Clearing the confusion about post-accreditation monitoring, meta-evaluation and meta-accreditation

Abstract We have recently published the experience of the accreditation body of undergraduate medical education in Iran on developing and validating standards based on the WFME framework (Gandomkar et al., BMC Med Educ 23:379, 2023). Agabagheri et al. extended our work and proposed a blueprint for p...

Full description

Bibliographic Details
Main Authors: Roghayeh Gandomkar, Azim Mirzazadeh, Tahereh Changiz
Format: Article
Language:English
Published: BMC 2024-03-01
Series:BMC Medical Education
Subjects:
Online Access:https://doi.org/10.1186/s12909-024-05214-7
_version_ 1797266763617927168
author Roghayeh Gandomkar
Azim Mirzazadeh
Tahereh Changiz
author_facet Roghayeh Gandomkar
Azim Mirzazadeh
Tahereh Changiz
author_sort Roghayeh Gandomkar
collection DOAJ
description Abstract We have recently published the experience of the accreditation body of undergraduate medical education in Iran on developing and validating standards based on the WFME framework (Gandomkar et al., BMC Med Educ 23:379, 2023). Agabagheri et al. extended our work and proposed a blueprint for post-accreditation monitoring based on their experience in developing an official guide in their Matters Arising (Aghabagheri et al., BMC Med Educ). The authors have used post-accreditation monitoring as a process of monitoring and controlling accreditation activities, procedures often referred to as meta-evaluation or meta-accreditation (depending on the objectives of evaluation) in the literature. On the contrary, post-accreditation monitoring alludes to the process of continuous quality improvement of educational programs after accreditation. We would like to make clarifications between post-accreditation monitoring, meta-evaluation and meta-accreditation which have been used interchangeably in their paper. Considering the emerging interests in scholarship and non-scholarship activities and reports in undergraduate medical education accreditation, this clarification provides a better understanding of the roles of these crucial concepts in the accreditation process.
first_indexed 2024-04-25T01:05:52Z
format Article
id doaj.art-4fdd24dec296431aac4815ecc84402a2
institution Directory Open Access Journal
issn 1472-6920
language English
last_indexed 2024-04-25T01:05:52Z
publishDate 2024-03-01
publisher BMC
record_format Article
series BMC Medical Education
spelling doaj.art-4fdd24dec296431aac4815ecc84402a22024-03-10T12:15:24ZengBMCBMC Medical Education1472-69202024-03-012411310.1186/s12909-024-05214-7Clearing the confusion about post-accreditation monitoring, meta-evaluation and meta-accreditationRoghayeh Gandomkar0Azim Mirzazadeh1Tahereh Changiz2Department of Medical Education, School of Medicine, Tehran University of Medical SciencesDepartment of Internal Medicine, School of Medicine, Tehran University of Medical SciencesDepartment of Medical Education, Isfahan University of Medical SciencesAbstract We have recently published the experience of the accreditation body of undergraduate medical education in Iran on developing and validating standards based on the WFME framework (Gandomkar et al., BMC Med Educ 23:379, 2023). Agabagheri et al. extended our work and proposed a blueprint for post-accreditation monitoring based on their experience in developing an official guide in their Matters Arising (Aghabagheri et al., BMC Med Educ). The authors have used post-accreditation monitoring as a process of monitoring and controlling accreditation activities, procedures often referred to as meta-evaluation or meta-accreditation (depending on the objectives of evaluation) in the literature. On the contrary, post-accreditation monitoring alludes to the process of continuous quality improvement of educational programs after accreditation. We would like to make clarifications between post-accreditation monitoring, meta-evaluation and meta-accreditation which have been used interchangeably in their paper. Considering the emerging interests in scholarship and non-scholarship activities and reports in undergraduate medical education accreditation, this clarification provides a better understanding of the roles of these crucial concepts in the accreditation process.https://doi.org/10.1186/s12909-024-05214-7Post-accreditation monitoringMeta-evaluationMeta-accreditation
spellingShingle Roghayeh Gandomkar
Azim Mirzazadeh
Tahereh Changiz
Clearing the confusion about post-accreditation monitoring, meta-evaluation and meta-accreditation
BMC Medical Education
Post-accreditation monitoring
Meta-evaluation
Meta-accreditation
title Clearing the confusion about post-accreditation monitoring, meta-evaluation and meta-accreditation
title_full Clearing the confusion about post-accreditation monitoring, meta-evaluation and meta-accreditation
title_fullStr Clearing the confusion about post-accreditation monitoring, meta-evaluation and meta-accreditation
title_full_unstemmed Clearing the confusion about post-accreditation monitoring, meta-evaluation and meta-accreditation
title_short Clearing the confusion about post-accreditation monitoring, meta-evaluation and meta-accreditation
title_sort clearing the confusion about post accreditation monitoring meta evaluation and meta accreditation
topic Post-accreditation monitoring
Meta-evaluation
Meta-accreditation
url https://doi.org/10.1186/s12909-024-05214-7
work_keys_str_mv AT roghayehgandomkar clearingtheconfusionaboutpostaccreditationmonitoringmetaevaluationandmetaaccreditation
AT azimmirzazadeh clearingtheconfusionaboutpostaccreditationmonitoringmetaevaluationandmetaaccreditation
AT taherehchangiz clearingtheconfusionaboutpostaccreditationmonitoringmetaevaluationandmetaaccreditation