• Users Online: 118
  • Print this page
  • Email this page


 
 
Table of Contents
SHORT COMMUNICATION
Year : 2021  |  Volume : 18  |  Issue : 4  |  Page : 439-440

Ensuring quality assurance of the faculty development programs in medical education using the Kirkpatrick model of evaluation


1 Medical Education Unit Coordinator and Member of the Institute Research Council, Department of Community Medicine, Shri Sathya Sai Medical College and Research Institute, Sri Balaji Vidyapeeth—Deemed to be University, Ammapettai, Nellikuppam, Chengalpet District, Tamil Nadu, India
2 Department of Community Medicine, Shri Sathya Sai Medical College and Research Institute, Sri Balaji Vidyapeeth—Deemed to be University, Ammapettai, Nellikuppam, Chengalpet District, Tamil Nadu, India

Date of Submission04-Jun-2021
Date of Acceptance18-Jun-2021
Date of Web Publication18-Dec-2021

Correspondence Address:
Saurabh RamBihariLal Shrivastava
MD, FAIMER, PGDHHM, DHRM, FCS, ACME, Professor, Department of Community Medicine, Shri Sathya Sai Medical College and Research Institute, Sri Balaji Vidyapeeth (SBV)—Deemed to be University, Thiruporur–Guduvancherry Main Road, Ammapettai, Nellikuppam, Chengalpet District 603108, Tamil Nadu.
India
Login to access the Email id

Source of Support: None, Conflict of Interest: None


DOI: 10.4103/MJBL.MJBL_40_21

Get Permissions

  Abstract 

Faculty development programs (FDPs) occupy an important role in the effective delivery of the medical curriculum to the medical students. Owing to the specific recommendation by the regulatory body, all the medical colleges are conducting a specific number of mandatory FDPs. However, like any other program, the mere organization of any FDP does not serve the purpose, unless the quality assurance of such programs is ensured and the outcomes of the same are evaluated as a follow-up activity. The quality assurance of the FDP can be assessed via either the internal or external quality assurance methods. In conclusion, the FDPs play a crucial role in improving the competence level of the faculty members. However, in order to ensure that we accomplish the set targets, it is extremely essential to maintain the quality of the organized FDPs and follow it up in the subsequent period.

Keywords: Faculty development programs, medical education, quality assurance


How to cite this article:
Shrivastava SR, Shrivastava PS. Ensuring quality assurance of the faculty development programs in medical education using the Kirkpatrick model of evaluation. Med J Babylon 2021;18:439-40

How to cite this URL:
Shrivastava SR, Shrivastava PS. Ensuring quality assurance of the faculty development programs in medical education using the Kirkpatrick model of evaluation. Med J Babylon [serial online] 2021 [cited 2022 Jan 18];18:439-40. Available from: https://www.medjbabylon.org/text.asp?2021/18/4/439/332744




  Introduction Top


Faculty development programs (FDPs) occupy an important role in the effective delivery of the medical curriculum to the medical students.[1] This is accomplished not only by exposing the faculty members to the various new methods of teaching–learning, assessment, and evaluation, but also by strengthening the delivery of medical curriculum using traditional modes of teaching–learning and assessment.[1] It is important to note that in the field of medical education, no formal training is required for a postgraduate student to discharge their role as a medical teacher, and thus, the Medical Council of India has made it mandatory for all the faculty members to undergo a fixed number of medical education workshops or sensitization programs.


  Quality Assurance Top


Owing to the specific recommendation by the regulatory body, all the medical colleges have established a medical education unit (MEU) and is involved in the organization of at least the mandatory number of FDPs, and if the resources permit, even an additional number of such programs has been advocated. However, like any other program, the mere organization of any FDP does not serve the purpose, unless the quality assurance of such programs is ensured and the outcomes of the same are evaluated as a follow-up activity.[2] In general, quality assurance of an FDP refers to a set of procedures that are being adhered to ensure that the FDP succeeds in accomplishing the intended learning outcomes and has to be a continuous process.


  Assessment of Quality Assurance Top


The quality assurance of the FDP can be assessed via either the internal or external quality assurance methods.[2],[3] The internal quality assurance of the FDP can be evaluated through the adoption of Kirkpatrick’s model of evaluation, wherein for level 1 of reaction, feedback can be obtained from the participants on the content, facilitators, facilities provided, resource materials, schedule, relevance to the current needs and interests, an adequate mix of theory and practical sessions, accomplishment of the specified objectives, and overall satisfaction.[4] For level 2 of learning, the participants are made to answer the questions (posttest), which demonstrates the improvement of knowledge, skills, and attitude. In fact, upon analyzing the results of levels 1 and 2, the MEU can organize a review meeting to discuss the strengths and the areas that need further improvements.

