Home About us Editorial board Search Browse articles Submit article Instructions Contacts Login 
Users Online: 487
Home Print this page Email this page

 

SYSTEMATIC REVIEW
Year : 2021  |  Volume : 10  |  Issue : 1  |  Page : 199

Context, Input, Process, and Product Evaluation Model in medical education: A systematic review


1 PhD Candidate, Department of Reproductive Health and Midwifery, School of Nursing and Midwifery, Tehran University of Medical Sciences, Tehran, Iran
2 Department of Reproductive Health and Midwifery, School of Nursing and Midwifery, Member of Nursing and Midwifery Care Research Center, Tehran University of Medical Sciences, Tehran, Iran
3 Clinical Education Research Center, Shiraz University of Medical Sciences, Shiraz, Iran
4 Department of Reproductive Health and Midwifery, Faculty of Nursing and Midwifery, Tehran University of Medical Sciences, Tehran, Iran

Correspondence Address:
Dr. Mehrnaz Geranmayeh
Department of Reproductive Health and Midwifery, Faculty of Nursing and Midwifery, Tehran University of Medical Sciences, Tehran
Iran
Login to access the Email id

Source of Support: None, Conflict of Interest: None


DOI: 10.4103/jehp.jehp_1115_20

Rights and Permissions

BACKGROUND: Evaluation is one of the most important tools for determining the quality of any educational program, which can lead to reformation, revision, or termination of programs. Quality in higher education requires assessment and judgment of goals and strategies, executive policies, operational processes, products, and outcomes. The Context, Input, Process, and Product (CIPP) model is a comprehensive perspective that attempts to provide information in order to make the best decisions related to CIPP. Due to the importance of this topic, the present study examined the application of the CIPP model in the evaluation of medical education programs through a systematic review. MATERIALS AND METHODS: In this systematic review, Persian databases including ISC, SID, Mag Iran, CivilicaL, and Noormags and English databases including PubMed, Web of Science, Scopus, ProQuest Dissertations, Embase, CINAHL, ERIC, and Google Scholar were searched using relevant keywords, such as evaluation, program evaluations, outcome and process assessment, educational assessment, and educational measurements. The search was done with no time limits and 41 papers were obtained until May 22, 2020. This systematic review was performed by following the data extraction steps and assessing the quality of the studies and findings. Critical Appraisal Skills Programs and Mixed-Methods Appraisal Tool checklists were used to check the quality of the papers. RESULTS: This systematic review was conducted on 41 studies, 40 of which were research papers and one was a review paper. From the perspective of the CIPP model of evaluation, most papers showed quite a good level of evaluation of educational programs although some studies reported poor levels of evaluation. Moreover, factors such as modern teaching methods, faculty members, financial credits, educational content, facilities and equipment, managerial and supervisory process, graduates' skills, produced knowledge, and teaching and learning activities were reported as the factors that could influence the evaluation of educational programs. CONCLUSION: Due to the important role of evaluation in improvement of the quality of educational programs, policymakers in education should pay special attention to the evaluation of educational programs and removal of their barriers and problems. To promote the quality of educational programs, policymakers and officials are recommended to make use of the CIPP model of evaluation as a systemic approach that can be used to evaluate all stages of an educational program from development to implementation.


[FULL TEXT] [PDF]*
Print this article     Email this article
 Next article
 Previous article
 Table of Contents

 Similar in PUBMED
   Search Pubmed for
   Search in Google Scholar for
 Related articles
 Citation Manager
 Access Statistics
 Reader Comments
 Email Alert *
 Add to My List *
 * Requires registration (Free)
 

 Article Access Statistics
    Viewed329    
    Printed2    
    Emailed0    
    PDF Downloaded44    
    Comments [Add]    

Recommend this journal