 

평가를 계획할 때 해야 할 질문(Questions to ask when planning an evaluation)

- What are the goals of the evaluation?

- From whom and in what form will data be collected?

- Who will collect and analyse data?

- What type of analysis, interpretation, and decision rules will be used and by whom?

- Who will see the results of the evaluation?

이상적인 평가의 특징(Characteristics of an ideal evaluation)

- Reliability

- Validity

- Acceptability—to evaluator and to person being evaluated

- Inexpensiveness

평가의 비뚤림을 줄이기 위해서는 둘 이상의 그룹으로부터 정보를 모으라.

To reduce possible bias in evaluation, collect views from more than one group of people—for example, students, teachers, other clinicians, and patients

평가에 있어서의 학생의 참여(Participation by students)

- 능력(Competence) : 학생은 신뢰성과 타당성을 갖춘 정보원이다.

—Students can be a reliable and valid source of information. They are uniquely aware of what they can consume, and they observe teaching daily. They are also an inexpensive resource. Daily contact, however, does not mean that students are skilled in evaluation. Evaluation by students should be limited to areas in which they are competent to judge. 

- 주인의식(Ownership) : 평가에 대해서 완전히 집중(committed)하지 않는 학생에게서는 좋은 정보를 얻을 수 없다. 대개 평가의 결과는 일부의 학생에게만 영향을 주는 경우가 흔한데, 학생들에게 정보를 제공하는 것이 의미가 있는 일임을 확신시켜 줄 수 있어야 한다.

—Students who are not committed to an evaluation may provide poor information. They need to feel ownership for an evaluation by participating in its development. The importance of obtaining the information and the type of information needed must be explicit. Usually the results of an evaluation will affect only subsequent cohorts of students, so current students must be convinced of the value of providing data.

- 정보수집(Sampling) : 학생들이 자기의 시간이 존중받는다는 느낌이 들도록 해야 한다. 100명에서 얻으면 충분할 데이터를 굳이 300명으로부터 얻을 필요는 없다. 또한 익명성이 보장되어야 한다. 

—Students need to feel that their time is respected. If they are asked to fill out endless forms they will resent the waste of their time. If they become bored by tedious repetition, the reliability of the data will deteriorate. One solution is to use different sampling strategies for evaluating different elements of a curriculum. If reliable information can be obtained from 100 students, why collect data from 300?

—Anonymity is commonly advocated as a guard against bias when information is collected from students. However, those who support asking students to sign evaluation forms say that this helps to create a climate of responsible peer review. If students are identifiable from the information they provide, this must not affect their progress. Data should be collected centrally and students’ names removed so that they cannot be identified by teachers whom they have criticised.

- 피드백(Feedback) : 평가의 결과를 학생들에게 알려주고, 그로 인해 어떤 것이 달라질 것인지도 알려줘야 한다.

—Students need to know that their opinions are valued, so they should be told of the results of the evaluation and given details of the resulting action.

Key points

Evaluation should:

- Enable strategic development of a curriculum

- Be a positive process that contributes to the academic development of a medical school

The goals of an evaluation should:

- Be clearly articulated

- Be linked to the outcomes of the teaching

When carrying out an evaluation:

- More than one source and type of information should be sought

- The results should be fed back to participants and details of the resulting action given

Learners need:

- To be involved in developing an evaluation

- To feel their time is respected

- To know their opinions are valued and acted on

Evaluators must:

- Act on the results of the evaluation to correct deficiencies, improve methods, and update content

- Repeat the process

평가의 분류

평가에 있어서 교수자(선생님)의 참여

---

BMJ. 2003 Feb 15;326(7385):385-7.

ABC of learning and teaching in medicine: Evaluation.

Morrison J.

Source

National University of Ireland, Galway, Republic of Ireland.