A META ANALYSIS OF EVALUATION MODELS AND A FRAMEWORK FOR EVALUATION OF INDIVIDUAL OFFERINGS IN A TOTAL NURSING STAFF DEVELOPMENT PROGRAM.

Abstract

Sorry, the full text of this article is not available in Huskie Commons. Please click on the alternative location to access it.

429 p.

An extensive body of knowledge exists in the discipline of program evaluation and the field of adult education that is potentially applicable to nursing staff development (NSD). This body of knowledge is for the most part unavailable to those responsible for NSD. The purpose of this study was twofold: first, through a meta analysis of evaluation literature, to identify evaluation concepts and principles in the existing literature; second, to synthesize and apply those concepts and principles in a framework for evaluation of NSD offerings.The meta analysis included the program evaluation literature, particularly models of evaluation, and the adult education, including the NDS and continuing education in nursing (CEN). As a result of the meta analysis, seven types of evaluation--Situational, Developmental, Implementation, Process, Output, Outcome and Impact, plus an additional general category were identified. Based on previously established criteria, potentially applicable concepts and principles from each model and/or source were identified. Examples of potential application were generated and categorized according to type of evaluation. Through a process involving two cycles of synthesis, guidelines for evaluation were developed from the examples of potential application. The NSD Evaluation Framework resulted from the process. The Framework is intended to serve as a guide to selection of evaluation approaches to NSD offerings. As such, the Framework offers a number of guidelines from which the NSD practitioner may choose according to the specific programatic circumstance.A review of 111 NSD/CEN evaluation studies reported in the literature was conducted to identify any incompatibilities with the Framework. No incompatibilities were found. The Framework was also subjected to critical review by three NSD/CEN experts who applied seven criteria. Based on the critique, revisions in the Framework were made and the need for future development, research and testing discussed.