ppt on competency based education

• My presentations

Auth with social network:

Download presentation

We think you have liked this presentation. If you wish to download it, please recommend it to your friends in any social system. Share buttons are a little bit lower. Thank you!

Presentation is loading. Please wait.

Competency Based Education

Published by Anabel Weaver Modified over 5 years ago

Similar presentations

Presentation on theme: "Competency Based Education"— Presentation transcript:

A Competency Based Osteopathic Internship Bruce Dubin, DO The Edward Via – Virginia College of Osteopathic Medicine.

Mastery Learning Compare and contrast direct instruction and mastery learning. Developed by W. Huitt (1998)

Understanding By Design: Integration of CTE and Core Content Curriculum Michael S. Gullett.

Update on Goals 1 and 2 Curricular Domain Curricular Domain – accomplishments to date Developed baseline information about current level of faculty.

CENTRAL TEXAS COLLEGE DECEMBER 2012 FACULTY QUALIFICATION.

School of Business University of Bridgeport Admissions Presentation Robert Gilmore, Ph.D. Associate Dean School of Business.

LEARNING CENTER & SUPPLEMENTAL LEARNING ISSUES Wheeler North San Diego Miramar College Ray M. Sanchez Fresno City College.

Basic Skills Definitions  Cheryl Aschenbach, Lassen College  Melody Nightingale, Santa Monica College  Michelle Pilati, Rio Hondo College.

NCATE for Dummies AKA: Everything You Wanted to Know About NCATE, But Didn’t Want to Ask.

CAREER TECHNICAL EDUCATION (CTE). CAREER TECHNICAL EDUCATION is a program of study that involves a multi-year sequence of courses that integrate core.

 Colleges are concerned with GPA as well as curriculum. Students who take advanced coursework will score higher on the ACT.  Colleges DO NOT know what.

ATHLETIC TRAINER Jacob Willey. Tasks n Teach others n Assist and care for other n Update and use job-related knowledge n Get information needed to do.

Adult Education and Literacy Symposium 2015 Juan Carlos Aguirre ACCELERATE TEXAS : INTEGRATED EDUCATION AND TRAINING CAREER PATHWAYS AT SOUTH TEXAS COLLEGE.

Institutional Effectiveness at CPCC DENISE H WELLS.

NONCREDIT PROGRAMS: STARTING ONE FROM SCRATCH AND MOVING CREDIT COURSES INTO NONCREDIT Cheryl Aschenbach, Lassen College, ASCCC Executive Committee Virginia.

Acceleration Plans. Purpose Parents will receive information about Pender County’s AIG Acceleration Policy. Parents will have an opportunity to provide.

Helena High Pathways to Helena College

Fall 2010 Presenter: Jan Vogel Consultant Special Projects

Introduction to Curriculum Mapping

Jonathan Furr Education Systems Center at NIU November 3, 2016

About project

© 2024 SlidePlayer.com Inc. All rights reserved.

Newly Launched - AI Presentation Maker

AI PPT Maker

Design Services

Business PPTs

Business Plan

Introduction PPT

Self Introduction

Startup Business Plan

Cyber Security

Digital Marketing

Project Management

Product Management

Artificial Intelligence

Target Market

Communication

Supply Chain

Google Slides

Research Services

All Categories

Competency based education PowerPoint Presentation Templates and Google Slides

Save your time and attract your audience with our fully editable ppt templates and slides..

Competency Based Education Model Ppt Presentation Powerpoint

This is a competency based education model ppt presentation powerpoint. This is a six stage process. The stages in this process are planning, skills practice, learner support, development, culture, tracking progress.

Comparative Assessment Traditional Vs Competency Based Education System Inspiration PDF

This slide provides information regarding comparative assessment of traditional education system and competency based education system across various parameters. Deliver an awe inspiring pitch with this creative Comparative Assessment Traditional Vs Competency Based Education System Inspiration PDF bundle. Topics like Comparative Assessment Traditional, Competency Based Education System can be discussed with this completely editable template. It is available for immediate download depending on the needs and requirements of the user.

Comparative Assessment Traditional Vs Competency Based Education System Elements PDF

This slide provides information regarding comparative assessment of traditional education system and competency based education system across various parameters. Deliver an awe inspiring pitch with this creative Comparative Assessment Traditional Vs Competency Based Education System Elements PDF bundle. Topics like Evaluation And Projects, Competency Based Education System, Comparative Assessment can be discussed with this completely editable template. It is available for immediate download depending on the needs and requirements of the user.

Digital Coaching And Learning Playbook Comparative Assessment Traditional Vs Competency Based Education System Diagrams PDF

This slide provides information regarding comparative assessment of traditional education system and competency based education system across various parameters. Crafting an eye catching presentation has never been more straightforward. Let your presentation shine with this tasteful yet straightforward Digital Coaching And Learning Playbook Comparative Assessment Traditional Vs Competency Based Education System Diagrams PDF template. It offers a minimalistic and classy look that is great for making a statement. The colors have been employed intelligently to add a bit of playfulness while still remaining professional. Construct the ideal Digital Coaching And Learning Playbook Comparative Assessment Traditional Vs Competency Based Education System Diagrams PDF that effortlessly grabs the attention of your audience Begin now and be certain to wow your customers.

Virtual Learning Playbook Comparative Assessment Traditional Vs Competency Based Education System Mockup PDF

This slide provides information regarding comparative assessment of traditional education system and competency based education system across various parameters. Deliver an awe inspiring pitch with this creative Virtual Learning Playbook Comparative Assessment Traditional Vs Competency Based Education System Mockup PDF bundle. Topics like Evaluation And Projects, Assessment Methods, Abilities can be discussed with this completely editable template. It is available for immediate download depending on the needs and requirements of the user.

