Loading…

Evaluating Workforce Development: Perspectives, Processes, and Lessons Learned

Evaluating workforce development for public health is a high priority for federal funders, public health agencies, trainees, trainers, and academic researchers. But each of these stakeholders has a different set of interests. Thus, the evolving science of training evaluation in the public health sec...

Full description

Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Published in:Journal of public health management and practice 2003-11, Vol.9 (6), p.489-495
Main Authors: Potter, Margaret A., Ley, Christine E., Fertman, Carl I., Eggleston, Molly M., Duman, Senol
Format: Article
Language:English
Subjects:
Citations: Items that this one cites
Online Access:Get full text
Tags: Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
cited_by
cites cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c222t-501369f08245740ad89393424a4308dfeb1dffe96741476acac90bc34349c7e23
container_end_page 495
container_issue 6
container_start_page 489
container_title Journal of public health management and practice
container_volume 9
creator Potter, Margaret A.
Ley, Christine E.
Fertman, Carl I.
Eggleston, Molly M.
Duman, Senol
description Evaluating workforce development for public health is a high priority for federal funders, public health agencies, trainees, trainers, and academic researchers. But each of these stakeholders has a different set of interests. Thus, the evolving science of training evaluation in the public health sector is being pulled simultaneously in a number of different directions, each emphasizing different methods, indicators, data-collection instruments, and reporting priorities. We pilot-tested the evaluation of a 30-hour, competency-based training course in a large urban health department. The evaluation processes included strategic, baseline assessment of organizational capacity by the agency; demographic data on trainees as required by the funder; a pre- and posttraining inventory of beliefs and attitudes followed by a posttraining trainee satisfaction survey as required by the trainers and the agency; and a 9-month posttraining follow-up survey and discussion of learning usefulness and organizational impact as desired by the academic researchers and the trainers. Routinely requiring all of these processes in training programs would be overly burdensome, time-consuming, and expensive. This pilot experience offers some important practical lessons for training evaluations in the future.
doi_str_mv 10.1097/00124784-200311000-00008
format article
fullrecord <record><control><sourceid>jstor_proqu</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_71346917</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><jstor_id>44970590</jstor_id><sourcerecordid>44970590</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-LOGICAL-c222t-501369f08245740ad89393424a4308dfeb1dffe96741476acac90bc34349c7e23</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNpdkE9rGzEQxUVJaf71IzQsOeSUbUfS7ErKLThJGzCtDwk5Clk7W-yuV660a-i3j1w7CWRgmAfze8PwGCs4fOVg1DcALlBpLAWA5BwAytygP7AjXlVQViDEQdagdIl1ZQ7ZcUrL7JIV8k_skGMNNdfqiP283bhudMOi_108hfinDdFTcUMb6sJ6Rf1wVcwopjX5YbGhdFnMYvCU0la6vimmWYc-5eliT80p-9i6LtHn_Txhj3e3D5Mf5fTX9_vJ9bT0Qogh_8dlbVrQAiuF4BptpJEo0KEE3bQ0503bkqkVclS1884bmHuJEo1XJOQJu9jdXcfwd6Q02NUieeo611MYk1VcYm24yuD5O3AZxtjn36yQubSqZIb0DvIxpBSpteu4WLn4z3Kw28DtS-D2NXD7P_BsPdvfH-crat6M-4Qz8GUHLNMQ4use0SioDMhnYwqDVg</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Aggregation Database</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>article</recordtype><pqid>233338753</pqid></control><display><type>article</type><title>Evaluating Workforce Development: Perspectives, Processes, and Lessons Learned</title><source>JSTOR Archival Journals and Primary Sources Collection</source><creator>Potter, Margaret A. ; Ley, Christine E. ; Fertman, Carl I. ; Eggleston, Molly M. ; Duman, Senol</creator><creatorcontrib>Potter, Margaret A. ; Ley, Christine E. ; Fertman, Carl I. ; Eggleston, Molly M. ; Duman, Senol</creatorcontrib><description>Evaluating workforce development for public health is a high priority for federal funders, public health agencies, trainees, trainers, and academic researchers. But each of these stakeholders has a different set of interests. Thus, the evolving science of training evaluation in the public health sector is being pulled simultaneously in a number of different directions, each emphasizing different methods, indicators, data-collection instruments, and reporting priorities. We pilot-tested the evaluation of a 30-hour, competency-based training course in a large urban health department. The evaluation processes included strategic, baseline assessment of organizational capacity by the agency; demographic data on trainees as required by the funder; a pre- and posttraining inventory of beliefs and attitudes followed by a posttraining trainee satisfaction survey as required by the trainers and the agency; and a 9-month posttraining follow-up survey and discussion of learning usefulness and organizational impact as desired by the academic researchers and the trainers. Routinely requiring all of these processes in training programs would be overly burdensome, time-consuming, and expensive. This pilot experience offers some important practical lessons for training evaluations in the future.