Document Type : Review Article
Authors
1
Department of Psychology, Faculty of Arts, University of Regina, Regina, SK, Canada
2
Departments of Community Health Sciences and Surgery, Cumming School of Medicine, University of Calgary, Calgary, AB, Canada
3
Department of Geography and Planning, University of Toronto, Toronto, ON, Canada
4
Ontario Health, Toronto, ON, Canada
5
School of Nursing, Faculty of Applied Sciences, University of British Columbia, Vancouver, BC, Canada
6
Department of Kinesiology and Health Sciences, Faculty of Health, University of Waterloo, Waterloo, ON, Canada
7
Interdisciplinary School of Health Sciences, Faculty of Health Sciences, University of Ottawa, Ottawa, ON, Canada
8
School of Rehabilitation Science, Faculty of Health Sciences, McMaster University, Hamilton, ON, Canada
9
MAP Centre for Urban Health Solutions, Li Ka Shing Knowledge Institute, St Michael’s Hospital, Toronto, ON, Canada
10
Department of Applied Psychology & Human Development, Ontario Institute for Studies in Education, University of Toronto, Toronto, ON, Canada
11
IMAGINE Network SPOR, McMaster University, Hamilton, ON, Canada
12
Departments of Community Health Sciences and Medicine, Cumming School of Medicine, University of Calgary, Calgary, AB, Canada
Abstract
Background
The Kirkpatrick model is commonly used as a systematic approach to evaluate training programs, although its application to health sciences experiential learning programs is not well-established. To inform the use of the Kirkpatrick model in the evaluation of the Canadian Institutes of Health Research’s (CIHR’s) Health System Impact Fellowship National Cohort Training Program (HSIF NCTP), we examined its application in post-secondary health sciences programs.
Methods
Using the Joanna Briggs Institute’s updated methodology for scoping reviews, we searched CINAHL, EMBASE, ERIC, MEDLINE, PsycINFO, and Web of Science for studies published from 2017 to 2023 that focused on health sciences experiential learning programs held at universities and reported on at least one level of the Kirkpatrick model (ie, reaction, learning, behavior, results). We extracted data on study characteristics and reported outcomes for each of the Kirkpatrick model levels.
Results
After deduplication, we screened 755 titles and abstracts, we reviewed 97 full texts, and we included 34 studies in our scoping review. Many studies reported outcomes at the reaction or learning levels followed by the behaviour and results levels. Across levels, despite identifying several areas of improvement, learners typically reported favourable perceptions, increased confidence and knowledge, improved performance, and organizational improvements.
Conclusion
The Kirkpatrick model is a widely used and highly adaptable evaluation model that has been successfully used to evaluate a range of post-secondary health sciences programs. Despite its wide use, evaluators using the Kirkpatrick model should use more robust methodologies to capture long-term behaviour and results associated with the programs. Future work should focus on evaluating a broader spectrum of programs such as doctoral- and postdoctoral-level experiential learning programs and underrepresented healthcare professions such as psychologists and dieticians. Integration of behaviour change and implementation science methodologies within the broader educational evaluation literature is also needed.
Keywords
)