Comparative Assessment Traditional VS Competency Based Education System Topics PDF

This slide provides information regarding comparative assessment of traditional education system and competency based education system across various parameters. This is a Comparative Assessment Traditional VS Competency Based Education System Topics PDF template with various stages. Focus and dispense information on one stage using this creative set, that comes with editable features. It contains large content boxes to add your information on topics like Learning Assistance, Education Orientation, Education Scenario. You can also showcase facts, figures, and other relevant content using this PPT layout. Grab it now.

Ratings and Reviews

Most relevant reviews.

June 10, 2021

September 21, 2022

November 14, 2022

January 2, 2023

by Uus Sutisna

By mark comer, by glen mccracken.

March 5, 2023

Items 1 to 10 of 11 total

• You're currently reading page 1

Competency Based Education (CBE) PPT: Definition and Principles

Competency Based Education (CBE) PPT: Definition and Principles Free Download: In primary terms, competency based education means that, in preference to that specialize in grades and every year curriculum schedules, the principle consciousness is located on how equipped every scholar is withinside the subject. This approach that scholars can most effective pass ahead whilst they could reveal mastery.

Competency primarily based totally training and customized getting to know absolutely pass hand-in-hand. By personalizing the getting to know revel in for every man or woman scholar, instructors make sure that every scholar has complete mastery earlier than they could pass ahead. Competency primarily based totally education offers a clean consciousness on making ready college students for the following degree in their life, whether or not it’s university or a career.

Table of Content

• Introduction
• Principles of Competency Based Education
• Pros of Competency Based Education
• Cons of Competency Based Education

Competency Based Education (CBE) PPT : Definition and Principles

Related Posts

Social media marketing ppt presentation seminar free, biomedical waste management ppt presentation free, monkey and the cap seller story ppt presentation free download, 1210 electrical engineering(eee) seminar topics 2024, 112 iot seminar topics-internet of thing presentation topics 2024.

330 Latest AI (Artificial Intelligence Seminar Topics) 2024

No comments yet, leave a reply cancel reply.

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed .

Got any suggestions?

We want to hear from you! Send us a message and help improve Slidesgo

Top searches

Trending searches

pink flowers

255 templates

15 templates

62 templates

49 templates

rio de janeiro

16 templates

39 templates

Competency Based Learning Center

It seems that you like this template, competency based learning center presentation, free google slides theme, powerpoint template, and canva presentation template.

In education there’s lots of different methods you can follow, but it has been proven that focusing on what the students can achieve at the end of the school year instead of tests or grades is a great way of ensuring that they are making progress in their development as people. In order to have a structured schedule, you must set what the competences to achieve will be at the beginning of the year: maybe speaking about your family in another language? Or also knowing how to use trigonometry? Perhaps being able to understand classic literature? Use this modern, creative template to speak about the methods your center will follow!

Features of this template

• 100% editable and easy to modify
• 25 different slides to impress your audience
• Contains easy-to-edit graphics such as graphs, maps, tables, timelines and mockups
• Includes 500+ icons and Flaticon’s extension for customizing your slides
• Designed to be used in Google Slides, Canva, and Microsoft PowerPoint
• 16:9 widescreen format suitable for all types of screens
• Includes information about fonts, colors, and credits of the resources used

How can I use the template?

Am I free to use the templates?

How to attribute?

Attribution required If you are a free user, you must attribute Slidesgo by keeping the slide where the credits appear. How to attribute?

Register for free and start downloading now

Related posts on our blog.

How to Add, Duplicate, Move, Delete or Hide Slides in Google Slides

How to Change Layouts in PowerPoint

How to Change the Slide Size in Google Slides

Related presentations.

Premium template

Unlock this template and gain unlimited access

Create your presentation Create personalized presentation content

Writing tone, number of slides.

Register for free and start editing online

• Enroll & Pay
• Prospective Students
• Current Students
• Degree Programs

CBE at KU Updates 06.26.2024

Wed, 06/26/2024.

Alicia Rosa Marksberry

Jayhawk Flex Halfway There Celebration was held last week. For pictures & videos from the event,  see here !

Key policies & procedures that need to be updated for Jayhawk Flex have been identified and prioritized. Review  here .

STEM & HOPE programs were unanimously approved by the Kansas Board of Regents on June 20!

Next Steering Committee: TBD

Strand Updates

Business processes & systems.

Leader: Nick Stevens

Next Meeting: TBD

Drafts of R2T4, SAP, and credit hour policies are completed - see  here . Next steps are to start drafting the next phase of policies & procedures and start queueing up for governance reviews as necessary.

Curriculum & Learning

Leader: Kelli Feldman

Grading policies and procedures guidance  complete and will be utilized as we moved forward to the policy drafting process. See list of key policies for review  here .  

Information Technology

Leader: Ed Hudson

Next Meeting: June 27

Canvas Design Workgroup has been assembled and will begin testing and prototyping competencies in Canvas soon.

Policy & Regulatory Compliance

Leader: Jennifer Roberts

Next Meeting: Jun 27

STEM & HOPE programs were unanimously approved by the Kansas Board of Regents on June 20.

Project Management Flex HLC application draft is completed, reviewed and  feedback  has been given. In the coming weeks we’ll be revising and preparing for submission.

Student Journey Supports

Leader: Misty Chandler

Next Meeting: Jul 15

SJS is creating a library of Playbooks for each student service area to clarify expectations, delivery, and additional needs or set up required. These draft Playbooks are available for use and reference:

 Jayhawk Flex and Online Navigators + SlatePlaybook.docx

 Jayhawk Flex Application and AdmissionRequirements.docx

Jayhawk Flex & Online OrientationPlaybook.docx

 Jayhawk Flex Advising Playbook.docx

 Jayhawk Online and Flex Playbook -International Students.docx

Jayhawk Flex and Online Marketing and Lead Generation Playbook.docx

• Open access
• Published: 16 August 2024

Going virtual: mixed methods evaluation of online versus in-person learning in the NIH mixed methods research training program retreat

• Joseph J. Gallo 1 ,
• Sarah M. Murray 1 ,
• John W. Creswell 2 ,
• Charles Deutsch 3 &
• Timothy C. Guetterman 2  

BMC Medical Education volume  24 , Article number:  882 ( 2024 ) Cite this article

37 Accesses

Metrics details

Despite the central role of mixed methods in health research, studies evaluating online methods training in the health sciences are nonexistent. The focused goal was to evaluate online training by comparing the self-rated skills of scholars who experienced an in-person retreat to scholars in an online retreat in specific domains of mixed methods research for the health sciences from 2015–2023.