</description><identifier>ISSN: 1078-4659</identifier><identifier>EISSN: 1550-5022</identifier><identifier>DOI: 10.1097/00124784-200311000-00008</identifier><identifier>PMID: 14606187</identifier><language>eng</language><publisher>United States: Lippincott Williams &amp; Wilkins, Inc</publisher><subject>Adult ; Competency-Based Education - standards ; Health technology assessment ; Humans ; Models, Educational ; Ohio ; Pennsylvania ; Program Development ; Public Health - education ; Public Health Administration - manpower ; Schools, Public Health ; Staff Development - methods</subject><ispartof>Journal of public health management and practice, 2003-11, Vol.9 (6), p.489-495</ispartof><rights>Copyright © 2003 Lippincott Williams &amp; Wilkins, Inc.</rights><rights>Copyright Aspen Publishers, Inc. Nov/Dec 2003</rights><lds50>peer_reviewed</lds50><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed><cites>FETCH-LOGICAL-c222t-501369f08245740ad89393424a4308dfeb1dffe96741476acac90bc34349c7e23</cites></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Tsyndetics_thumb_exl</thumbnail><linktopdf>$$Uhttps://www.jstor.org/stable/pdf/44970590$$EPDF$$P50$$Gjstor$$H</linktopdf><linktohtml>$$Uhttps://www.jstor.org/stable/44970590$$EHTML$$P50$$Gjstor$$H</linktohtml><link.rule.ids>314,780,784,27924,27925,58238,58471</link.rule.ids><backlink>$$Uhttps://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/14606187$$D View this record in MEDLINE/PubMed$$Hfree_for_read</backlink></links><search><creatorcontrib>Potter, Margaret A.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Ley, Christine E.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Fertman, Carl I.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Eggleston, Molly M.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Duman, Senol</creatorcontrib><title>Evaluating Workforce Development: Perspectives, Processes, and Lessons Learned</title><title>Journal of public health management and practice</title><addtitle>J Public Health Manag Pract</addtitle><description>Evaluating workforce development for public health is a high priority for federal funders, public health agencies, trainees, trainers, and academic researchers. But each of these stakeholders has a different set of interests. Thus, the evolving science of training evaluation in the public health sector is being pulled simultaneously in a number of different directions, each emphasizing different methods, indicators, data-collection instruments, and reporting priorities. We pilot-tested the evaluation of a 30-hour, competency-based training course in a large urban health department. The evaluation processes included strategic, baseline assessment of organizational capacity by the agency; demographic data on trainees as required by the funder; a pre- and posttraining inventory of beliefs and attitudes followed by a posttraining trainee satisfaction survey as required by the trainers and the agency; and a 9-month posttraining follow-up survey and discussion of learning usefulness and organizational impact as desired by the academic researchers and the trainers. Routinely requiring all of these processes in training programs would be overly burdensome, time-consuming, and expensive. This pilot experience offers some important practical lessons for training evaluations in the future.</description><subject>Adult</subject><subject>Competency-Based Education - standards</subject><subject>Health technology assessment</subject><subject>Humans</subject><subject>Models, Educational</subject><subject>Ohio</subject><subject>Pennsylvania</subject><subject>Program Development</subject><subject>Public Health - education</subject><subject>Public Health Administration - manpower</subject><subject>Schools, Public Health</subject><subject>Staff Development - methods</subject><issn>1078-4659</issn><issn>1550-5022</issn><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>article</rsrctype><creationdate>2003</creationdate><recordtype>article</recordtype><recordid>eNpdkE9rGzEQxUVJaf71IzQsOeSUbUfS7ErKLThJGzCtDwk5Clk7W-yuV660a-i3j1w7CWRgmAfze8PwGCs4fOVg1DcALlBpLAWA5BwAytygP7AjXlVQViDEQdagdIl1ZQ7ZcUrL7JIV8k_skGMNNdfqiP283bhudMOi_108hfinDdFTcUMb6sJ6Rf1wVcwopjX5YbGhdFnMYvCU0la6vimmWYc-5eliT80p-9i6LtHn_Txhj3e3D5Mf5fTX9_vJ9bT0Qogh_8dlbVrQAiuF4BptpJEo0KEE3bQ0503bkqkVclS1884bmHuJEo1XJOQJu9jdXcfwd6Q02NUieeo611MYk1VcYm24yuD5O3AZxtjn36yQubSqZIb0DvIxpBSpteu4WLn4z3Kw28DtS-D2NXD7P_BsPdvfH-crat6M-4Qz8GUHLNMQ4use0SioDMhnYwqDVg</recordid><startdate>200311</startdate><enddate>200311</enddate><creator>Potter, Margaret A.</creator><creator>Ley, Christine E.</creator><creator>Fertman, Carl I.</creator><creator>Eggleston, Molly M.</creator><creator>Duman, Senol</creator><general>Lippincott Williams &amp; Wilkins, Inc</general><general>Lippincott Williams &amp; Wilkins Ovid Technologies</general><scope>CGR</scope><scope>CUY</scope><scope>CVF</scope><scope>ECM</scope><scope>EIF</scope><scope>NPM</scope><scope>AAYXX</scope><scope>CITATION</scope><scope>K9.