For Faculty
Recommended Publications and Presentations
Andersen, R. M., P. L. Davidson, et al. (2000). "Program directors' recommendations for transforming health services management education." Journal of Health Administration Education 18(2): 153-73.
A survey of graduate program directors shows that they recognize major change taking place in the health services industry and the need for programs to respond with curriculum revision. The revisions proposed tend to emphasize more practice involvement and human resources management skills rather than increased quantitative and financial competencies. Is this the right direction for programs to take? Will such revisions produce graduates better able to manage and lead in the emerging health care environment? We need more evidence-based research to answer these questions. In the meantime we have developed an environmental typology suggesting some rather clear distinctions among programs according to their settings. We know that the resulting categories of programs vary according to their national reputations and the kind of students that they serve. Do these different categories of programs prepare their different students well for the changing health care environment? Our current evidence, again, is sparse, indicating the need for further research.
Angel, B. F., M. Duffey, et al. (2000). "An evidence-based project for evaluating strategies to improve knowledge acquisition and critical-thinking performance in nursing students." Journal of Nursing Education 39(5): 219-28.
This longitudinal, quasi-experimental study with 142 junior nursing students focused on measurement of learning outcomes in two areas: acquisition of knowledge and development of critical thinking skills. The variation in clinical teaching strategy (structured versus unstructured health pattern assessment) was the independent variable. Results indicated significant gains in both knowledge and critical thinking performance from the beginning to the end of the semester. The significant gains in critical thinking performance provides support to the assertion that domain-specific measures of critical thinking are needed in nursing education. Additionally, our results suggested that it was the interaction between learning strategy and the characteristics of the learner that was more significant in determining knowledge improvement than the particular strategy. As a result of this study, it is recommended that faculty develop and use an evidence-based model to support their decision making regarding teaching methodologies. This seems especially relevant for large, introductory clinical courses that use team teaching to achieve educational goals related to improvement in critical thinking or knowledge.
Anonymous (1999). "Guidelines for evaluating papers on educational interventions.[erratum appears in BMJ 1999 Jul 10;319(7202):90]." Bmj 318(7193): 1265-7.
Anonymous (2001). "Best evidence medical education and the perversity of humans as subjects.[comment]." Advances in Health Sciences Education 6(1): 1-3.
Appling, S., P. Naumann, et al. (2001). Using a Faculty Evaluation Triad to ACHIEVE Evidence-Based Teaching. Education Summit 2001, National League for Nursing.
An affective and comprehensive faculty evaluation system provides both formative and summative data for ongoing faculty development. It also provides data for annual faculty evaluation and tenure and promotion decision making. To achieve an effective system, a triad of faculty evaluation data sources - student ratings, teaching portfolio, and peer evaluation - were developed. Concurrently, a system of faculty mentorship was implemented, as well as an administrative structure to effectively use data to assist in merit pay and promotion decisions. Using a comprehensive, evidence-based system to document, analyze, and improve teaching effectiveness is essential to assuring excellence in teaching and learning.
Beck, D. E. (2001). "Pharmacy educators: How can We be better tomorrow than we are today?" American Journal of Pharmaceutical Education 65: 423-4.
Beck, D. E. (2002). "Pharmacy educators: Can an evidence-based approach make your instruction better tomorrow than today?" American Journal of Pharmaceutical Education 66: 87-8.
Belfield, C., T. Hywel, et al. (2001). "Measuring effectiveness for best evidence medical education: a discussion." Medical Teacher 23(2): 164-70.
This paper considers how educational interventions should be evaluated for their effectiveness. Five levels of effectiveness are clarified and illustrated: outcomes, behavior, learning, reaction, and participation. These levels are then discussed, within the context of research evidence for education within the medical profession. Methodological and practical research conclusions are then drawn. From an analysis of over 200 abstracts the evidence shows that only limited research on healthcare outcomes has been undertaken, and there is considerable ambiguity over what constitutes an effectiveness measure. The benefits of a consistent set of terms are then considered. Finally, five key messages are distilled from the discussion and summarized.
BEME, G. (2000). "Best evidence medical education (BEME): Report of meeting-3-5 December 1999, London, UK." Medical Teacher 22(3): 242-5.
Bligh, J. and M. B. Anderson (2000). "Medical teachers and evidence.[see comment]." Medical Education 34(3): 162-3.
Brighton, M. (2000). "Making our measurements count [Personal view]." Medical Teacher 22(2): 154-9.