The authors administered a scholar Mixed Methods Skills Self-Assessment instrument based on an educational competency scale that included domains on: “research questions,” “design/approach,” “sampling,” “analysis,” and “dissemination” to participants of the Mixed Methods Research Training Program for the Health Sciences (MMRTP). Self-ratings on confidence on domains were compared before and after retreat participation within cohorts who attended in person ( n  = 73) or online ( n  = 57) as well as comparing across in-person to online cohorts. Responses to open-ended questions about experiences with the retreat were analyzed.

Scholars in an interactive program to improve mixed methods skills reported significantly increased confidence in ability to define or explain concepts and in ability to apply the concepts to practical problems, whether the program was attended in-person or synchronously online. Scholars in the online retreat had self-rated skill improvements as good or better than scholars who participated in person. With the possible exception of networking, scholars found the online format was associated with advantages such as accessibility and reduced burden of travel and finding childcare. No differences in difficulty of learning concepts was described.

Conclusions

Keeping in mind that the retreat is only one component of the MMRTP, this study provides evidence that mixed methods training online was associated with the same increases in self-rated skills as persons attending online and can be a key component to increasing the capacity for mixed methods research in the health sciences.

Peer Review reports

Introduction

The coronavirus pandemic accelerated interest in distance or remote learning. While the acute nature of the pandemic has abated, changes in the way people work have largely remained, with hybrid conferences and trainings more commonly implemented now than during the pre-pandemic period. Studies of health-related online teaching have focused on medical students [ 1 , 2 , 3 ], health professionals [ 4 , 5 ], and medical conferences [ 6 , 7 , 8 ] and have touted the advantages of virtual training and conferences in health education, but few studies have assessed relative growth in skills and competencies in health research methods for synchronous online vs. in-person training.

The National Institutes of Health (NIH)-funded Mixed Methods Research Training Program (MMRTP) for the Health Sciences provided training to faculty-level investigators across health disciplines from 2015–2023. The NIH is a major funder of health-related research in the United States. Its institutes span diseases and conditions (e.g., mental health, environmental health) in addition to focus areas (e.g., minority health and health disparities, nursing) and developing research capacity. Scholars in the MMRTP seek to develop skills in mixed methods research through participation in a summer retreat followed by ongoing mentorship for one year from a mixed methods expert matched to the scholar to support their development of a research proposal. Webinars leading up to the retreat include didactic sessions taught by the same faculty each year, and the retreat itself contains multiple interactive small group sessions in which each scholar presents their project and receives feedback on their grant proposal. Due to pandemic restrictions on gatherings and travel, in 2020 the MMRTP retained all components of the program but transitioned the in-person retreat to a synchronous online retreat.

The number of NIH agencies funding mixed methods research increased from 23 in 1997–2008 to 36 in 2009–2014 [ 9 ]. The usefulness of mixed methods research aligns with several Institutes’ strategic priories, including improving health equity, enhancing feasibility, acceptability, and sustainability of interventions, and addressing patient-centeredness. However, there is a tension between growing interest in mixed methods for health sciences research and a lack of training for investigators to acquire mixed methods research skills. Mixed methods research is not routinely taught in doctoral programs, institutional grant-writing programs, nor research training that academic physicians receive. The relative lack of researchers trained in mixed methods research necessitates ongoing research capacity building and mentorship [ 10 ]. Online teaching has the potential to meet growing demand for training and mentoring in mixed methods, as evidenced by the growth of online offerings by the Mixed Methods International Research Association [ 11 ]. Yet, the nature of skills and attitudes required for doing mixed methods research, such as integration of quantitative and qualitative data collection, analysis, and epistemologies, may make this type of training difficult to adapt to an online format without compromising its effectiveness.

Few studies have attempted to evaluate mixed methods training [ 12 , 13 , 14 , 15 ] and none appear to have evaluated online trainings in mixed methods research. Our goal was to evaluate our online MMRTP by comparing the self-rated skills of scholars who experienced an in-person retreat to an online retreat across specific domains. While the MMRTP retreat is only one component of the program, assessment before and after the retreat among persons who experienced the synchronous retreat online compared to in-person provides an indication of the effectiveness of online instruction in mixed methods for specific domains critical to the design of research in health services. We hypothesized that scholars who attended the retreat online would exhibit improvements in self-rated skills comparable to scholars who attended in person.

Participants

Five cohorts with a total of 73 scholars participated in the MMRTP in person (2015–2019), while four cohorts with a total of 57 scholars participated online (2020–2023). Scholars are faculty-level researchers in the health sciences in the United States. The scholars are from a variety of disciplines in the health sciences; namely, pediatrics, psychiatry, general medicine, oncology, nursing, human development, music therapy, nutrition, psychology, and social work.

The mixed methods research training program

Formal program activities include two webinars leading up to a retreat followed by ongoing mentorship support. The mixed methods content taught in webinars and the retreat is informed by a widely used textbook by Creswell and Plano Clark [ 18 ] in addition to readings on methodological topics and the practice of mixed methods. The webinars introduce mixed methods research and integration concepts, with the goal of imparting foundational knowledge and ensuring a common language. Specifically, the first webinar introduces mixed methods concepts, research designs, scientific rigor, and becoming a resource at one’s institution, while the second focuses on strategies for the integration of qualitative and quantitative research. Retreats provide an active workshop blending lectures, one-on-one meetings, and interactive faculty-led small workgroups. In addition to scholars, core program faculty who serve as investigators and mentors for the MMRTP, supplemented with consultants and former scholars, lead the retreat. The retreat has covered the state-of-the-art topics within the context of mixed methods research: rationale for use of mixed methods, procedural diagrams, study aims, use of theory, integration strategies, sampling strategies, implementation science, randomized trials, ethics, manuscript and proposal writing, and becoming a resource at one’s home institution. In addition to lectures, the retreat includes multiple interactive small group sessions in which each scholar presents their project and receives feedback on their grant proposal and is expected to make revisions based on feedback and lectures.

