Rubric for evaluating online courses in Digital Health

Authors

  • Denise de Cássia Moreira Zornoff Universidade Estadual Paulista
  • Juliano de Souza Gaspar Universidade Federal de Minas Gerais
  • Maria Elisabete Salvador Unifesp
  • Gilberto Vieira Branco Rede Nacional de Ensino e Pesquisa
  • Paulo Roberto de Lima Lopes Rede Nacional de Ensino e Pesquisa
  • Luiz Ary Messina Rede Nacional de Ensino e Pesquisa

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.59681/2175-4411.v16.iEspecial.2024.1323

Keywords:

Professional Training, Telemedicine, Education, Distance

Abstract

Objective: Rubric tools can bring objectivity when evaluating online courses in the health area, in addition to contributing to improving the effectiveness of the educational proposal. This study describes the evaluation process of the Digital Health Professional Update Program courses based on a rubric instrument. Method: Study of implementation of the online course evaluation process, selection of the rubric instrument, determination of analysis variables, application of the rubric and evaluation report. Results: The Open SUNY Course Quality Review (OSCQR) rubric instrument allowed us to detail multiple aspects related to the courses, including their design, methodologies and student evaluation strategies, in addition to revealing the intrinsic quality of the content that makes up the courses and the limitations that deserve attention from the authors. Conclusions: The adoption of the OSCQR rubric brought security and objectivity to the evaluation of the courses and indicated opportunities to promote the development of professionals working in the area of ​​Digital Health.

Author Biographies

Denise de Cássia Moreira Zornoff, Universidade Estadual Paulista

Dr. Prof., Faculdade de Medicina, Universidade Estadual Paulista, Botucatu (SP), Brasil.

Juliano de Souza Gaspar, Universidade Federal de Minas Gerais

Dr. Prof., Faculdade de Medicina, Universidade Federal de Minas Gerais, Belo Horizonte (MG), Brasil.

Maria Elisabete Salvador, Unifesp

Professor Associado, Departamento de Informática em Saúde, Escola Paulista de Medicina, Unifesp, São Paulo (SP), Brasil

Gilberto Vieira Branco, Rede Nacional de Ensino e Pesquisa

Mestre, Diretoria Adjunta de Relacionamento Institucional para Saúde, Rede Nacional de Ensino e Pesquisa, Rio de Janeiro (RJ), Brasil.

Paulo Roberto de Lima Lopes, Rede Nacional de Ensino e Pesquisa

Doutor, Diretoria Adjunta de Relacionamento Institucional, Rede Nacional de Ensino e Pesquisa, Rio de Janeiro (RJ), Brasil.

Luiz Ary Messina, Rede Nacional de Ensino e Pesquisa

Doutor, Rede Universitária de Telemedicina (RUTE), Diretoria Adjunta de Relacionamento Institucional, Rede Nacional de Ensino e Pesquisa, Rio de Janeiro (RJ), Brasil.

References

Ali S, Uppal MA, Gulliver SR. A conceptual framework highlighting e-learning implementation barriers. Inf Technol People. 1o de janeiro de 2018;31(1):156–80.

Vaona A, Banzi R, Kwag KH, Rigon G, Cereda D, Pecoraro V, et al. E-learning for health professionals. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 21 de janeiro de 2018;1(1):CD011736.

Dede C, Grotzer T, Kamarainen A, Metcalf S. Designing immersive authentic simulations that enhance motivation and learning. J Learn Sci Theory Res Pract. 2019;229–59.

Ferraz AP do CM, Belhot RV. Taxonomia de Bloom: revisão teórica e apresentação das adequações do instrumento para definição de objetivos instrucionais. Gest Produção. 2010;17:421–31.

Alturkistani A, Lam C, Foley K, Stenfors T, Blum ER, Van Velthoven MH, et al. Massive Open Online Course Evaluation Methods: Systematic Review. J Med Internet Res. 27 de abril de 2020;22(4):e13851.

Awidi IT, Paynter M, Vujosevic T. Facebook group in the learning design of a higher education course: An analysis of factors influencing positive learning experience for students. Comput Educ. 1o de fevereiro de 2019;129:106–21.

