The impact of national accreditation reform on survey reliability: a 2‐year investigation of survey coordinators’ perspectives

Greenfield, David; Hogden, Anne; Hinchcliff, Reece; Mumford, Virginia; Pawsey, Marjorie; Debono, Deborah; Westbrook, Johanna I.; Braithwaite, Jeffrey

doi:10.1111/jep.12512

Cited by 11 publications

(5 citation statements)

References 14 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Consistency in determinations of performance across individual programs is essential to the fair application of accreditation in higher education and the validity of accreditation in general (Hinchcliff et al, 2016).…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Steps that are used by the agency to promote consistency: Survey team member selection, survey team organization, standardization of reporting formats, survey team training, and agency support have been shown to be factors affecting consistency in decision-making for an accrediting agency (Greenfield et al, 2009), (Greenfield et al, 2015), (Greenfield et al, 2016). With the largely non-prescriptive and non-quantitative nature of the agency's Elements, consistency requires that survey teams and the Committee have similar expectations of what constitutes satisfactory performance in the Elements.…”

Section: Description Of the Agency's Accreditation Processmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Consistency in decision-making between survey teams and the decision-making body in a professional education program accrediting agency

Hash¹

2019

MedEdPublish

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Credibility of an education program accreditor is dependent on consistency in decision-making among program reviews. The use of peer-review accreditation survey teams is a potential source of inconsistency in the review of individual programs, especially so when the agency employs non-prescriptive accreditation standards. The accrediting agency that is the subject of this study utilized multiple steps to ensure consistency in the recommendations from peer survey teams. Analysis of the agreement between survey team recommendations and final decisions by the decision-making body revealed a coefficient of agreement of 0.927, indicated a high degree of agreement. The results suggest the accrediting agency's processes are effective in ensuring that peer review survey teams are applying the accreditation standards consistently between peer teams and the accrediting agency.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Description Of the Agency's Accreditation Processmentioning

confidence: 99%

Consistency in decision-making between survey teams and the decision-making body in a professional education program accrediting agency

Hash¹

2019

MedEdPublish

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Nevertheless, the 2016 standards appeared to discuss approximately the same number of domains as the 2010 version but each in more detail. By being “wordier” this may address a concern that minimalistic language inhibits the interpretation and uptake of accreditation standards [ 29 ]. To this end, a revisit to all the stakeholders, especially CPs, for feedback on interpretation and implementation of the 2016 standards may provide valuable information for the CCE-International for continued improvement.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Comparing the old to the new: A comparison of similarities and differences of the accreditation standards of the chiropractic council on education-international from 2010 to 2016

2018

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

BackgroundChiropractic programs are accredited and monitored by regional Councils on Chiropractic Education (CCE). The CCE-International has historically been a federation of regional CCEs charged with harmonising world standards to produce quality chiropractic educational programs. The standards for accreditation periodically undergo revision. We conducted a comparison of the CCE-International 2016 Accreditation Standards with the previous version, looking for similarities and differences, expecting to see some improvements.MethodThe CCE-International current (2016) and previous versions (2010) were located and downloaded. Word counts were conducted for words thought to reflect content and differences between standards. These were tabulated to identify similarities and differences. Interpretation was made independently followed by discussion between two researchers.ResultsThe 2016 standards were nearly 3 times larger than the previous standards. The 2016 standards were created by mapping and selection of common themes from member CCEs’ accreditation standards and not through an evidence-based approach to the development and trialling of accreditation standards before implementation. In 2010 chiropractors were expected to provide attention to the relationship between the structural and neurological aspects of the body in health and disease. In 2016 they should manage mechanical disorders of the musculoskeletal system. Many similarities between the old and the new standards were found. Additions in 2016 included a hybrid model of accreditation founded on outcomes-based assessment of education and quality improvement. Both include comprehensive competencies for a broader role in public health. Omissions included minimal faculty qualifications and the requirement that students should be able to critically appraise scientific and clinical knowledge. Another omission was the requirement for chiropractic programs to be part of a not-for-profit educational entity. There was no mention of evidence-based practice in either standards but the word ‘evidence-informed’ appeared once in the 2016 standards.ConclusionsSome positive changes have taken place, such as having bravely moved towards the musculoskeletal model, but on the negative side, the requirement to produce graduates skilled at dealing with scientific texts has been removed. A more robust development approach including better transparency is needed before implementation of CCE standards and evidence-based concepts should be integrated in the programs. The CCE-International should consider the creation of a recognition of excellence in educational programs and not merely propose minimal standards.

show abstract

“…42 Knowledge and skills of surveyors and credibility of inspections schemes Ensuring trust and credibility of assessment schemes requires collaboration between regulators, assessment agencies and health services. 58 A key factor for credibility is surveying reliability, 59 and qualitative and quantitative date suggest that reliability and validity of surveyor judgements and how they interpret and apply the standards can be a challenge. 44 49 59-63 The relationship between surveyors and the staff in the organisations being inspected fundamentally affect the way inspections work.…”

Section: Self-assessmentmentioning

confidence: 99%

Mediators of change in healthcare organisations subject to external assessment: a systematic review with narrative synthesis

Hovlid

Braut

Hannisdal³

et al. 2020

BMJ Open

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

ObjectivesExternal inspections are widely used to improve the quality of care. The effects of inspections remain unclear and little is known about how they may work. We conducted a narrative synthesis of research literature to identify mediators of change in healthcare organisations subject to external inspections.MethodsWe performed a literature search (1980–January 2020) to identify empirical studies addressing change in healthcare organisations subject to external inspection. Guided by the Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research, we performed a narrative synthesis to identify mediators of change.ResultsWe included 95 studies. Accreditation was the most frequent type of inspection (n=68), followed by statutory inspections (n=19), and external peer review (n=9). Our findings suggest that the regulatory context in which the inspections take place affect how they are acted on by those being inspected. The way inspections are conducted seem to be critical for how the inspection findings are perceived and followed up. Inspections can engage and involve staff, facilitate leader engagement, improve communication and enable the creation of new networks for reflection on clinical practice. Inspections can contribute to creating an awareness of the inspected organisation’s current practice and performance gaps, and a commitment to change. Moreover, they can contribute to facilitating the planning and implementation of change, as well as self-evaluation and the use of data to evaluate performance.ConclusionsExternal inspections can affect different mediators of organisational change. The way and to what extent they do depend on a range of factors related to the outer setting, the way inspections are conducted and how they are perceived and acted on by the inspected organisation. To improve the quality of care, the organisational change processes need to involve and impact the way care is delivered to the patients.

show abstract

The impact of national accreditation reform on survey reliability: a 2‐year investigation of survey coordinators’ perspectives

Cited by 11 publications

References 14 publications

Consistency in decision-making between survey teams and the decision-making body in a professional education program accrediting agency

Consistency in decision-making between survey teams and the decision-making body in a professional education program accrediting agency

Comparing the old to the new: A comparison of similarities and differences of the accreditation standards of the chiropractic council on education-international from 2010 to 2016

Mediators of change in healthcare organisations subject to external assessment: a systematic review with narrative synthesis

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About