Evaluating Clinical Research Education: Formative or Punitive

1
Evaluating Clinical Research Education Formative
or Punitive?
Doris M. Rubio, Ph.D. University of
Pittsburgh Laurie Shroyer, Ph.D. University of
Colorado Patricia Mullan, Ph.D. University of
Michigan Margaret Ames, Ph.D. NICHD, NIH
2
Contributions and Thanks

• Evaluation Committee
• David Felson, Erin Haynes, Franklin Adkinson
  Fred Wolf Jill Ringold Mark Schwartz Laurie
  Shroyer Lori Bakken Michael Lichtenstein
  Patricia Mullan Steve Shedlofsky Yvonne
  Belanger Linda Lee Doug Brock
• Special thanks to Angela Kite

3
Panel Members

• Doris Rubio, University of Pittsburgh, Co-Chair,
  ACRT Evaluation Subcommittee, Past Chair Roadmap
  K12 Evaluation Liaisons, Core leader of the
  Evaluation Core for University of Pittsburghs
  CTSA
• Laurie Shroyer, University of Colorado, Health
  Science Center, Co- Chair ACRT Evaluation
  Subcommittee PI National Cardiovascular Care
  Improvement Program at VA
• Patricia Mullan,
• Margaret Ames, NICHD, NIH, Co-Chair CTSA
  Evaluation Chair, Roadmap K12 Evaluation

4
Session Agenda Objectives

• Starting with story about evaluating
• Case example of engaging in formative evaluation
  by developing trust
• Issues with evaluation and empowerment evaluation
  approach
• NIH perspective

5
Objectives

• Discuss models for formative evaluation
• Identify ways of developing trust
• Understand some threats to formative evaluation
• Formative evaluation iterative, but only if you
  have trust

6
Story about evaluating

• To consent or not to consent
• Power differentials between mentors and mentees
• Establishing trust and respect for your
  participants
• Issues of confidentiality