|
|
|
|
||
|
|
|
|||
| Your Location: Home > Volume 22, Issue 2 | |||||
|
CURRENT ISSUE
BACK ISSUES SUBSCRIBE ADVERTISE ABOUT JCEHP FOR AUTHORS JCEHP AWARD SEARCH (Members only) FULL-TEXT |
Volume 22 (2)
Volume 22, Issue 2, Spring 2002 
J Contin Educ Health Prof 2002; 22(2):77-83
ORIGINAL ARTICLES
Rothman AI Sibbald G A b s t r a c t INTRODUCTION: Since January 2000, standard presenter evaluation forms have been made available to grand rounds organizers in the Department of Medicine, University of Toronto. During the 2000-2001 academic year, effort was directed at the accumulation of evidence for the validity of the results generated. METHODS: Two issues were addressed: the integrity or coherence of the form itself and the number of forms or evaluations required to achieve a stable estimate of the construct "presenter effectiveness" for an individual presenter. RESULTS: Positive evidence relating to the integrity of the form is presented and the number of evaluations or ratings required to provide a stable estimate of presenter effectiveness is suggested. DISCUSSION: Most presenters' ratings were distributed in a narrow range. Ranking of individual presentations would require exceptionally high precision. Separation into groups requires less precision. This type of classification appears sufficient to enable planning decisions. Lessons for Practice
|
|
|
JCEHP.com & The Journal of Continuing Education in the Health Professions All rights reserved Disclaimer · About This Site · Web Editor · Make JCEHP Your Homepage Information on this site was last updated: 31 January 2012 |
||