Campbell, J. K. and C. Johnson (1999). "Trend spotting: fashions in medical education." Bmj 318(7193): 1272-5.
Chen, F. M. (2003). Medical Education Outcomes Research. 2004.
Chen, F. M., H. Bauchner, et al. (2004). "A call for outcomes research in medical education." Academic Medicine 79(10): 955-60.
The primary goal of medical education is to produce physicians who deliver high-quality health care. Recent calls for greater accountability in medical education and the development of outcomes research methodologies should encourage a new research effort to examine the effects of medical training upon clinical outcomes. The authors offer a research agenda that links medical education and quality of health care and give specific examples of potential research projects that would begin to examine that relationship. A proposed model of patient outcomes research in medical education recognizes the contributory effects of health care system-level factors as well as the continuum of medical education, process measures, and individual training and preparedness to deliver high-quality care. There exists an opportunity to create a research agenda in medical education outcomes research that is multidisciplinary, broad based, and focused on patient-centered outcomes.
Dauphinee, W. D. and S. Wood-Dauphinee (2004). "The need for evidence in medical education: the development of best evidence medical education as an opportunity to inform, guide, and sustain medical education research." Academic Medicine 79(10): 925-30.
The development of the Best Evidence Medical Education (BEME) Collaboration is introduced in the context of other systematic review initiatives, specifically the Cochrane and Campbell collaborations. The commentary addresses two goals: to describe the current status of BEME and to situate BEME in the broader context of the medical education community's need to be accountable, to conduct research to understand educational processes and results, and the key role that medical educational research must play within the quality-improvement agenda. Lessons drawn from the evidence-based practice movement of the last ten years and the current experience with BEME suggest that, although BEME will inform some educational policies and practices, its initial success may be limited because of the paucity of studies that meet current standards for evidence and the great difficulty in conducting methodologically rigorous studies in the complex social interaction called education. Nonetheless, the need exists for medical education research to continue to address key issues in medical education using experimental designs, while at the same time anticipating the need for more situation-specific data to permit educators to monitor and benchmark their existing programs within a quality-improvement and accountability framework. The authors conclude that the very nature of being professional in today's social and fiscal context demands that medical educators provide evidence of effectiveness and efficiency of their programs while at the same time BEME and medical education research continue to grow and mature.
Davidson, P. L., R. M. Andersen, et al. (2000). "A framework for evaluating the impact of health services management education." Journal of Health Administration Education 18(1): 63-110.
The objectives of this paper are three-fold. The first is to propose a conceptual and analytical framework for planning and evaluating health services management education programs. The framework was developed in response to the health care industry restructuring and the emerging questions and concerns regarding how to strategically redesign the educational programs for the twenty-first century. Additionally, it was used to develop a questionnaire for the 1998 National Survey of Program Directors. The second objective is to suggest variables for operationalizing the framework as the field considers initiatives such as, "Evidence-Based Health Administration
Education" (AUPHA Education Outcomes Task Force 1999; Griffith 2000) and other more standardized, quantifiable approaches to assessing program quality. The third objective is to report selected results from the 1998 National Survey of Program Directors focusing on the major changes impacting the health services industry and the implications for management education and development. In the future, ACEHSA and other accrediting commissions will likely consider evidence-based evaluation criteria for assessing and improving education program quality. The framework presented in this paper can be used as a starting point for conceptualizing and developing valid and reliable measures.
Davies, P. (2000). "Approaches to evidence-based teaching." Medical Teacher 22(1): 14-21.
Davies, P. (2000). "The Relevance of Systematic Reviews to Educational Policy and Practice." Oxford Review of Education 36(3/4): 365-78.
This paper argues that educational policy and practice has much to gain from systematic reviews and other methods of research synthesis. Different types of reviews are considered, including narrative reviews, vote-counting reviews, meta-analyses, best evidence synthesis, and meta-ethnography. It is argued that systematic reviews allow researchers, and users of research, to go beyond the limitations of single studies and to discover the consistencies and variability in seemingly similar studies. This, in turn, allows for some degree of cumulative knowledge of educational research that is often missing in the absence of systematic reviews. Some limitations of systematic reviews and research synthesis for educational policy and practice are also discussed. The work of the Campbell Collaboration as an international organisation that promotes the use of systematic reviews in educational policy and practice is outlined.