A level 3 evaluation regarding changes in behavior focuses on whether the trained faculty member is utilizing the gained knowledge or skills in their routine practice. The inference regarding this can be done through questionnaires, videotape recordings, feedback from students, results of students assessments (which shows improvement in their performance), and maintenance of the portfolio either by the faculty or by the self-assessment reports, wherein faculty members report about their competence and level of confidence after attending the FDPs. It is important to understand that obtaining feedback from students about the faculty member regarding their approach towards teaching–learning, especially after attending the FDP, can be used to gain significant insights into the change in behavior by the faculty and should always be sought.[3]

Level 4 of results can be evaluated by identifying whether the organized FDP has resulted in a positive impact on the overall functioning of the organization or the produced students in the long run. The external quality assurance of the organized FDP can be assessed with the help of audit involving external experts or by the accreditation body or by the involvement of observers from the Regional or the Nodal Centre for Faculty Development (which is a mandatory practice for the organization of Revised Basic Course Workshops or Curriculum Implementation Support Programme). The most essential aspect of sustaining the quality assurance of the FDP is that it has to be a continuous process and should be done in a transparent manner, and this can be achieved by involving external stakeholders.[3],[4],[5]

At Shri Sathya Sai Medical College and Research Institute, a constituent unit of the Sri Balaji Vidyapeeth, Deemed-to-be-University, Puducherry, Kirkpatrick model of evaluation has been regularly used to assess the quality of the organized program. As a matter of fact, the Medical Education Unit (MEU) of the institution, under the leadership of the dean organized the fourth Revised Basic Course Workshop between 3 and 5 August 2021, in the presence of an observer from the Nodal Center (Christian Medical College, Vellore). In the workshop, a total of 30 faculty members from pre, para and clinical departments got trained by the 7 resource persons from the MEU team. In order to ascertain the quality of the workshop, pre and post-test were conducted (Kirkpatrick Level 1) and even feedback were also obtained from all 30 participants for all the sessions individually (Kirkpatrick Level 2). All these reports were analyzed and subsequently submitted to the Nodal Center.


  Conclusion Top


In conclusion, the FDPs play a crucial role in improving the competence level of the faculty members. However, in order to ensure that we accomplish the set targets, it is extremely essential to maintain the quality of the organized FDPs and follow it up in the subsequent period.

Contribution details

SRS contributed toward the conception or design of the work, drafting of the work, and approval of the final version of the article, and agreed to all aspects of the work. PSS contributed toward the literature review, revision of the manuscript for important intellectual content, and approval of the final version of the article, and agreed to all aspects of the work.

Financial support and sponsorship

Nil.

Conflicts of interest

There are no conflicts of interest.



 
  References Top

1.
Merriam SB, Vanderberg R, McNeil MA, Nikiforova T, Spagnoletti CL. A robust faculty development program for medical educators: A decade of experience. South Med J 2020;113:275-80.  Back to cited text no. 1
    
2.
Joshi MA. Quality assurance in medical education. Indian J Pharmacol 2012;44:285-7.  Back to cited text no. 2
  [Full text]  
3.
Debroy A, Ingole A, Mudey A. Teachers’ perceptions on student evaluation of teaching as a tool for faculty development and quality assurance in medical education. J Educ Health Promot 2019;8:218.  Back to cited text no. 3
    
4.
Shrivastava SR, Shrivastava PS. Organizing a faculty development program on interactive teaching methods: Need, framework and role of Medical Education Unit. Al Ameen J Med Sci 2020;13:135-6.  Back to cited text no. 4
    
5.
Douglass K, Williams A. Faculty development program for emergency medicine physicians in India: A pilot program. AEM Educ Train 2019;3:33-8.  Back to cited text no. 5
    




 

Top
 
  Search
 
    Similar in PUBMED
   Search Pubmed for
   Search in Google Scholar for
 Related articles
    Access Statistics
    Email Alert *
    Add to My List *
* Registration required (free)  

 
  In this article
Abstract
Introduction
Quality Assurance
Assessment of Qu...
Conclusion
References

 Article Access Statistics
    Viewed84    
    Printed0    
    Emailed0    
    PDF Downloaded13    
    Comments [Add]    

Recommend this journal