Frydenberg J. Quality Standards in eLearning: A matrix of analysis. Int Rev Res Open Distrib Learn [Internet]. 1o de outubro de 2002 [citado 1o de maio de 2024];3(2). Disponível em: https://www.irrodl.org/index.php/irrodl/article/view/109

Kirkpatrick J, Kirkpatrick W. Kirkpatrick 's Four Levels of Training Evaluation [Internet]. Alexandria VA: ATD Press; 2016 [citado 1o de maio de 2024]. Disponível em: https://www.kirkpatrickpartners.com/product/kirkpatricks-four-levels-of-training-evaluation

Macedo KD da S, Acosta BS, Silva EB da, Souza NS de, Beck CLC, Silva KKD da. Metodologias ativas de aprendizagem: caminhos possíveis para inovação no ensino em saúde. Esc Anna Nery. 2 de julho de 2018;22(3):e20170435.

Rogers L, De Brún A, McAuliffe E. Defining and assessing context in healthcare implementation studies: a systematic review. BMC Health Serv Res. 29 de junho de 2020;20(1):591.

Bauer MS, Damschroder L, Hagedorn H, Smith J, Kilbourne AM. An introduction to implementation science for the non-specialist. BMC Psychol. 16 de setembro de 2015;3(1):32.

Brasil. Resolução CNS No 510/2016 [Internet]. 2016. Disponível em: https://conselho.saude.gov.br/resolucoes/2016/Reso510.pdf

SUNY. OSCQR – SUNY Online Course Quality Review Rubric [Internet]. 2024 [citado 1o de maio de 2024]. Disponível em: https://oscqr.suny.edu/

SUNY. SUNY Online Teaching [Internet]. 2024 [citado 2 de maio de 2024]. Disponível em: https://online.suny.edu/onlineteaching/

olc. Online Learning Consortium (OLC) - Enhancing Remote Learning [Internet]. 2024 [citado 2 de maio de 2024]. Disponível em: https://onlinelearningconsortium.org/

Baldwin S, Ching YH, Hsu YC. Online Course Design in Higher Education: A Review of National and Statewide Evaluation Instruments. TechTrends. 1o de janeiro de 2018;62(1):46–57.

RNP. Rede Nacional de Ensino e Pesquisa - RNP [Internet]. 2024 [citado 1o de maio de 2024]. Disponível em: https://www.rnp.br/sobre/governanca/estatuto

Seaborn. Seaborn Heatmap Documentation [Internet]. 2024 [citado 1o de maio de 2024]. Disponível em: https://seaborn.pydata.org/generated/seaborn.heatmap.html

Wutoh R, Boren SA, Balas EA. eLearning: a review of Internet-based continuing medical education. J Contin Educ Health Prof. 2004;24(1):20–30.

Fontaine G, Cossette S, Maheu-Cadotte MA, Mailhot T, Deschênes MF, Mathieu-Dupuis G, et al. Efficacy of adaptive e-learning for health professionals and students: a systematic review and meta-analysis. BMJ Open. 28 de agosto de 2019;9(8):e025252.

Aldowah H, Al-Samarraie H, Alzahrani AI, Alalwan N. Factors affecting student dropout in MOOCs: a cause and effect decision‐making model. J Comput High Educ. 1o de agosto de 2020;32(2):429–54.

Stracke CM, Downes S, Conole G, Burgos D, Nascimbeni F. Are MOOCs Open Educational Resources? A literature review on history, definitions and typologies of OER and MOOCs. Open Prax. 31 de dezembro de 2019;11(4):331.

Stracke CM, Tan E. The Quality of Open Online Learning and Education: Towards a Quality Reference Framework for MOOCs. julho de 2018 [citado 5 de maio de 2024]; Disponível em: https://repository.isls.org//handle/1/549

Stracke CM, Trisolini G. A Systematic Literature Review on the Quality of MOOCs. Sustainability. 2021;13(11).

Gilstad H, Skogen M, Toussaint P, Larsen CB, Faxvaag A. Negotiating scientific knowledge in the development of an eHealth MOOC. Educ Inf Technol. 1o de janeiro de 2023;28(1):13–36.

Wilkinson L, Friendly M. The History of the Cluster Heat Map. Am Stat. 1o de maio de 2009;63(2):179–84.

Porta M, Paragarino V, Czerwonogora A, Enríquez C, Casnati A, Marrero C. Rediseñar la Universidad digital: aperturas Reflexivas. 15 de agosto de 2023;

Published

2024-11-19

How to Cite

Zornoff, D. de C. M., Gaspar, J. de S., Salvador, M. E., Branco, G. V., Lopes, P. R. de L., & Messina, L. A. (2024). Rubric for evaluating online courses in Digital Health. Journal of Health Informatics, 16(Especial). https://doi.org/10.59681/2175-4411.v16.iEspecial.2024.1323

Similar Articles

<< < 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 > >> 

You may also start an advanced similarity search for this article.

Most read articles by the same author(s)

1 2 > >>