Eitel, F., K. K, et al. (2000). "Training and certification of teachers and trainers: The professionalization of medical education." Medical Teacher 22(5): 517-26.
Economic constraints, profound changes in the healthcare system and insufficient educational expertise have gripped medical education. The objective of this study was to review professionalization of medical education and to contribute to an elaboration of a conceptual framework for understanding reforms. We developed a concept map based on information retrieved by searching the Medline/Knowledge Finder and the Cochrane Library databases. The descriptors used for the searches were' certification, credentialing, education, faculty medical, quality assurance health care, research, staff development, teaching'. The endpoints for the study were: frequency, quality of studies and propositional content with regard to professionalization for developing a concept map. Thirty-one relevant studies were found in Medline. The Cochrane Library search returned no relevant studies. The evidence of the few studies was weak. The literature-derived concept map shows that faculty development is a prerequisite for certification leading to professionalization. Other related variables were resource allocation, intrinsic motivation to learn, educational research, study time, financial policy, organizational and staff development, and new specialized roles such as clinician-educator. It is concluded that professionalization of medical education is needed. This deficit underscores the need for conceptually sound research approaches. The concept of intrinsic motivation explains how to comply with scientifically based standards, thus fostering professionality. Approaches facilitating compliance, such as evidence-based learning, potentially professionalize the practice of medical education. Novel approaches such as quality management and best evidence medical education could professionalize medical education.
Eitel, F. and S. Steiner (1999). "Evidence-based learning." Medical Teacher 21(5): 506-12.
In spite of the empirically evident merits of innovative teaching/learning formats such as PBL, resistance is observed to implementing promising curricular innovations, or to changing the traditional medical curricula. Moreover, reforms have failed because of resistance to change. To solve these problems it is accepted worldwide that faculty have to find and apply innovative approaches and to manage change in medical education. The aim of this study is to conceptualize change in pedagogy. The hypotheses developed in this article are visualized by concept mapping. A path analysis (correlation study) is demonstrated investigating the relationship between instructional design and motivation to learn. The article is designed as a case study. Well-defined teaching/learning goals, learning by doing, feedback and social integration of the students are features of instructional design. They correlate positively (0.14-0.32) with students' experience of self-efficacy, which leads to intrinsic motivation to learn (0.48). Implementing an intrinsically motivating teaching/learning format is proposed as a means to managing change in instructional design and, consequently, educational outcome. Evidence-based learning (EBL) was conceptualized in order to develop a format that provides these design conditions. EBL is characterized by seven instructional steps synthesizing:
- problem-based learning (PBL) with
- critical appraisal of concepts to be learned, and with
- quality management of learning projects.
The definition of EBL given here provides the basis for further investigation directed towards continuous improvement in medical education.
Evans, J. and P. Benefield (2001). "Systematic Reviews of Educational Research: does the medical model fit?" British Educational Research Journal 27(5): 527-41.
There has been a recent increase in interest in the research review as a method of presenting cumulative data about the effects of educational policies and practices. This is part of a wider movement in 'evidence-informed policy-making' espoused by the current Government. In part, the interest as been sparked by the perceived success of the Cochrane Collaboration in medicine, which has set up a framework for conducting and verifying systematic reviews and meta-analyses of random controlled trials of medical interventions. A pilot project to apply the methods of systematic review has been carried out at the National Foundation for Educational Research. The subject of the review was 'Strategies to Support Pupils with Emotional and Behavioural Difficulties in Mainstream Primary Classrooms'. The article describes the process of the review, the adaptations of the 'medical model' to educational settings and discusses some of the implications of these for researchers and policy-makers.
Goldstein, H. A response to Hargreaves on 'evidence-based Educational research. 2004.
Greenhalgh, T., P. Toon, et al. (2003). "Transferability of principles of evidence based medicine to improve educational quality: systematic review and case study of an online course in primary health care.[see comment]." Bmj 326(7381): 142-5.
Griffith, J. R. (2000). "Towards evidence-based health administration education: the tasks ahead." Journal of Health Administration Education 18(2): 251-62.
