Implementation and Evaluation Report

Jasmine D. Hill
Walden University

Dr. Ronald Paige

EIDT-6910
Capstone: Practical Application of Instructional Design
June 22, 2015

Implementation and Evaluation Report

Implementation Overview
Mid-South Urgent Care (MSUC) received a professional development course with topics that
covered team building, patient relations and conflict resolution. This development course was
not mandatory and the expected participation was four MSUC staff. On the day of the
implementation only two participated from MSUC. The manager and I were able to find two
other participants, who worked in the healthcare field, to have the minimal participants for the
exercises. The implementation occurred at the urgent care facility after hours and in the waiting
area. This allowed the best space and practice for the implementation.
During the implementation, all of the participants were engaged during the scenario exercise.
Although there were only two scenarios, the time given was not enough time to fully act out and
give proper feedback from peers. During the team building exercises all of the participants
appeared comfortable with each other and acted out their roles accordingly. However, during the
Hear No Wrong, See No Right exercise there was not enough room to execute the instructions
especially with multiple teams at once. During this exercise, we did have to improvise and have
everyone take turns in different roles. This did take more time than assumed taking away from
the patient relations section.
As we entered the patient relations section of the development course, time was running short.
Due to this not being mandatory for MSUC staff and having volunteers step in, they were given
the choice to continue with the patient relations development or to stop and wrap up the session.
Everyone decided to stay an extra thirty minutes to do their research and discuss their findings

with their peers. As a result, everyone was able to complete the developmental course regardless
of time constraint being the biggest concern throughout the course.
Analysis of Assessment and Evaluation Data
Learning assessments before the course was given by the manager of MSUC. She provided the
staff with an anonymous box for them to ask questions about their duties or to comment on what
they would like to learn. Furthermore, to provide specific needs and to determine any prerequisites was determined after shadowing the MSUC facility and its staff for a day. It was then
compelling that most of them wanted to have better communication with each other and learn
how to handle patient relations/conflicts.
During the course several assessments or rubrics were used to determine if the faculty can come
together and agree upon facility standards, strategies and regulations. Due to only having two of
MSUCs staff available to adequately give input for this assessment, it was difficult to have all of
them be in agreeance to a set of standards. However, they were successfully able to write down
individual strategies, regulations and standards that they felt were necessary for a healthcare
facility to implement on a general level. As we moved forward to the team building exercises
and scenarios, they were each evaluated on participation, leadership, communication, interaction
between other learners and contribution to the peer to peer discussions. There was 100% of
participation with all of the learners. Each one of them contributed fully to all of the exercises
and scenarios. Again, due to our time constraints I did not have time to fully assess the learners
on the patient relations section of the course. However, they were made aware of the importance
of reaching out to their patients, providing quality care for all patients and being knowledgeable
not only in their job duties, but also about their community to provide the best patient care.
Assessments after the course were provided to the learners to take within three days of

completion. All of them did comply and gave feedback on the instructor/facilitator and the
course work. The facilitator evaluation consisted of seven questions and the course evaluation
had five questions. Some of the results for the course evaluation concluded: three out of four
strongly agreed that this course provided appropriate instruction between instruction and
practice. Three people were satisfied with the overall course while one was somewhat satisfied
with the overall course. Below you will find a representation (picture1) of some of the questions
and answered for the course evaluation. The facilitator evaluation answers were answered 90%
mostly effective and agreed responses from all four participants. You will also find a
representation (picture 2) on the type of questions that were asked for the Facilitator Evaluation.

(Picture 1)

(Picture 2)

In conclusion the participants found a connection with the course and how important building a
working relationship can make a difference in their environment. Because two of the
participants were not a part of MSUCs staff, I cannot fully assess how well the material will
transfer to specific job duties. In order to get further results on how well the participants
retained, I would have to do a follow up in another month.