An innovative program, introduced into a tradition-based undergraduate medical school curriculum, was evaluated using an ethnographic approach for data collection and analysis. The objective of theevaluation study was to provide data in support of rational decision making with respect to the future of the innovation. This article describes the methodology andprocesses used to evaluate the innovation and assesses the strengths and weaknesses of the evaluation.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
ARGYRIS, C.
, R. POTNAM, and D. McLAIN SMITH (1985) Action Science. London: Jossey-Bass.
2.
BARZANSKY, B.
, E. BERNER, and C. BECKMAN (1985) "Evaluation of a clinical program."Evaluation & the Health Professions8 (2): 193-208.
3.
BEDNARZ, D.
(1983) "Quantity and quality in evaluation research: a divergent view." Presented at the Joint Meeting of the Evaluation Network and the Evaluation Research Society, Chicago.
4.
BYRNE, N. (1986) "Proposal for establishment and evaluation of a core selective program." (unpublished)
5.
DILL, P. D.
and C. P. FRIEDMAN (1979) "An analysis of frameworks for research on innovation and change in higher education."Rev. of Educ. Research49 (3): 411-435.
6.
EISNER, E. W.
(1985) The Art of Educational Evaluation: A Personal View. London: Falmer.
7.
ENGEL, J.
and C. M. FILLING (1981) "Research approaches in health professions education: problems and prospects."Evaluation & the Health Professions4 (March): 13-20.
8.
FELETTI, G.
and L. FISHER (1979) "Evaluation of process and product in medical education."PLET16 (November).
9.
FLEMING, W. G.
(1978) "The shared understanding of human action: a more appropriate goal for educational technology," pp. 361-366 in D. Brook and P. Race (eds.) Educational Technology in a Changing World. London: Kogan Page.
10.
FLEMING, W. G.
(1986) "The interview: a neglected issue in research on student learning."Higher Education15: 547-563.
11.
GEER, B.
(1967) "First days in the field," in P. E. Hammond (ed.) Sociologists at Work. Garden City, NY: Doubleday.
12.
GLASER, B.
and A. STRAUSS (1967) The Discovery of Grounded Theory: Strategies for Qualitative Research. Chicago: Aldine.
13.
GOETZ, J. P.
and M. D. Le COMPTE (1984) Ethnography and Qualitative Design in Education Research. New York: Academic Press.
14.
GUBA, E. G.
and Y. S. LINCOLN (1981) Effective Evaluation. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
15.
MILES, M.
and A. HUBERMAN (1984) "Drawing valid meaning from qualitative data: towards a shared craft."Education Researcher13: 20-30.
16.
ROTHMAN, A. I.
(1984) "Research approaches in health manpower development: some alternatives."Evaluation & the Health Professions7 (December): 427-442.
17.
SMITH, N. L.
[ed.] (1985) New Techniques for Evaluation. Beverly Hills, CA: Sage.
18.
STUFFLEBEAM, D. L.
(1978) "Meta-evaluation: an overview."Evaluation & the Health Professions1 (1).
19.
WITTROCK, M. C.
and D. WILEY (1970) Symposium on Problems in the Evaluation of Instruction. New York: Holt, Rinehart & Winston.