The vision of a more objective, patient-oriented and quantitative evaluation of medicine motivates much current activity in health care, and has come to be called "evidence-based" medicine (Atkins, Kamerow and Eisenberg 1998). A similar vision underlies this special issue. It derives from the 1998 AUPHA annual meeting theme of teaching management technology and the work of an AUPHA task force. The task force is seeking support for a collaborative program to develop measures of educational outcomes and use them in the systematic improvement of member programs (Stephen F. Loebs, PhD, Chair. Members include Ray Davis, PhD; Jeptha W. Dalston, PhD; Gary Filerman, PhD; Barry Greene, PhD; the author; and Douglas Wakefield, PhD.) The task force calls this effort "evidence-based health administration education." It intends a systematic, outcomes-oriented, evaluation and improvement of the educational process, as the evidence-based medicine movement does of medical care. Evolution of member programs using measured performance and continuous improvement is implied, rather than dramatic change (Griffith 1998). Just as evidence-based medicine relies on a disease-oriented taxonomy, evidence-based education must rely on an agreed-upon set of specific skills, knowledge, and abilities (SKAs) that can be learned by students and tested in graduates. This paper discusses what lessons can be learned from the papers reported in the issue, identifies the components necessary to implement the vision, and suggests how AUPHA can proceed in the near future to implement evidence-based education.
Haig, A. and M. Dozier (2003). "BEME guide no. 3: systematic searching for evidence in medical education--part 2: constructing searches." Medical Teacher 25(5): 463-84.
Searching for evidence to inform best practice in medical education is a complex undertaking. With very few information sources dedicated to medical education itself, one is forced to consult a wide range of often enormous sources-and these are dedicated to either medicine or education, making a medical education search all the more challenging. This guide provides a comprehensive overview of relevant information sources and methods (including bibliographic databases, grey literature, hand searching and the Internet) and describes when they should be consulted. The process of constructing a search is explained:identifying and combining core concepts, using Boolean algebra and search syntax, limiting results sets, and making best use of databases' controlled vocabularies. This process is illustrated with images from search screens and is followed by numerous examples designed to reinforce skills and concepts covered. The guide has been developed from the ongoing experience gained from the systematic searches conducted for the Best Evidence Medical Education Collaboration, and concludes by looking ahead to initiatives that will shape future searching for medical education evidence.
Haig, A. and M. Dozier (2003). "BEME Guide no 3: systematic searching for evidence in medical education--Part 1: Sources of information." Medical Teacher 25(4): 352-63.
Searching for evidence to inform best practice in medical education is a complex undertaking. With very few information sources dedicated to medical education itself, one is forced to consult a wide range of often enormous sources--and these are dedicated to either medicine or education, making a medical education search all the more challenging. This guide provides a comprehensive overview of relevant information sources and methods (including bibliographic databases, grey literature, hand searching and the Internet) and describes when they should be consulted. The process of constructing a search is explained: identifying and combining core concepts, using Boolean algebra and search syntax, limiting results sets, and making best use of databases' controlled vocabularies. This process is illustrated with images from search screens and is followed by numerous examples designed to reinforce skills and concepts covered. The guide has been developed from the ongoing experience gained from the systematic searches conducted for the Best Evidence Medical Education Collaboration, and concludes by looking ahead to initiatives that will shape future searching for medical education evidence.
Hammer, D. P., K. A. Sauer, et al. (2004). "White paper on best evidence pharmacy education (BEPE)." American Journal of Pharmaceutical Education 68(1): 1-12.
In 2001-02, the task force on Best Evidence Pharmacy Education (BEPE) was established within the American Association of Colleges of Pharmacy Council of Faculties (AACP COF). The charge of this task force was 2-fold: (1) scan the external environment and introduce how evidence-based methodologies are being used by other educators to make curriculum and instructional decisions, and (2) recommend whether AACP and/or COF would benefit from involvement in the Best Evidence Medical Education group. After an initial report of the 2002 AACP Annual Meeting, the task force continued its work into 2002-03 academic year and drafted a white paper on BEPE. This paper included background on evidence-based education, pros and cons of BEPE for academic pharmacy, and recommendations to the academy for further progress in this area. Information from the White Paper described above, as well as future directions for the task force, are presented. BEPE is a rational approach for examination of curricular and programatic decisions as well as a means to enhance collaborations of academic pharmacy with the educational goals of other health care professions.
Hammersley, M. (1997). "Educational Research and Teaching: A Response to David Hargreaves' TTA Lecture." British Educational Research Journal 23(2): 141-61.
Addresses some of the recent criticism aimed at educational research, its failure to provide a sound base for teaching or to generate a cumulative body of knowledge. Answers that there is always a dichotomy between research and application and argues that restrictions would only worsen the situation.
Hammersley, M. (2001). Some questions about evidence-based practice in education. Evidence-based practice in education.