Scholars are matched for one year with a mentor based on the Scholar’s needs, career level, and area of health research from a national list of affiliated experienced mixed methods investigators with demonstrated success in obtaining independent funding for research related to the health sciences and a track record and commitment to mentoring. The purpose of this arrangement is to provide different perspectives on mixed methods design while also providing specific feedback on the scholar's research proposal, reviewing new ideas, and together developing a strategy and timeline for submission.

From 2015–2019 (in-person cohorts) the retreat was held over 3 days at the Johns Hopkins University Bloomberg School of Public Health (in 2016 Harvard Catalyst, the Harvard Clinical and Translational Science Center, hosted the retreat at Harvard Medical School). Due to pandemic restrictions, from 2020–2023 the retreat activities were conducted via Zoom with the same number of lecture sessions (over 3 days in 2020 and 4 days thereafter). We made adaptations for the online retreat based on continuous feedback from attendees. We had to rapidly transition to online in 2020 with the same structure as in person, but feedback from scholars led us to extend the retreat to 4 days online from 2021–2023. The extra day allowed for more breaks from Zoom sessions with time for scholars to consider feedback from small groups and to have one-on-one meetings with mentors. Discussion during interactive presentations was encouraged and facilitated by using breakout rooms at breaks mid-presentation. Online resources were available to participants through CoursePlus, the teaching and learning platform used for courses at the Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health, hosting publications, presentation materials, recordings of lectures, sharing proposals, email, and discussion boards that scholars have access to before, during, and after the retreat.

Measurement strategy

Before and after the retreat in each year, we distributed a self-administered scholar Mixed Methods Skills Self-Assessment instrument (Supplement 1) to all participating scholars [ 15 ]; we have reported results from this pre-post assessment for the first two cohorts [ 14 ]. The Mixed Methods Skills Self-Assessment instrument has been previously used and has established reliability for the total items (α = 0.95) and evidence of criterion-related validity between experiences and ability ratings [ 15 ]. In each year, the pre-assessment is completed upon entry to the program, approximately four months prior to the retreat, and the post-assessment is administered two weeks after the retreat. The instrument consists of three sections: 1) professional experiences with mixed methods, including background, software, and resource familiarity; 2) a quantitative, qualitative, and mixed methods skills self-assessment; and 3) open-ended questions focused on learning goals for the MMRTP. The skills assessment contains items for each of the following domains: “research questions,” “design/approach,” “sampling,” “analysis,” and “dissemination.” Each skill was assessed via three items drawn from an educational competency ratings scale that ask scholars to rate: [ 16 ] “My ability to define/explain,” “My ability to apply to practical problems,” and “Extent to which I need to improve my skill.” Response options were on a five-point Likert-type scale that ranged from “Not at all” (coded ‘1’) to “To a great extent” (coded ‘5’), including a mid-point [ 17 ]. We took the mean of the scholar’s item ratings over all component items within each domain (namely, “research questions,” “design/approach,” “sampling,” “analysis,” and “dissemination”).

Open-ended questions

The baseline survey included two open-ended prompts: 1) What skills and goals are most important to you?, and 2) What would you like to learn? The post-assessment survey also included two additional open-ended questions about the retreat: 1) What aspects of the retreat were helpful?, and 2) What would you like to change about the retreat? In addition, for the online cohorts (2020–2023), we wanted to understand reactions to the online training and added three questions for this purpose: (1) In general, what did you think of the online format for the MMRTP retreat?, 2) What mixed methods concepts are easier or harder to learn virtually?, and 3) What do you think was missing from having the retreat online rather than in person?

Data analysis

Our evaluation employed a convergent mixed methods design [ 18 ], integrating an analysis of ratings pre- and post-retreat with analysis of open-ended responses provided by scholars after the retreat. Our quantitative analysis proceeded in 3 steps. First, we analyzed item-by-item baseline ratings of the extent to which scholars thought they “need to improve skills,” stratified into two groups (5 cohorts who attended in-person and 4 cohorts who attended online). The purpose of comparing the two groups at baseline on learning needs was to assess how similar the scholars in the in-person or online groups were in self-assessment of learning needs before attending the program. Second, to examine the change in scholar ratings of ability to “define or explain a concept” and in their ability to “apply to practical problems,” from before to after the retreat, we conducted paired t-tests. The goal was to compare the ratings before and after the retreat among scholars who attended the program in person to scholars who attended online. Third, we compared post-retreat ratings among in-person cohorts to online cohorts to gauge the effectiveness of the online training. We set statistical significance at α  < 0.05 as a guide to inference. We calculated Cohen’s d as a guide to the magnitude of differences [ 19 ]. SPSS Version 28 was employed for all analyses.

We analyzed qualitative data using a thematic analysis approach that consisted of reviewing all open-ended responses, conducting open coding based on the data, developing and refining a codebook, and identifying major themes [ 20 ]. We then compared the qualitative results for the in-person versus online cohorts to understand any thematic differences concerning retreat experiences and reactions.

Background and experiences of scholars

Scholars in the in-person ( n  = 59, 81%) and online ( n  = 52, 91%) cohorts reported their primary training was quantitative rather than qualitative or mixed methods, and scholars across cohorts commonly reported at least some exposure to mixed methods research (Table  1 ). However, most scholars did not have previous mixed methods training with 17 (23%) and 16 (28%) of the in-person and online cohorts, respectively, having previously completed a mixed methods course. While experiences were similar across in-person vs. online cohorts, there were two areas in which the scholars reported a statistically significant difference: a larger portion of the online cohorts reported writing a mixed methods application that received funding ( n  = 35, 48% in person; n  = 46, 81% online), and a smaller proportion of the online cohorts had given a local or institutional mixed methods presentation ( n  = 32, 44% in person; n  = 15, 26% online).

