Beyond Average Information: How Q‐Methodology Enhances Course Evaluations in Anatomy

Abstract

Course evaluations can be used for curriculum improvement and have the potential to better the student learning experience. However, because most are based on Likert scales and open‐ended feedback, understanding diversity in student opinion and uncovering optimal options for course change and improvement are often difficult. Alternatively, Q‐methodology can be used to investigate patterns of thought within a group and may offer greater potential for course reform. This manuscript offers a tutorial‐based explanation of the three components of Q‐methodology studies (1) survey instrument development, (2) data collection, and (3) analysis and interpretation, then demonstrates, via case study, the use of Q‐methodology to evaluate a fourth‐year undergraduate pathoanatomy course. The goal of this article is to enable the reader to broadly apply Q‐methodology in other courses to gain insight and feedback beyond that offered by traditional Likert scale methods. As demonstrated through the pathoanatomy case study, Q‐methodology highlights groups (denoted by factors) of like‐minded students that share opinions, preferences, and values. Overall, Q‐methodology analyses support course instructors in identifying areas of course strength and improvement in an evidence‐based way. This alternative to traditional Likert scales represents a promising solution to ongoing course evaluation limitations.

Using Q‐methodology to determine students' perceptions of interprofessional anatomy education

“…Q-methodology combines qualitative and quantitative methods to understand human viewpoints, perceptions, or experiences. It is used extensively in social sciences and psychology and is becoming increasingly popular in health sciences including nursing (Akhtar-Danesh et al, 2008, 2009Killam et al, 2012) and education research (Valaitis et al, 2007;Barker, 2008;Brewer-Deluce et al, 2020;Byram et al, 2020). Q-methodology is unique because it uncovers patterns of beliefs, experiences, or viewpoints that exist within a group.…”

“…Since healthcare is grounded in collaborative practice, it is critical to objectively measure student perceptions of IPE experiences. Traditional quantitative methods may not be sufficient to understand the spectrum of student experiences, since statistical analyses of Likert‐scale data calculate averages and do not clearly depict outliers (Brewer‐Deluce et al, 2020). While averages and proportions are informative, it is equally important to understand the range of student experiences in the context of IPE, because of the lack of recognized best practices for IPE curriculums (Gilbert et al, 2010; Reeves et al, 2013; Thistlethwaite and Dallest, 2014).…”

Student perceptions of hybrid delivery of interprofessional anatomy—The best of both worlds?

“…The total score of this scale ranges from 12 to 72 with higher scores indicating greater readiness for IPE. Q-methodology identifies similarities between participants across a number of statements about a topic (Brewer-Deluce et al, 2020). In Q-methodology, a concourse is a list of statements representing the total range of opinions expressed about the study topic.…”

qpair: A command for analyzing paired Q-sorts in Q-methodology

“…Accordingly, Q-methodology is appropriate for research about attitudes, feelings, values, life experiences such as stress and quality of life, and intraindividual concerns such as self esteem and body (Dennis 1986). For example, Q-methodology has been used for research about political science (Stevenson 2019), pain (Risdon et al 2003), job satisfaction (Chinnis et al 2001), clinical decision making (McCaughan et al 2002), nurses’ attitude toward health promotion (Cross 2005), stress (O’Byrne et al 2021; Yeun et al 2016), course evaluation (Brewer-Deluce et al 2020; Mackinnon et al 2022), information systems (Wingreen and Blanton 2018), climate change (Lo 2015), and health economics (Baker, Thompson, and Mannion 2006).…”