Hammersley, M. (2001). "On 'Systematic' Reviews of Research Literatures: A 'Narrative' Response to Evans and Benefield." British Educational Research Journal 27(5): 543-54.
States that production of systematic research findings has recently come to be treated as a priority in education. Examines assumptions about research and about reviewing that are built into the concept of systematic review. Gives attention to likely consequences of the priority given to this type of review.
Harden, R., G. J, et al. (1999). "BEME Guide No.1: Best Evidence Medical Education." Medical Teacher 21(6): 553-62.
There is a need to move from opinion-based education to evidence-based education. Best evidence medical education (BEME) is the implementation, by teachers in their practice, of methods and approached to education based on the best evidence available. It involves a professional judgment by the teacher about his/her teaching taking into account a number of factors-the QUESTS dimensions. The Quality of the research available-how reliable is the evidence? the Utility of the evidence-can the methods be transferred and adopted without modification, the Extent of the evidence, the Strength of the evidence, the Target or outcomes measured-how valid is the evidence? and the Setting or context-how relevant is the evidence? The evidence available can be graded on each of six dimensions. In the ideal situation the evidence is high on all six, but this is rarely found. Usually the evidence may be good in some aspects, but poor in others. The teacher has to balance the different dimensions and come to a decision on a course of action based on his or her professional judgment. The QUESTS dimensions highlight a number of tensions with regard to the evidence in medical education: quality vs. validity; and utility vs. the setting or context. The different dimensions reflect the nature of research and innovation. Best Evidence Medical Education encourages a culture or ethos in which decision making takes place in the context.
Harden, R., G. J, et al. (2000). "Best Evidence Medical Education." Advances in Health Sciences Education 5: 71-90.
There is a need to move from opinion-based education to evidence-based education. Best Evidence Medical Education (BEME) is the implementation, by teachers in their practice, of methods and approaches to education based on the best evidence available. It involves a professional judgement by the teacher about their teaching taking into account a number of factors - the QUESTS dimensions. The Quality of the research evidence available - how reliable is the evidence?, the Utility of the evidence - can the methods be transferred and adopted without modification?, the Extent of the evidence, the Strength of the evidence, the Target or outcomes measured - how valid is the evidence? and the Setting or context - how relevant is the evidence? The evidence available can be graded on each of the six dimensions. In the ideal situation the evidence is high on all six dimensions, but this is rarely found. Usually the evidence may be good in some respects, but poor in others. The teacher has to balance the different dimensions and come to a decision on a course of action based on his or her professional judgement. The QUESTS dimensions highlight a number of tensions with regard to the evidence in medical education: quality v relevance; quality v validity; and utility v the setting or context. The different dimensions reflect the nature of research and innovation. Best Evidence Medical Education encourages a culture or ethos in which decision making takes place in this context.
Harden, R. M. and P. M. Lilley (2000). "Best evidence medical education: The simple truth [Editorial]." Medical Teacher 22(2): 117-9.
Hargreaves, D. (1997). "In defence of research for evidence-based teaching: a rejoiner to Martyn Hammersley." British Educational Research Journal 23(4): 405-19.
Hargreaves, D. (1999). "Revitalizing Educational Research: lessons from the past and proposals for the future." Cambridge Journal of Education 29(2): 239-49.
The new government's policy on educational research is emerging in the light of recent reviews. This provides an opportunity to reflect on some of the lessons to be derived from the last half-century's experience of the relations between social science research and public policy and professional practice. Implications for the future of educational research are considered in the light of this experience and the new government's approach.
Hart, I. (1999). "Best Evidence Medical Education (BEME) [Editorial]." Medical Teacher 21(5): 453-4.
Hart, I. R. and H. RM (2000). "Best evidence medical education (BEME): A plan for action." Medical Teacher 22(2): 131-5.
Hilberman, D. W., P. L. Davidson, et al. (2000). "Perceived effectiveness of teaching methods for heath services administration education." Journal of Health Administration Education 18(1): 119-33.
This article brings to the forefront the challenges of establishing an empirical link between teaching methods and education outcomes in the classroom. In the health administration education field, precious little empirical data exist on the effectiveness of various teaching methods and approaches on achieving education outcomes. Results are reported from the 1998 National Survey of program directors of the AUPHA graduate programs on the perceived effectiveness of a wide range of teaching methods, using a Likert scale, ranging from very effective to not very effective. The authors elaborate on the highest- and lowest-ranked teaching methods, and propose a research agenda for measuring education outcomes in the classroom.