Self-identified need to improve skills in mixed methods

At baseline, scholars rated the extent to which they needed to improve specific mixed methods skills (Table  2 ). Overall, scholars endorsed a strong need to improve all mixed methods skills. The ratings between the in-person and online cohorts were not statistically significant for any item.

Change in self-ratings of skills after the retreat

Within cohorts.

For all domains, the differences in pre-post assessment scores were statistically significant for both the in-person and online cohorts in ability to define or explain concepts and to apply concepts to practical problems (left side of Table  3 ). In other words, on average scholars improved in both in-person and online cohorts.

Across cohorts

Online cohorts had significantly better self-ratings after the retreat than did in-person cohorts in ability to define or explain concepts and to apply concepts to practical problems (in sampling, data collection, analysis, and dissemination) but no significant differences in research questions and design / approach (rightmost column of Table  3 ).

Scholar reflections about online and in-person retreats

Goals of training.

In comparing in-person to online cohorts, discussions of the skills that scholars wanted to improve had no discernable differences. Scholars mentioned wanting to develop skills in the foundations of mixed methods research, how to write competitive proposals for funding, the use of the terminology of mixed methods research, and integrative analysis. In addition, some scholars expressed wanting to become a resource at their own institutions and providing training and mentoring to others.

Small group sessions

Scholars consistently reported appreciating being able to talk through their project and gaining feedback from experts in small group sessions. Some scholars expressed a preference for afternoon small group sessions, “The small group sessions felt the most helpful, but only because we can apply what we were learning from the morning lecture sessions” (online cohort 9). How participants discussed the benefits of the small group sessions or how they used the sessions did not depend on whether they had experienced the session in person or online.

Online participants described a tradeoff between the accessibility of a virtual retreat versus advantages of in-person training. One participant explained, “I liked the online format, as I do not have reliable childcare” (online cohort 8). Many of the scholars felt that there was an aspect of networking missing when the retreat was held fully online. As one scholar described, when learning online they, “miss getting to know the other fellows and forming lasting connections” (online cohort 9). However, an equal number of others reported that having a virtual retreat meant less hassle; for instance, they were able to join from their preferred location and did not have to travel. Some individuals specifically described the tradeoff of fewer networking opportunities for ease of attendance. One scholar wrote, being online “certainly loses some of the perks of in person connection building but made it equitable to attend” (online cohort 8).

Learning online

No clear difference in ease of learning concepts was described. A scholar explained: “Learning most concepts is essentially the same virtually versus in person” (online cohort 8). However, scholars described some concepts as easier to learn in one modality versus the other, for example, simpler concepts being more suited to learning virtually while complex concepts were better suited to in-person learning. There was notable variation though in the topics which scholars considered to be simple versus complex. For instance, one scholar noted that “I suppose developing the joint displays were a bit tougher virtually since you were not literally elbow to elbow” (online cohort 7) while another explained, “joint displays lend themselves to the zoom format” (online cohort 8).

Integrating survey responses and scholar reflections

In-person and online cohorts were comparable in professional experiences and ratings of the need to improve skills before attending the retreat, sharpening the focus on differences in self-rated skills associated with attendance online compared to in person. If anything, online attendees rated skills as good or better than in-person attendees. Open-ended questions revealed that, for the most part, scholar reflections on learning were similar across in-person and online cohorts. Whether learning the concept of “mixed methods integration” was more difficult online was a source of disagreement. Online attendance was associated with numerous advantages, and small group sessions were valued, regardless of format. Taken together, the evidence from nine cohorts shows that the online retreat was acceptable and as effective in improving self-rated skills as meeting in person.

Mixed methods have become indispensable to health services research from intervention development and testing [ 21 ] to implementation science [ 22 , 23 , 24 ]. We found that scholars participating in an interactive program to improve mixed methods skills reported significantly increased confidence in their ability to define or explain concepts and in their ability to apply the concepts to practical problems, whether the program was attended in-person or synchronously online. Scholars who participated in the online retreat had self-rated skill improvements as good or better than scholars who participated in person, and these improvements were relatively large as indicated by the Cohen’s d estimates. The online retreat appeared to be effective in increasing confidence in the use of mixed methods research in the health sciences and was acceptable to scholars. Our study deserves attention because the national need is so great for investigators with training in mixed methods to address complex behavioral health problems, community- and patient-centered research, and implementation research. No program has been evaluated as we have done here.

Aside from having written a funded mixed methods proposal, the online compared to earlier in person cohorts were comparable in experiences and need to improve specific skills. Within each cohort, scholars reported significant gains in self-rated skills on their ability to “define or explain” a concept and on their ability to “apply to practical problems” in domains essential to mixed methods research. However, consistent with our hypothesis that online training would be as effective as in person we found that online scholars reported better improvement in self-ratings in ability to define or explain concepts and to apply concepts to practical problems in sampling, data collection, analysis, and dissemination but no significant differences in research questions and design / approach. Better ratings in online cohorts could reflect differences in experience with mixed methods, secular changes in knowledge and availability of resources in mixed methods, and maturation of the program facilitated by continued modifications based on feedback from scholars and participating faculty [ 13 , 14 , 15 ].

Ratings related to the “analysis” domain, which includes the central concept of mixed methods integration, deserve notice since scholars rated this skill well below other domains at baseline. While both in-person and online cohorts improved after the retreat, and online cohorts improved substantially more than in-person cohorts, ratings for analysis after the retreat remained lower than for other domains. Scholars consistently have mentioned integration as a difficult concept, and our analysis here is limited to the retreat alone. Continued mentoring one year after the retreat and work on their proposal is built in to the MMRTP to enhance understanding of integration.

