Volume 64 - Summer 1996	Download

A need for program evaluation by Cecile Sanders, MEd, MT(ASCP) CLSPRC Member

1995 Essentials 20-23 require that accredited programs establish and use a system of program evaluation to continually assess the overall effectiveness of the program and to adjust the program accordingly. Results of such evaluations can serve as indicators of compliance with other Essentials, in particular those concerned with curriculum and evaluations (1995 Essential 12).

Systematic review

Essential 20 requires a "continuing system for periodically and systematically reviewing the effectiveness of the program. " A program must have documented evaluations, which may be sent to graduates, employers of graduates, students, faculty, advisory committee members and others. This documented system must be implemented so that the program receives regular feedback about the quality of students' educational experiences. Hence, a program must not only have a system for collecting data; the information must be used to make needed improvements in the program.

External examination performance

Essential 21 requires that performance on external certifying exams be "documented and considered in program evaluation. " Student pass rates on certifying exams, such as those administered by the ASCP or NCA, or pass rates on state licensure exams, can indicate curricular elements that need additional emphasis. For instance, if students consistently score low on the microbiology section of the ASCP certifying examination, this may indicate the need for a review course or for curricular changes in the microbiology area. Programs should examine both objectives and evaluations to ensure that there is the proper mix of higher taxonomic level objectives and evaluations. It is understood that low test scores are not always an indicator of needed curricular changes, for there are many factors that influence student performance. The Essentials set no numerical standards for student pass rates. Instead, the Essentials require that if pass rates are low, the program identifies reasons for the low pass rates and implements changes needed to increase the pass rates.

Placement and graduation rates

Essential 22 requires that placement rates, as well as graduation or program completion rates, be documented and analyzed in order to identify potential changes for the program.

This requirement is new in the 1995 Essentials. Analysis of this information is required under the 1992 Reauthorization of the Higher Education Act. Again, NAACLS sets no numerical standards for these indicators, but a high rate of attrition in a program may indicate a need to look at recruitment practices or admissions policies. Low placement rates may indicate that the program needs to reorganize its curriculum or develop entry-level competencies that correspond to local employers' expectations. Similarly, low placement rates may indicate a depressed labor market or significant downsizing of health care facilities in the area. NAACLS does not set a minimum for either of these indicators. Programs are required to assess this information and revise the curriculum if needed.

Adjustment of program elements

Essential 23 requires that program evaluations be documented and that the results be "reflected in the curriculum and other elements of the program. " Programs must demonstrate that they have collected data regarding program success from the various communities of interest. Should a deleterious trend develop in the evaluations, programs must do all that is possible to improve the educational experience. For example, if program evaluations sent to recent graduates indicate that, at their current positions, they must use equipment not available in the program, the program may consider purchasing new equipment for the student laboratory, or finding a clinical experience for students where the equipment is available.

These Essentials are established to encourage program improvement through ongoing self-analysis. The required evaluations assess separate elements of the program such as resources, curriculum and evaluations themselves. Results of program evaluation serve to identify the potential for problems within the program.

Ms. Sanders is the former Vice Chairman and a current member of the Clinical Laboratory Sciences Programs Review Committee.

Top of the News
			A need for program evaluation by Cecile Sanders, MEd, MT(ASCP) CLSPRC Member
			Achieving serious applicant status by Denise K. Johnson Program Coordinator
			Announcing upcoming scheduled site visits
			Comings and goings
			Site visitors needed for hospital based programs by Olive M. Kimball, EdD, MT(ASCP) Executive Director
Features
			Dear Dr. NAACLS Clinical sites vs. enrichment sites
			Executive Director's corner by Olive M. Kimball, EdD, MT(ASCP) Executive Director
			President's report by Cynthia Wells, EdD, CLS(NCA), MT(ASCP) President, Board of Directors

	Select an Issue   Vol 109 - Fall 2011 Vol 108 - Summer 2011 Vol 107 - Spring 2011 Vol 106 - Volume 106 - Fall NAACLS News Vol 105 - Summer 2010 Vol 104 - Spring 2010 NAACLS News Vol 103 - Fall 2009 NAACLS News Vol 102 - Summer 2009 Vol 101 - Spring 2009 Vol 100 - Winter 2008 Vol 99 - Summer 2008 Vol 98 - Spring 2008 Vol 97 - Winter 2007 Vol 96 - Summer 2007 Vol 95 - Spring 2007 Vol 94 - Winter 2006 Vol 93 - Spring/Summer 2006 Vol 92 - Special Edition Vol 91 - Winter 2005 Vol 90 - Fall 2005 Vol 89 - Spring/Summer 2005 Vol 87 - Fall 2004 Vol 86 - Spring/Summer 2004 Vol 85 - Fall 2003 Vol 84 - Spring/Summer 2003 Vol 83 - Winter 2003 Vol 82 - Fall 2002 Vol 81 - Spring / Summer 2002 Vol 80 - Winter 2002 Vol 79 - Fall 2001 Vol 78 - Spring / Summer 2001 Vol 77 - Winter 2001 Vol 76 - Fall 2000 Vol 75 - Spring / Summer 2000 Vol 74 - Winter 2000 Vol 73 - Fall 1999 Vol 72 - Spring / Summer 1999 Vol 71 - Winter 1999 Vol 70 - Fall 1998 Vol 69 - Spring / Summer 1998 Vol 68 - Winter 1998 Vol 67 - Fall 1997 Vol 66 - Spring 1997 Vol 65 - Winter 1996 Vol 64 - Summer 1996 Vol 63 - Spring 1996 Vol 62 - Winter 1996 Vol 61 - Summer 1995 Vol 60 - Spring 1995 Vol 59 - Fall 1994 Vol 58 - Summer 1994 Vol 57 - Spring 1994 Vol 56 - Fall 1993 Vol 55 - Summer 1993 Vol 54 - Spring 1993 Vol 53 - Fall 1992 Vol 52 - Summer 1992 Vol 51 - Spring 1992 Vol 50 - Fall 1991 Vol 49 - Summer 1991 Vol 48 - Spring 1991 Vol 47 - Fall 1990 Vol 46 - Summer 1990 Vol 45 - Spring 1990 Vol 44 - Fall 1989 Vol 43 - Summer 1989 Vol 42 - Winter 1989 Vol 41 - Fall 1988 Vol 40 - April 1988 Vol 39 - December 1987 Vol 38 - September 1987 Vol 37 - Spring 1987 Vol 36 - Winter 1987 Vol 35 - October 1986 Vol 34 - November 1985 Vol 33 - November 1984 Vol 32 - July 1984 Vol 31 - November 1983 Vol 30 - November 1982 Vol 29 - November 1981 Vol 28 - December 1980 Vol 27 - August 1980 Vol 26 - September 1979 Vol 25 - August 1979 Vol 24 - June 1979 Vol 23 - February 1979 Vol 22 - October 1978 Vol 21 - July 1978 Vol 20 - April 1978 Vol 19 - October 1977 Vol 18 - July 1977 Vol 17 - April 1977 Vol 16 - February 1977 Vol 15 - November 1976 Vol 14 - September 1976 Vol 13 - June 1976 Vol 12 - December 1975 Vol 11 - October 1975 Vol 10 - August 1975 Vol 9 - July 1975 Vol 8 - June 1975 Vol 7 - April 1975 Vol 6 - February 1975 Vol 5 - December 1974 Vol 4 - November 1974 Vol 3 - September 1974 Vol 2 - August 1974 Vol 1 - June 1974