Hinman, M. Evidence-Based Teaching. 2004.
Jason, H. (2000). "The Importance-and Limits- of Best Evidence Medical Education [Editorial]." Education for Health 13(1): 9-13.
Mennin, S. P. (1999). "Standards for teaching in medical schools: double or nothing [Editorial]." Medical Teacher 21(6): 543-5.
Mennin, S. P. and M. C. McGrew (2000). "Scholarship in teaching and best evidence medical education: Synergy for teaching and learning." Medical Teacher 22(5): 468-71.
Medical education has lagged behind research and clinical care in developing a value system and social construct that promotes and stimulates the open discussion of the state of the art in teaching among teachers. The recent development of best evidence medical education (BEME) in Europe and the renewed attention to the concept of scholarship in North America provide a conceptual and strategic approach for enhancing the educational enterprise in the health professions. The similarities and differences between BEME and an approach to Scholarship in Teaching developed by a subcommittee of the Group on Educational Affairs of the Association of American Medical Colleges is examined. Combining these two approaches to medical teaching can maximize the potential for advancing the science and art of medical education.
Morrison, J. M., F. Sullivan, et al. (1999). "Evidence-based education: development of an instrument to critically appraise reports of educational interventions." Medical Education 33(12): 890-3.
Educational interventions may ultimately impact on patient care as well as affecting individuals' learning. Critical evaluation of educational literature by those involved in designing and developing educational interventions is therefore important. A checklist instrument for critically appraising reports of educational interventions is described. The instrument was developed by an iterative process and piloted. The instrument consists of nine questions: 1. Is there a clear question which the study seeks to answer? 2. Is there a clear learning need which the intervention seeks to address? 3. Is there a clear description of the educational context for the intervention? 4. Is the precise nature of the intervention clear? 5. Is the study design able to answer the question posed by the study? 6. Are the methods within the design capable of appropriately measuring the phenomena which the intervention ought to produce? 7. Are the outcomes chosen to evaluate the intervention appropriate? 8. Are there any other explanations of the results explored in the study? 9. Are any unanticipated outcomes explained? A worked example is given to illustrate how the instrument can be used in practice. The Department of General Practice in Glasgow. Young general practitioners and the Educational Journal Club. The instrument was feasible. The use of the checklist allows the reader to critically appraise reports of educational interventions and helps in the practice of evidence-based education.
Norman, G. (2000). "Reflections on BEME [Commentary]." Medical Teacher 22(2): 141-4.
Best evidence medical education (BEME) is an attempt to examine systemically the quality of the evidence available to address educational issues, using six dimensions: quality, utility, extent, strength, target, and setting. The present paper is a critical examination of some of the assumptions of this method. Five basic points are made: (1) educational research is not necessarily inferior to clinical research; (2) methodological rigour is not unidimensional; (3) educational interventions cannot be easily standardized; (4) attempts to examine the strength and extent of evidence presuppose a single world-view; (5) however, despite these concerns, generalization is possible for many questions.
Norman, G. (2000). "Editorial-Evidence and Education." Advances in Health Sciences Education 5: 1-2.
Oakley, A. (2001). "Making evidence-based practice educational: A rejoiner to John Elliot." British Educational Research Journal 27(5): 575-6.
Petersen, S. (1999). "Time for evidence based medical education." Bmj 318(7193): 1223-4.
Piascik, P. (2002). "What if we approached our teaching like we approach our research?" American Journal of Pharmaceutical Education 66: 461-2.
Sackett, D. L., W. M. Rosenberg, et al. (1996). "Evidence based medicine: what it is and what it isn't.[see comment]." Bmj 312(7023): 71-2.
Shorten, A., M. C. Wallace, et al. (2001). "Developing information literacy: a key to evidence-based nursing." International Nursing Review 48(2): 86-92.
This report describes the evaluation of a curriculum-integrated programme designed to help students develop an awareness of the nursing literature, the skills to locate and retrieve it, and skills required in its evaluation; in other words 'information literacy'. Positive changes in student performance on objective measures of information-literacy skills were revealed as well as a significant increase in the levels of confidence of the student in performing those skills. Students who had undertaken the information-literacy programme ('programme' students) performed better on a range of objective measures of information literacy, as well as reporting higher levels of confidence in these skills, than students who had not participated in the programme ('non-programme' students). Evaluation of this programme provides evidence of the potential usefulness of a curriculum-integrated approach for the development of information-literacy skills within nursing education. With these underlying skills, students will be better equipped to consolidate and extend their key information-literacy skills to include research appreciation and application. These are vital for effective lifelong learning and a prerequisite to evidence-based practice.
