Table 4.
Program Evaluation: Assessment of Program Quality, Educational Methods, and Facilitation, Cohorts 1–16, N = 138*
| Mean Rating (SD) | |
|---|---|
| Teaching methodology/educational objectives | |
| Usefulness of the 6-step model† | 4.15 (0.94) |
| Helpfulness of group work-in-progress sessions‡ | 4.10 (0.96) |
| Effectiveness of the program on:§ | |
| Providing encouragement | 4.18 (0.90) |
| Providing helpful suggestions from facilitators | 4.39 (0.71) |
| Providing helpful suggestions from participants | 3.96 (0.99) |
| Maintaining your interest | 3.85 (0.89) |
| Value of the program in improving:§ | |
| Knowledge base | 4.15 (0.87) |
| Skills | 4.17 (0.80) |
| Impact of program on learner | |
| Sense of accomplishment∥ | 3.11 (0.89) |
| Level of enjoyment∥ | 4.18 (0.82) |
| Level of satisfaction∥ | 4.24 (0.82) |
| Confidence that developed curriculum will be:¶ | |
| Piloted | 4.60 (0.84) |
| Implemented | 4.30 (0.92) |
| Evaluated | 4.06 (0.95) |
| Published | 2.92 (1.32) |
| Confident developing a curriculum in the future# | 3.65 (0.73) |
| Facilitation quality | |
| Giving verbal feedback§ | 4.41 (0.69) |
| Giving written feedback§ | 4.31 (0.88) |
| Availability for individual meetings§ | 4.48 (0.73) |
| Helpfulness of team feedback meetings‡ | 4.46 (0.80) |
| Overall quality of teaching§ | 4.28 (0.72) |
| Overall educational quality§ | 4.33 (0.70) |
*The number of individuals responding to each question varied slightly
†Ratings: 1 = not at all useful, 5 = very useful
‡Ratings: 1 = none, 2 = a little, 3 = some, 4 = moderate, 5 = very
§Ratings: 1 = poor, 2 = fair, 3 = good, 4 = very good, 5 = excellent
∥Ratings: 1 = absolutely none, 5 = very high
¶Ratings: 1 = not at all, 5 = very
#Ratings: 1 = strongly disagree, 2 = disagree, 3 = not sure, 4 = agree, 5 = strongly agree