Several reviews point out the advantages of online training including savings in time, money, and greenhouse emissions [ 1 , 7 , 8 ]. Online conferences may increase the reach of training to international audiences, improve the diversity of speakers and attendees, facilitate attendance of persons with disabilities, and ease the burden of finding childcare [ 1 , 8 , 25 ]. Online training in health also appears to be effective [ 2 , 4 , 5 , 25 ], though studies are limited because often no skills were evaluated, no comparison groups were used, the response rate was low, or the sample size was small [ 1 , 6 ]. With the possible exception of networking, scholars found the online format was associated with advantages, including saving travel, maintaining work-family balance, and learning effectively. As scholars did discuss perceived increase in difficulty networking, deliberate effort needs to be directed at enhancing collaborations and mentorship [ 8 ]. The MMRTP was designed with components to facilitate networking during and beyond the retreat (e.g., small group sessions, one-on-one meetings, working with a consultant on a specific proposal).

Limitations of our study should be considered. First, the retreat was only one of several components of a mentoring program for faculty in the health sciences. Second, in-person and online cohorts represent different time periods spanning 9 years during which mixed methods applications to NIH and other funders have been increasing [ 9 ]. Third, the pre- and post-evaluations of ability to explain or define concepts, or to apply the concepts to practical problems, were based on self-report. Nevertheless, the pre-post retreat survey on self-rated skills uses a skills self-assessment form we developed [ 15 ], drawing from educational theory related to the epistemology of knowledge [ 26 , 27 ].

Despite the central role of mixed methods in health research, studies evaluating online methods training in the health sciences are nonexistent. Our study provides evidence that mixed methods training online was associated with the same increases in self-rated skills as persons attending online and can be a key component to increasing the capacity for mixed methods research in the health sciences.

Availability of data and materials

The datasets used and analysed during the current study are available from the corresponding author on reasonable request.

Abbreviations

Mixed Methods Research Training Program

Wilcha RJ. Effectiveness of Virtual Medical Teaching During the COVID-19 Crisis: Systematic Review. JMIR Med Educ. 2020;6(2):e20963.

Article   Google Scholar  

Pei L, Wu H. Does online learning work better than offline learning in undergraduate medical education? A systematic review and meta-analysis. Medical Education Online. 2019;24(1) https://doi.org/10.1080/10872981.2019.1666538

Barche A, Nayak V, Pandey A, Bhandarkar A, Nayak K. Student perceptions towards online learning in medical education during the COVID-19 pandemic: a mixed-methods study. F1000Res. 2022;11:979. https://doi.org/10.12688/f1000research.123582.1 .

Ebner C, Gegenfurtner A. Learning and Satisfaction in Webinar, Online, and Face-to-Face Instruction: A Meta-Analysis. Frontiers in Education. 2019;4(92) https://doi.org/10.3389/feduc.2019.00092

Randazzo M, Preifer R, Khamis-Dakwar R. Project-Based Learning and Traditional Online Teaching of Research Methods During COVID-19: An Investigation of Research Self-Efficacy and Student Satisfaction. Frontiers in Education. 2021;6(662850) https://doi.org/10.3389/feduc.2021.662850

Chan A, Cao A, Kim L, et al. Comparison of perceived educational value of an in-person versus virtual medical conference. Can Med Educ J. 2021;12(4):65–9. https://doi.org/10.36834/cmej.71975 .

Rubinger L, Gazendam A, Ekhtiari S, et al. Maximizing virtual meetings and conferences: a review of best practices. Int Orthop. 2020;44(8):1461–6. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00264-020-04615-9 .

Sarabipour S. Virtual conferences raise standards for accessibility and interactions. Elife. Nov 4 2020;9 https://doi.org/10.7554/eLife.62668

Coyle CE, Schulman-Green D, Feder S, et al. Federal funding for mixed methods research in the health sciences in the United States: Recent trends. J Mixed Methods Res. 2018;12(3):1–20.

Poth C, Munce SEP. Commentary – preparing today’s researchers for a yet unknown tomorrow: promising practices for a synergistic and sustainable mentoring approach to mixed methods research learning. Int J Multiple Res Approaches. 2020;12(1):56–64.

Creswell JW. Reflections on the MMIRA The Future of Mixed Methods Task Force Report. J Mixed Methods Res. 2016;10(3):215–9. https://doi.org/10.1177/1558689816650298 .

Hou S. A Mixed Methods Process Evaluation of an Integrated Course Design on Teaching Mixed Methods Research. Int J Sch Teach Learn. 2021;15(2):Article 8. https://doi.org/10.20429/ijsotl.2021.150208 .

Guetterman TC, Creswell J, Deutsch C, Gallo JJ. Process Evaluation of a Retreat for Scholars in the First Cohort: The NIH Mixed Methods Research Training Program for the Health Sciences. J Mix Methods Res. 2019;13(1):52–68. https://doi.org/10.1177/1558689816674564 .

Guetterman T, Creswell JW, Deutsch C, Gallo JJ. Skills Development and Academic Productivity of Scholars in the NIH Mixed Methods Research Training Program for the Health Sciences (invited publication). Int J Multiple Res Approach. 2018;10(1):1–17.

Guetterman T, Creswell JW, Wittink MN, et al. Development of a Self-Rated Mixed Methods Skills Assessment: The NIH Mixed Methods Research Training Program for the Health Sciences. J Contin Educ Health Prof. 2017;37(2):76–82.

Harnisch D, Shope RJ. Developing technology competencies to enhance assessment literate teachers. AACE; 2007:3053–3055.

DeVellis RF. Scale development: Theory and applications. 3rd ed. Sage; 2012.

Creswell JW, Plano Clark VL. Designing and Conducting Mixed Methods Research. 3rd ed. Sage Publications; 2017.

Cohen J. Statistical power analysis for the behavioral sciences. 3rd ed. Academic Press; 1988.

Boeije H. A purposeful approach to the constant comparative method in the analysis of qualitative interviews. Qual Quant. 2002;36:391–409.

Aschbrenner KA, Kruse G, Gallo JJ, Plano Clark VL. Applying mixed methods to pilot feasibility studies to inform intervention trials. Pilot Feasibility Stud. 2022;8(1):217–24. https://doi.org/10.1186/s40814-022-01178-x .

