Program Evaluation of a Nationwide Continuing Professional Development (CPD) Program in Korean Public Health and Medical Institutions
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Background: Education & Training Centre for Public Healthcare of the National Medical Centre plays a key role in providing continuing professional development (CPD) to 221 public health and medical institutions in South Korea. To assess the realisation of the Center’s core value and of the intended chages, program evaluations is needed. The context, input, process, and product (CIPP) model is particularly suitable for evaluating CPD in public sector as it allows to recognise the dynamic nature of the programme environment.Methods: This research applied the CIPP model to the evaluation of CPD programmes, particulary abdominal and thracic ultrasond programme implemented in 2017 and 2018. Data were collected from 2017 to 2019. The programme and its feedback were reviewed in context evaluation. Based on this, the subsequent programme strategy was established in input evaulation. Observing the programme in real time and recording progress was followed in process evaluation. Finally, the outcome and impact of the programme were reviewed and compared with baseline data in product evaluation. Results: In context evaluation, the educational needs of the recipients of the Centre’s CPD programme, impediments that inhibit participation in education, and resources that the Centre can utilise were identified through online survey, focus group interviews, expert consultation. Through input evaluation, we identified the best alternative that satisfied all pre-selected criteria, which were responsiveness to priority system needs, potential effectiveness, fit with existing services, affordability, and administrative feasibility. Observing the programme in real time and recording progress was conducted in process evaluation and shows that the improved programme went as planned, and even had to be expanded due to increased demand. The impact of the programme was measured, interpreted, and assessed in the product evaluation. As the review committee decided that the intended change has occurred, the Centre decided to maintain the program. Conclusions: Thorough evaluations are necessary to unlock the potential benefits of CPD. The CIPP methodology is valuable to execute formative as well as summative evaluations. The CIPP model is especially useful for securing accountability data for large-scale nation-wide educational programmes supplied by public funds.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.032 | 0.029 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.005 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".