Cinq stratégies pour bien cerner les inconvénients des modèles logiques dans l’évaluation de programmes

Logic models are perhaps the most widely used tools in program evaluation work. They provide reasonably straightforward, visual illustrations of plausible links between program activities and outcomes. Consequently, they are employed frequently in stakeholder engagement, communication, and evaluation project planning. However, their relative simplicity comes with multiple drawbacks that can compromise the integrity of evaluation studies. In this Black Ice article, we outline key considerations and provide practical strategies that can help those engaged in evaluation work to identify and mitigate some limitations of logic models Les modèles logiques sont vraisemblablement les outils d’évaluation de programme les plus utilisés. Ils illustrent visuellement de façon assez simple les liens plausibles entre les activités du programme et les résultats obtenus. Par conséquent, ils sont fréquemment utilisés pour la mobilisation des parties prenantes, la communication et la planification de tels projets. Toutefois, leur relative simplicité s’accompagne de multiples inconvénients qui peuvent compromettre l’intégrité des études d’évaluation. Dans cet article de (la rubrique) Terrain glissant, nous proposons des éléments essentiels et des stratégies pratiques à prendre en considération lorsqu’on entreprend une évaluation pour être en mesure de cibler et de remédier à certaines limites des modèles logiques

International Perspectives on the Legal Environment for Selection

Perspectives from 22 countries on aspects of the legal environment for selection are presented in this article. Issues addressed include (a) whether there are racial/ethnic/religious subgroups viewed as "disadvantaged,” (b) whether research documents mean differences between groups on individual difference measures relevant to job performance, (c) whether there are laws prohibiting discrimination against specific groups, (d) the evidence required to make and refute a claim of discrimination, (e) the consequences of violation of the laws, (f) whether particular selection methods are limited or banned, (g) whether preferential treatment of members of disadvantaged groups is permitted, and (h) whether the practice of industrial and organizational psychology has been affected by the legal environmen

Five ways to get a grip on the shortcomings of logic models in program evaluation

Logic models are perhaps the most widely used tools in program evaluation work. They provide reasonably straightforward, visual illustrations of plausible links between program activities and outcomes. Consequently, they are employed frequently in stakeholder engagement, communication, and evaluation project planning. However, their relative simplicity comes with multiple drawbacks that can compromise the integrity of evaluation studies. In this Black Ice article, we outline key considerations and provide practical strategies that can help those engaged in evaluation work to identify and mitigate some limitations of logic modelsLes modèles logiques sont vraisemblablement les outils d’évaluation de programme les plus utilisés. Ils illustrent visuellement de façon assez simple les liens plausibles entre les activités du programme et les résultats obtenus. Par conséquent, ils sont fréquemment utilisés pour la mobilisation des parties prenantes, la communication et la planification de tels projets. Toutefois, leur relative simplicité s’accompagne de multiples inconvénients qui peuvent compromettre l’intégrité des études d’évaluation. Dans cet article de (la rubrique) Terrain glissant, nous proposons des éléments essentiels et des stratégies pratiques à prendre en considération lorsqu’on entreprend une évaluation pour être en mesure de cibler et de remédier à certaines limites des modèles logiques

Evidence for curricular and instructional design approaches in undergraduate medical education: An umbrella review

<p><b>Introduction</b>: An umbrella review compiles evidence from multiple reviews into a single accessible document. This umbrella review synthesizes evidence from systematic reviews on curricular and instructional design approaches in undergraduate medical education, focusing on learning outcomes.</p> <p><b>Methods</b>: We conducted bibliographic database searches in Medline, EMBASE and ERIC from database inception to May 2013 inclusive, and digital keyword searches of leading medical education journals. We identified 18,470 abstracts; 467 underwent duplicate full-text scrutiny.</p> <p><b>Results</b>: Thirty-six articles met all eligibility criteria. Articles were abstracted independently by three authors, using a modified Kirkpatrick model for evaluating learning outcomes. Evidence for the effectiveness of diverse educational approaches is reported.</p> <p><b>Discussion</b>: This review maps out empirical knowledge on the efficacy of a broad range of educational approaches in medical education. Critical knowledge gaps, and lapses in methodological rigour, are discussed, providing valuable insight for future research. The findings call attention to the need for adopting evaluative strategies that explore how contextual variabilities and individual (teacher/learner) differences influence efficacy of educational interventions. Additionally, the results underscore that extant empirical evidence does not always provide unequivocal answers about what approaches are most effective. Educators should incorporate best available empirical knowledge with experiential and contextual knowledge.</p

Affordances of knowledge translation in medical education: a qualitative exploration of empirical knowledge use among medical educators.