Palinkas LA. Qualitative and mixed methods in mental health services and implementation research. J Clin Child Adolesc Psychol. 2014;43(6):851–61.

Albright K, Gechter K, Kempe A. Importance of mixed methods in pragmatic trials and dissemination and implementation research. Acad Pediatr Sep-Oct. 2013;13(5):400–7. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.acap.2013.06.010 .

Palinkas L, Aarons G, Horwitz S, Chamberlain P, Hurlburt M, Landsverk J. Mixed methods designs in implementation research. Adm Policy Ment Health. 2011;38:44–53.

Ni AY. Comparing the Effectiveness of Classroom and Online Learning: Teaching Research Methods. J Public Affairs Educ. 2013;19(2):199–215. https://doi.org/10.1080/15236803.2013.12001730 .

Harnisch D, Shope RJ. Developing technology competencies to enhance assessment literate teachers. presented at: Society for Information Technology & Teacher Education International Conference; March 26, 2007 2007; San Antonio, Texas.

Guetterman TC. What distinguishes a novice from an expert mixed methods researcher? Qual Quantity. 2017;51:377–98.

Download references

Acknowledgements

The Mixed Methods Research Training Program is supported by the Office of Behavioral and Social Sciences Research under Grant R25MH104660. Participating institutes are the National Institute of Mental Health, National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute, National Institute of Nursing Research, and the National Institute on Aging.

Author information

Authors and affiliations.

Johns Hopkins University, Baltimore, MD, USA

Joseph J. Gallo & Sarah M. Murray

University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, MI, USA

John W. Creswell & Timothy C. Guetterman

Harvard University, Boston, MA, USA

Charles Deutsch

You can also search for this author in PubMed   Google Scholar

Contributions

All authors conceptualized the design of this study. TG analyzed the scholar data in evaluation of the program. TG and JG interpreted results and were major contributors in writing the manuscript. All authors read and approved the final manuscript.

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Timothy C. Guetterman .

Ethics declarations

Ethics approval and consent to participate.

The program was reviewed by the Johns Hopkins Institutional Review Board and was deemed exempt as educational research under United States 45 CFR 46.101(b), Category (2). Data were collected through an anonymous survey. Consent to participate was waived.

Consent for publication

Not applicable.

Competing interests

The authors declare no competing interests.

Additional information

Publisher’s note.

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Supplementary Information

Supplementary material 1, rights and permissions.

Open Access This article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License, which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons licence, and indicate if changes were made. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article's Creative Commons licence, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article's Creative Commons licence and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this licence, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ . The Creative Commons Public Domain Dedication waiver ( http://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/ ) applies to the data made available in this article, unless otherwise stated in a credit line to the data.

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article.

Gallo, J.J., Murray, S.M., Creswell, J.W. et al. Going virtual: mixed methods evaluation of online versus in-person learning in the NIH mixed methods research training program retreat. BMC Med Educ 24 , 882 (2024). https://doi.org/10.1186/s12909-024-05877-2

Download citation

Received : 15 January 2024

Accepted : 08 August 2024

Published : 16 August 2024

DOI : https://doi.org/10.1186/s12909-024-05877-2

Share this article

Anyone you share the following link with will be able to read this content:

Sorry, a shareable link is not currently available for this article.

Provided by the Springer Nature SharedIt content-sharing initiative

• Research training
• Mixed methods research
• Research capacity building
• Online education
• Teaching methods

BMC Medical Education

ISSN: 1472-6920

• Submission enquiries: [email protected]
• General enquiries: [email protected]

Competency-based Education

Mar 31, 2019

320 likes | 819 Views

Competency-based Education. Pat Trotter – KDE Barren River Area P-16 Council Meeting August 28, 2013. This?. Or This?. It’s time to make the leap to a competency-based system. Based on mastery of content and skills. Anywhere, Anytime Learning.

Share Presentation

• gary stager
• great ed tech learning
• educational landscape today
• actual examples
• www huffingtonpost com brit
• bring effort

Presentation Transcript

Competency-based Education Pat Trotter – KDE Barren River Area P-16 Council Meeting August 28, 2013

It’s time to make the leap to a competency-based system

Based on mastery of content and skills

Anywhere, Anytime Learning

Project-based learning is not necessarily COMPETENCY-BASED learning

Students receive timely, differentiated support based on their individual interests and learning needs

Fosters creativity

Supports Talent Development

It requires a culture shift

Competency-based education systems should include out-of-school programs.

“The more a student exhibits curiosity, which is rooted in interest, the more he or she can focus on, bring effort to, and engage in meaningful tasks” Expanding Minds and Opportunities

The Maker Movement http://www.huffingtonpost.com/brit-morin/what-is-the-maker-movemen_b_3201977.html http://techcrunch.com/2012/10/09/wireds-chris-anderson-todays-maker-movement-is-the-new-industrial-revolution-tctv/

Innovate to Learn Institute October 28-29, 2013 Lexington, KY Hosted by the University of Kentucky Supported by KDE Keynote speaker: Dr. Gary Stager

Co-author of Invent to Learn “Dr. Stager is one of the most courageous voices on the educational landscape today. He fights tirelessly to wake up the slumbering forces that guard the traditional fortress of “one size fits all” education. Gary’s presentations to educators around the world bring standing ovations – for his engaging, practical presentations packed with actual examples of great ed tech learning, along with his wry comedic style and provocative calls to action.” Peter H. Reynolds, award-winning author, animator and speaker.

Contact: [email protected] 502.564.4201

• More by User

Introduction to Competency-Based Residency Education

Objectives. Upon completion of this module, Program Directors and faculty will be able to:State foundational concepts of the Outcome ProjectState the requirements related to the general competencies in the Common Program Requirements Describe expectations of the Outcome Project timelines . What is Competency-based Education?.

