Advanced Search

Journal Navigation

Journal Home

Subscriptions

Archive

Contact Us

Table of Contents

Click here to sign up for SAGE Journal Email Alerts today!

Sign In to gain access to subscriptions and/or personal tools.
Evaluation & the Health Professions
This Article
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow References
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Right arrow Citation Map
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Similar articles in PubMed
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Add to Saved Citations
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrowRequest Permissions
Right arrow Request Reprints
Right arrow Add to My Marked Citations
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Right arrow Citing Articles via Scopus
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Guyatt, G.
Right arrow Articles by Brill-Edwards, P.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by Guyatt, G.
Right arrow Articles by Brill-Edwards, P.
Social Bookmarking
 Add to CiteULike   Add to Complore   Add to Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us   Add to Digg   Add to Reddit   Add to Technorati   Add to Twitter  
What's this?

Evaluating the Performance of Academic Medical Education Administrators

Gordon Guyatt

McMaster University

Deborah Cook

McMaster University and Ontario Ministry of Health

Derek King

James Nishikawa

Patrick Brill-Edwards

McMaster University

Educators have devoted little attention to formal evaluation of educational administrative personnel. The authors surveyed the educational administrators working in McMaster University’s Department of Medicine residency program and found they felt they were receiving little useful feedback. The authors also surveyed the colleagues, residents, and administrative staff with whom the administrators worked and found they felt they had inadequate input into the administrators’ evaluation. In response to these results, a measurement instrument was developed based on existing job descriptions and feedback was obtained on administrators’ performance from relevant individuals. After three yearly evaluations, administrators and evaluators acknowledged much broader input into evaluation but saw little evaluation related improvement in performance. Of the administrators, 85% felt the process should continue as did 91% of the evaluators. An evaluation process may not alter perceived performance when it is already good but there may be other benefits to rigorous evaluation.

Evaluation & the Health Professions, Vol. 22, No. 4, 484-496 (1999)
DOI: 10.1177/01632789922034428


Add to CiteULike CiteULike   Add to Complore Complore   Add to Connotea Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us Del.icio.us   Add to Digg Digg   Add to Reddit Reddit   Add to Technorati Technorati   Add to Twitter Twitter    What's this?