PURPOSE: Little is known about knowledge translation processes within medical education. Specifically, there is scant research on how and whether faculty incorporate empirical medical education knowledge into their educational practices. The authors use the conceptual framework of affordances to examine factors within the medical education practice environment that influence faculty utilization of empirical knowledge. METHOD: In 2012, the authors, using a purposive sampling strategy, recruited medical education leaders in undergraduate medical education from a Canadian university. Recruits all had direct teaching and curricular development roles in either preclinical or clinical courses across the four years of the undergraduate curriculum. Data were collected through individual semistructured interviews on participants' use of empirical evidence, as well as the factors that influence integration of empirical knowledge into practice. Data were analyzed using thematic analysis. RESULTS: Fifteen medical educators participated. The authors identified both constraining and facilitating affordances of empirical medical education knowledge use. Constraining affordances included poor quality and availability of evidence, inadequate knowledge delivery approaches, work and role overload, faculty and student change resistance, and resource limitations. Facilitating affordances included faculty development, peer recommendations, and local involvement in medical education knowledge creation. CONCLUSIONS: Affordances of the medical education practice environment influence empirical knowledge use. Developing strategies for effective knowledge translation thus requires careful assessment of contextual factors that can enable, constrain, or inhibit evidence use. Empirical knowledge use is most likely to occur among medical educators who are afforded rich, facilitative opportunities for participation in creating, seeking, and implementing knowledge

International Perspectives on the Legal Environment for Selection

Perspectives from 22 countries on aspects of the legal environment for selection are presented. Issues addressed include a) whether there are racial/ethnic/religious subgroups viewed as “disadvantaged minority”, b) whether research documents mean differences between groups on individual difference measures relevant to job performance, whether there are laws prohibiting discrimination against specific groups , d) what is required to make and refute a claim of discrimination, e) what are the consequences of violation of the laws, f) whether particular selection methods are limited or banned, g) whether preferential treatment of members of minority groups is permitted, and h) whether the practice of Industrial and Organizational psychology has been affected by the legal environment

Broadening International Perspectives on the Legal Environment for Personnel Selection

This is the response to suggestions and questions that are submitted to the autors of "Myors, B., Lievens, F., Schollaert, E., Van Hoye, G., Cronshaw, S.F., Mladinic A., Rodr\uedguez V., Aguinis, H., Steiner, D.D., Rolland, F., Schuler, H., Frintrup, A., Nikolaou, I., Tomprou, M., Subramony S., Raj, S.B. ,Tzafrir, S., Bamberger, P., Bertolino, M., Mariani, M., Fraccaroli, F., Sekiguchi, T., Onyura, B., Yang, H., Anderson, N., Evers, A., Chernyshenko, O., Englert, P., Kriek, H.J., Joubert, T., Salgado, J.F., K\uf6nig, C.J., Thommen, L.A., Chuang, A., Sinangil, H.K., Bayazit, M., Cook, M., Shen, W., Sackett, P.R. (2008). International Perspectives on the Legal Environment for Selection. Industrial and Organizational Psychology: Perspectives on Science and Practice, 1, 206-246

International perspectives on the legal environment for selection

Perspectives from 22 countries on aspects of the legal environment for selection are presented in this article. Issues addressed include (a) whether there are racial/ethnic/religious subgroups viewed as "disadvantaged," (b) whether research documents mean differences between groups on individual difference measures relevant to job performance, (c) whether there are laws prohibiting discrimination against specific groups, (d) the evidence required to make and refute a claim of discrimination, (e) the consequences of violation of the laws, (f) whether particular selection methods are limited or banned, (g) whether preferential treatment of members of disadvantaged groups is permitted, and (h) whether the practice of industrial and organizational psychology has been affected by the legal environment