Reflection on “Flexner, Accreditation, and Evaluation”

I want to start off by mentioning that evaluations are a little different than research in that they are client driven and often begin with a different frame of reference.  Also, often times, I have heard that evaluations are a study in common sense.

Hang on to these two thoughts as we will revisit them in a little bit.  Additionally, Flexner (1910) mentions common sense as a valid method.  Floden (1980) discusses accreditation as evaluations of a school; where schools refers to “departments, programs or colleges” (p. 35), and other educational institutes.

One of the first concepts to hit me while reading through this article is the idea of weighing internal and external evaluators’ strengths.  Floden mentions the importance of member checking, that there is incredible value at leveraging different perspectives during an educational evaluation. However, Floden brings up a critical question of who guides the evaluation process? Is it the clients? The major stakeholders? All of the participants? Floden (1980) questions the impact of certain groups and asks, “which groups will control the process” (p. 36).

In order to adopt this concept of evaluations in educational context, focused by differing parties we can adopt Flexner’s procedures and educational approaches.  Flexner (1910) has three guiding questions for educational programs, projects, and/or interventions.  The first question is centered around: 1) how should evaluation procedures be determined? Who should be in charge of directing procedures? Is it the evaluators (often experienced in such processes) that should be guiding the evaluation? Or is it the clients (often paying the bill) that should take the lead in the evaluation process? In the end, there needs to be some communication between client, stakeholders and evaluators to come to an agreement on procedures.

The next main question is centered around: 2) who should participate in the evaluation process?  While there is a need to communicate with key stakeholders and include ‘everyone’ in the process, there should be a priority placed on which parties can give the most valuable information (considering resources, as well).  In fact, Flexner (2010) as cited by Floden (1980) mentions that “insider knowledge” is required (p. 39) for successful educational evaluations.  This goes back to the idea of using internal and external evaluators for a well rounded evaluation. The final question adopted from Flexner is the idea of final recommendations and effects: 3) What are the effects of the evaluation?  This includes both the positive and negative impacts of an evaluation.

References:

Flexner, A. (1910). Medical education in the United States and Canada: a report to the Carnegie Foundation for the Advancement of Teaching (No. 4). Carnegie Foundation for the Advancement of Teaching.

Folden, R. E. (1980). Flexner, accreditation, and evaluation.  Educational Evaluation and Policy Analysis, 2(2), 36-46. Retrieved from  http://www.jstor.org/stable/1163932

Evaluations in teaching

Part of being an instructor is getting evaluated. When you first walk into the classroom students begin forming opinions about you, it gets worse as soon as you open your mouth to speak. In short, they are evaluating you…maybe they are judging your outfit or blood-shot eyes , or maybe they are assessing the right time to ask for a bathroom break. It really doesn’t matter what their focus is because in the end they are observing, gathering information and making a judge about who you are and how you teach. Unnerving, right?

Well it isn’t so bad…you actually get used to it after teaching for a couple of months. It isn’t the first days of class that frighten me it is weeks later when I am driving home or at the gym that the thought occurs to me, “what could I have done to make that class better? more engaging?” Oh no, now I’ve done it. I’ve gone and opened a can of worms that refuse to settle down quietly.