</scope><scope>NAPCQ</scope><scope>7X8</scope></search><sort><creationdate>200311</creationdate><title>Evaluating Workforce Development: Perspectives, Processes, and Lessons Learned</title><author>Potter, Margaret A. ; Ley, Christine E. ; Fertman, Carl I. ; Eggleston, Molly M. ; Duman, Senol</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c222t-501369f08245740ad89393424a4308dfeb1dffe96741476acac90bc34349c7e23</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>articles</rsrctype><prefilter>articles</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>2003</creationdate><topic>Adult</topic><topic>Competency-Based Education - standards</topic><topic>Health technology assessment</topic><topic>Humans</topic><topic>Models, Educational</topic><topic>Ohio</topic><topic>Pennsylvania</topic><topic>Program Development</topic><topic>Public Health - education</topic><topic>Public Health Administration - manpower</topic><topic>Schools, Public Health</topic><topic>Staff Development - methods</topic><toplevel>peer_reviewed</toplevel><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>Potter, Margaret A.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Ley, Christine E.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Fertman, Carl I.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Eggleston, Molly M.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Duman, Senol</creatorcontrib><collection>Medline</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>MEDLINE (Ovid)</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>PubMed</collection><collection>CrossRef</collection><collection>ProQuest Health &amp; Medical Complete (Alumni)</collection><collection>Nursing &amp; Allied Health Premium</collection><collection>MEDLINE - Academic</collection><jtitle>Journal of public health management and practice</jtitle></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>Potter, Margaret A.</au><au>Ley, Christine E.</au><au>Fertman, Carl I.</au><au>Eggleston, Molly M.</au><au>Duman, Senol</au><format>journal</format><genre>article</genre><ristype>JOUR</ristype><atitle>Evaluating Workforce Development: Perspectives, Processes, and Lessons Learned</atitle><jtitle>Journal of public health management and practice</jtitle><addtitle>J Public Health Manag Pract</addtitle><date>2003-11</date><risdate>2003</risdate><volume>9</volume><issue>6</issue><spage>489</spage><epage>495</epage><pages>489-495</pages><issn>1078-4659</issn><eissn>1550-5022</eissn><abstract>Evaluating workforce development for public health is a high priority for federal funders, public health agencies, trainees, trainers, and academic researchers. But each of these stakeholders has a different set of interests. Thus, the evolving science of training evaluation in the public health sector is being pulled simultaneously in a number of different directions, each emphasizing different methods, indicators, data-collection instruments, and reporting priorities. We pilot-tested the evaluation of a 30-hour, competency-based training course in a large urban health department. The evaluation processes included strategic, baseline assessment of organizational capacity by the agency; demographic data on trainees as required by the funder; a pre- and posttraining inventory of beliefs and attitudes followed by a posttraining trainee satisfaction survey as required by the trainers and the agency; and a 9-month posttraining follow-up survey and discussion of learning usefulness and organizational impact as desired by the academic researchers and the trainers. Routinely requiring all of these processes in training programs would be overly burdensome, time-consuming, and expensive. This pilot experience offers some important practical lessons for training evaluations in the future.</abstract><cop>United States</cop><pub>Lippincott Williams &amp; Wilkins, Inc</pub><pmid>14606187</pmid><doi>10.1097/00124784-200311000-00008</doi><tpages>7</tpages></addata></record>
fulltext fulltext
identifier ISSN: 1078-4659
ispartof Journal of public health management and practice, 2003-11, Vol.9 (6), p.489-495
issn 1078-4659
1550-5022
language eng
recordid cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_71346917
source JSTOR Archival Journals and Primary Sources Collection
subjects Adult
Competency-Based Education - standards
Health technology assessment
Humans
Models, Educational
Ohio
Pennsylvania
Program Development
Public Health - education
Public Health Administration - manpower
Schools, Public Health
Staff Development - methods
title Evaluating Workforce Development: Perspectives, Processes, and Lessons Learned
url http://sfxeu10.hosted.exlibrisgroup.com/loughborough?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2024-12-29T19%3A14%3A25IST&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&url_ctx_fmt=infofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&rfr_id=info:sid/primo.exlibrisgroup.com:primo3-Article-jstor_proqu&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=Evaluating%20Workforce%20Development:%20Perspectives,%20Processes,%20and%20Lessons%20Learned&rft.jtitle=Journal%20of%20public%20health%20management%20and%20practice&rft.au=Potter,%20Margaret%20A.&rft.date=2003-11&rft.volume=9&rft.issue=6&rft.spage=489&rft.epage=495&rft.pages=489-495&rft.issn=1078-4659&rft.eissn=1550-5022&rft_id=info:doi/10.1097/00124784-200311000-00008&rft_dat=%3Cjstor_proqu%3E44970590%3C/jstor_proqu%3E%3Cgrp_id%3Ecdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c222t-501369f08245740ad89393424a4308dfeb1dffe96741476acac90bc34349c7e23%3C/grp_id%3E%3Coa%3E%3C/oa%3E%3Curl%3E%3C/url%3E&rft_id=info:oai/&rft_pqid=233338753&rft_id=info:pmid/14606187&rft_jstor_id=44970590&rfr_iscdi=true