Evaluating the Performance of the Academic Coordinator of Clinical Education in Physical Therapist Education: Determining Appropriate Criteria and Assessors

Journal of Physical Therapy Education, Fall 2006 by Buccieri, Kathleen M, Brown, Renee

In the category of Administration (Table 2), the 3 evaluative criteria - Provides a method for student feedback regarding the clinical experience, Communicates program expectations effectively to sites, and Requests slots in a timely manner-were cited most often (50.9%-55.3%) as extremely important. The academic department chairs and CCCEs were cited most often as sources of input to evaluate performance on the Administrative criteria. When very important and extremely important responses were summed, all criteria in the administration category were valued by greater than 50% of respondents.

Teaching (Table B) was reported most frequently to be extremely important for evaluation for promotion and/or tenure, with more than 80% of the respondents indicating that every criterion was extremely important or very important. The 3 criteria rated the most frequently as extremely important were: Able to resolve learning difficulties during the affiliation, Is accessible and responsive to concerns, and Demonstrates knowledge regarding clinical education. The respondents indicated that a wide variety of individuals would be appropriate to provide input into evaluation of these criteria. All of the listed individuals on the questionnaire (students, CIs, CCCEs, academic faculty, academic department chairs, and affiliation coordinators from other departments within the school) were rated as qualified to provide feedback to the ACCE in the area of teaching.

Scholarship (Table 4) results rank behind Teaching and Administration, with 31% or less of the respondents reporting that the listed criteria were extremely important. There was a wide variety of responses to the value of the criteria under Scholarship. When extremely important and very important responses were summed, 4 of the 7 criteria were above 50%. Presenting at professional meetings and Publishing in peerreviewed journals were reported most frequently (B 1.6% and 30.2%, respectively) as extremely or very important, followed by Develops a research focus and Effectively supervises student research. Items that were not rated extremely important or very important by at least 50% of the respondents were: Secures grant funding, Publishes chapters or books, and Serves as an article reviewer. The academic department chair and academic faculty were cited most often (ranges of 88.9%-94.0% and 32.5%-55.9%, respectively) as individuals qualified to provide feedback on Scholarship criteria.

In the category of Service (Table 5) only 1 criterion, Involvement in professional physical therapy organizations, was ranked as extremely important by over 50% of respondents. Involvement in clinical education consortia or a special-interest group (SIC) was marked extremely important by 45.8% of those responding. When the extremely important and very important responses were combined, over 50% of respondents valued the following criteria: Provides in-services for clinical sites, Provides service on departmental committees, Participates in community service, and Provides service on university committees. Academic department chairs and other academic faculty were cited most frequently as individuals qualified to provide input when evaluating the ACCE's participation in service activities.