571 views • 21 slides

Competency Based Training

Competency Based Training. Objectives. By the end of this session the participants will be able to: Describe the components of competency based training List the importance of competency based training. What is Competence/Competency?. Competent: Prepared to provide safe services.

1.05k views • 11 slides

Competency-based interviews

Competency-based interviews. “Past, demonstrated behavior is the best indicator of future performance”. Values and Competencies. Values: Shared principles and beliefs that underpin the Organization’s work and guide actions and behaviours of staff Competencies:

409 views • 14 slides

COMPETENCY-BASED EDUCATION FOR PUBLIC HEALTH

COMPETENCY-BASED EDUCATION FOR PUBLIC HEALTH. C. William Keck MD, MPH March 26, 2010 APTR. Public Health’s Philosophical Renaissance. 1988 IOM Report – The Future of Public Health Practice/academic disconnect, 3 core functions 1988 – Faculty/Agency Forum

367 views • 11 slides

COMPETENCY BASED EDUCATION SYSTEM

COMPETENCY BASED EDUCATION SYSTEM . Prof. S. BALAKRISHNAN Professor In-charge &amp; Prof. &amp; Head / EEE Mepco Schlenk Engineering College Sivakasi . INTRODUCTION Existing Academic Structure. Lacks Competent manpower for industries Existing manpower is unemployed or under employed

647 views • 21 slides

Dental Hygiene Education “Competency-Based”

Dental Hygiene Education “Competency-Based”. Dental Accreditation Commission Foothill Dental Hygiene Program Competencies Integrated into Curriculum ePortfolios as Evaluation. Four Core Competencies. • Process of Patient Care • Health Ed. Strategies • Infection &amp; Hazard Control

335 views • 8 slides

What is Competency Based Education?

Competency Based Education Financial Aid Overview WASFAA – Reno, NV Lesley Phelps, Vice President, Regent Education Bob Collins, Vice President, WGU April 14, 2014. What is Competency Based Education? . The decoupling of seat time from academic progress

635 views • 0 slides

Competency-based Education (CBE) A Path Forward

Competency-based Education (CBE) A Path Forward. Dr. Ross Wirth [email protected] . IACBE Annual Conference – April 9, 2014. Objectives for Today. What is “competency-based education?” What leading schools are doing

1.58k views • 63 slides

Competency Based Education and Interdisciplinary Care Coordination

Competency Based Education and Interdisciplinary Care Coordination. Implications for Health Care Professional Education. Patricia J. Volland Director, Social Work Leadership Institute May 24, 2011. Frame Work for Healthcare Professional Education.

502 views • 22 slides

Overview: Competency-Based Education &amp; Evaluation

Overview: Competency-Based Education &amp; Evaluation. Dr. Deborah M. Fournier Assistant Provost for Institutional Research &amp; Evaluation Boston University Medical December 7, 2009. Competency-based Education.

712 views • 28 slides

Competency-based Education. Pat Trotter – KDE Cumberland River Area P-16 Council Meeting August 16, 2013. “I cannot teach anybody anything, I can only make them think.” Socrates. This?. Or This?. It is time to step into the Competency-based Education arena. Anywhere, Anytime Learning.

564 views • 19 slides

Enhancing Competency Based Training Through the Screening, Selection, and Performance Evaluation of Psychology Interns. Paul Robins, Ph.D 1,2 ., Thomas Power, Ph.D 1,2 ., Mary Rourke,Ph.D 1 ., Melissa Alderfer, Ph.D 1,2 ., Cathi Grus, Ph.D 3 ., &amp; Marley Watkins, Ph.D 4

529 views • 29 slides

COMPETENCY BASED TRAINING

COMPETENCY BASED TRAINING. Michigan Department of Community Health OPHP Technical Advisory Committee Rosemarie Rowney, MPH RN Director of Training February 9, 2004. What is a competency?. An extension of the agencies general vision A complex combination

1.32k views • 12 slides

COMPETENCY BASED ASSESSMENT

COMPETENCY BASED ASSESSMENT. Contents. Terminologies What is CBE? Characteristics of CBE Elements of CBE Competency based assessment Differences between traditional and competency based assessment Types of CBA approaches. What is Competency based education ?.

10.4k views • 69 slides

Competency Based Assessment

Competency Based Assessment. Baraa Alghalyini SAPIC Dec 1 st 2012. Today. Define Competency Based Assessment Discuss CBA goals, tools, limitations and, unintended effects. What is Competence in Medicine?. Epstien RM, JAMA 2002

1.95k views • 50 slides

GME Faculty Development: Competency-Based Education

GME Faculty Development: Competency-Based Education. May 28, 2010. Why Are You Here?. What Do You Want to Get Out of These Sessions?. Objectives. To Review the 6 Core Competencies To Understand Competency-Based Goals and Objectives To Explore Evaluation Techniques to Assess the Competencies

744 views • 44 slides

Competency-based Interviews

Competency-based Interviews. Chapter 7. What is a “Competency”?. Competency – A skill, trait, quality or characteristic that contributes to a person’s ability to perform the duties and responsibilities of a job effectively. Tangible (technical) skills Knowledge Skills Abilities.

278 views • 5 slides

Promoting Competency-Based Education

Promoting Competency-Based Education. Key directions for the future. Goal Strategies to foster competencies and skills needed in the labour market. Lessons learned. Wide variations by university, by region, by faculty, by department

354 views • 16 slides

COMPETENCY BASED EDUCATION SYSTEM. Prof. S. BALAKRISHNAN Professor In-charge &amp; Prof. &amp; Head / EEE Mepco Schlenk Engineering College Sivakasi. INTRODUCTION Existing Academic Structure. Lacks Competent manpower for industries Existing manpower is unemployed or under employed

745 views • 21 slides

Introduction to Competency-Based Residency Education. Joyce, 2006. What is Competency-Based Education?. Competency-based education focuses on learner performance (learning outcomes) in reaching specific objectives (goals and objectives of the curriculum). What is the Outcome Project?.

644 views • 40 slides

397 views • 29 slides

172 views • 11 slides