...
首页> 外文期刊>Health education & behavior: the official publication of the Society for Public Health Education >An Assessment of Evaluation Instruction Related to the Health Education Specialist Practice Analysis Competencies in Health Education-Related Professional Preparation Programs
【24h】

An Assessment of Evaluation Instruction Related to the Health Education Specialist Practice Analysis Competencies in Health Education-Related Professional Preparation Programs

机译:与健康教育专家实践分析能力相关的评估教学评估与健康教育相关的专业准备方案有关

获取原文
获取原文并翻译 | 示例
           

摘要

Background. Conducting evaluation and research is one of the seven areas of responsibility for health education specialists. However, there is little evidence to suggest that professional preparation programs use the competencies as identified by the 2015 Health Education Specialist Practice Analysis (HESPA) as a basis for instruction. Aims. To determine the degree to which departments with undergraduate health education-related professional preparation programs provide instruction in the HESPA 2015 Model evaluation competencies. Method. This was a descriptive, cross-sectional, nonexperimental study design. Data were collected using an online survey from programs that prepare students to sit for the CHES exam. Results. Faculty provide instruction about all evaluation subcompetencies regardless of entry- or advanced-level designation. Developing an evaluation plan, monitoring implementation, and selecting, adapting, and creating instruments to collect data represent the competencies taught most frequently. On average, two to three class periods are spent on each competency. Discussion. Advanced-level competencies, more commonly associated with graduate-level training and degrees, are commonly taught at the undergraduate level. This may be due to a lack of awareness of changes to the designation of competencies and subcompetencies as entry- or advanced-level in the HESPA 2015 Model framework, a lack of awareness or appreciation for the framework in general, competing values in the selection of curriculum content, or lack of professional consensus related to terms and definitions. Conclusion. Faculty should consider emphasizing entry-level competencies and subcompetencies consistent with process and formative evaluation. The health education profession should also standardize evaluation and research terms and definitions.
机译:背景。进行评估和研究是健康教育专家的七个责任领域之一。但是,几乎没有证据表明,专业的准备计划使用2015年健康教育专业实践分析(HESPA)所识别的能力作为指导的基础。目标。确定本科与本科教育相关的专业制定方案有关的程度,为2015年2015年模型评估能力提供教学。方法。这是一个描述性的横截面,非实验性的研究设计。使用在线调查从准备学生坐在Ches考试的计划中收集数据。结果。无论入门或高级级别指定如何,教师提供有关所有评估子公司的指导。开发评估计划,监测实施和选择,适应和创建仪器以收集数据代表最常教授的能力。平均而言,每次能力都花了两到三个课程。讨论。高级能力,更常见于研究生级培训和程度,通常在本科水平上教授。这可能是由于缺乏对竞争力和小组的变化的意识,作为2015年2015年模型框架的进入或高级级别,一般缺乏对框架的意识或欣赏,竞争价值课程内容,或缺乏与术语和定义相关的专业共识。结论。教师应考虑强调进入级别的竞争力和副群,与过程和形成性评估一致。健康教育专业也应规范评估和研究条款和定义。

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
获取原文

客服邮箱:kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备:11010802029741号 ICP备案号:京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有
  • 客服微信

  • 服务号