Simpson, D., C. Flynn, et al. (1997). "An evidence-based education journal club." Academic Medicine 72(5).
Stevens, K. (1999). Evidence-Based Teaching: Current Research in Nursing Education, Jones and Bartlett Publishers.
Ukoha, R. (2004). "Evidence-based multicultural teaching methods.[comment]." Nurse Educator 29(3): May-Jun.
Van der Vleuten, C., D. Dolmans, et al. (2000). "The need for evidence in education." Medical Teacher 22(3): 246-50.
In this article a plea is made to use evidence in education. A remarkable difference in attitude is noted between university staff in their role as scientists in their discipline and in their role as teachers. Whereas evidence is the key to guide scientists in the development of their discipline, evidence on teaching and learning hardly affects their role as teachers. Teaching is, rather, dominated by intuition and tradition. However, particularly in education, intuitions and traditions are not always correct when they are submitted for empirical verification. It even often turns out that our intuitions are not justified or that assumed relations are far more complex. To illustrate the fallacy of our (implicit) intuitions and beliefs, a few of these assumptions are held against the available evidence. Two assumptions related to learning of students and two assumptions related to the assessment of student achievement are discussed. The illustrations make clear that we do need to use evidence in education, just as we do in any other professional area. Being a [professional teacher requires more than being an expert in a content area; it also requires familiarity, use, and perhaps production of educational evidence and theory.
Wartman, S. and P. O'Sullivan (1989). "The case for a national center for health professions education research." Academic Medicine 64: 295-9.
Overall concerns with the health care system have raised important questions concerning educating health professional. The need to study and perhaps alter the assumptions of this has been raised, but data on which to base programmatic change have not been generated, since neither the assumptions nor proposed educational innovations have been adequately tested. A national center for health professions education research is proposed to facilitate well-funded, peer-reviewed, and academically credible research in health professions education. The goals of the center would allow for the testing of models to provide physicians and other health professionals with education grounded in sound methodology and content.
Whitehurst, G. (2004). Evidence-Based Education. 2004.
Wolf, F. M. (2000). "Lessons to be learned from evidence-based medicine: Practice and promise of evidence-based medicine and evidence-based education." Medical Teacher 22(3): 251-9.
The author briefly describes ten lessons derived from the practice thus far of evidence-based medicine (EBM) from which evidence-based education/best evidence medical education (EBE/BEME) may potentially profit. Two criteria derived from the practice of evidence-based medicine are then used to access how well the author believes we have done to date. The first criterion applies the five steps in the model of practicing EBM at the level of individual practitioner to the field as a whole. The second criterion applies the eight components of a systematic review as an evaluative schema. Finally, the author describes where he believes EBM, EBE, and BEME are headed in the future. Brief examples are provided and suggestions are offered for improving the likelihood of making more informed decisions based on the highest quality evidence available. Several ways in which BEME might benefit from, and contribute to, both the Cochrane Collaboration and the proposed new Campbell Collaboration are suggested.
Wolf, F. M. (2002). Evidence-Based Medical Education and its Role in Teaching in the Basic Sciences, IAMSE.
Wolf, F. M., J. A. Shea, et al. (2001). "Toward setting a research agenda for systematic reviews of evidence of the effects of medical education." Teaching & Learning in Medicine 13(1): 54-60.
To provide an update on, and a preliminary research agenda for, best evidence medical education (BEME). Efforts related to evidence-based medical education are summarized briefly, including BEME, the newly formed Campbell Collaboration, and the Cochrane Collaboration's Effective Practice and Organization of Care review group. A list of topics and priorities for which evidence of effectiveness in medical education should be systematically reviewed is provided based on the results of a session at the July 2000 annual meeting of the Society of Directors of Research in Medical Education. The highest ranked topics clustered around four major conceptual areas: (a) curricular design, (b) learning and instructional methods, (c) testing and assessment, and (d) outcomes. BEME is gaining momentum with growing numbers of people becoming involved as well as an increased number of pertinent workshops, publications, and Web sites. The work of creating pertinent systematic reviews of the medical education literature is at hand.
