Evaluating the Work of the Continuing Nurse Education Department of a District Health Authority

The aim of the research was to answer the question of how the education of post-registered nurses within a Department of Continuing Education could be evaluated. The study involved the choice of a model for the evaluation process, the development and refinement of evaluative tools, the analysis of the data, and a judgement about the usefulness of the model and the tools for evaluating continuing nurse education. The model chosen was Parlett and Hamilton’s Illuminative Evaluation model (1972). This fitted the researcher’s criteria for a model which would reflect the educational ethos and philosophy of the Continuing Education Department, which would enable the investigation of all aspects of the Department’s educational provision to be investigated, and which would not prescribe particular methods of enquiry. The first stage of the model - exploration - required the illumination of the ‘learning milieu’. This involved observation in both the Department and the clinical area, in order to achieve an ethnographic description of the learning milieu. For the second stage - further enquiry - a variety of evaluation tools were developed and tested. These were: evaluation forms for both students and teachers; interviews with course students, a manager and a department teacher; a tool based on Goal Attainment Scaling; and time logs to analyse the work of the teachers in the department. For the third stage of the model - seeking to explain the data - the information obtained was analysed both as an evaluation of the work of the Continuing Education Department, and also as further evidence for making judgements about the usefulness of the model and the tools used. The tools were judged against the criteria of: simplicity of development and administration; accurate, reliable and valid results; cost effectiveness in relation to time expended and information gained. The research suggests that the use of the Illuminative Evaluation model to evaluate continuing nurse education is feasible and valuable. In relation to the tools used, the research concludes that interview, a Goal Attainment Scale, and the time log can all be cost effective. The interviews, although expensive in time, produced a wealth of good quality data. Goal Attainment Scaling proved a feasible way of quantifying the learning which the student perceived had taken place, and could be further developed to identify prior learning. The time logs provided a cost-efficient way of identifying the multiplicity of roles of the nurse teacher, and could be further developed to help in the identification of job and person specifications when organisations are changing. In relation to future developments, the study identifies that the Illuminative Evaluation model, as a model for evaluating process, could be highly suitable for evaluating the quality of education within an institution. It is also possible that the model could be used to evaluate the care given to patients and clients. Finally, the conclusion relates the research to the current structure and organisation of the Health Service, and suggest that evaluation has become essential as part of the process of negotiating contracts, where the indication of quality can be critical in the relationship between purchasers and providers.