This chapter proposes approaches for assessing learners and evaluating courses and curriculum that could be used by directors of health professions education (HPE) programs to determine the effectiveness and impact of their programs.

Critical thinking is a socially constructed, contextual process not well measured by standardized tests. Better, locally grounded methods are pre/posttest (scenario building), experiential (critical practice audit), behavioral (critical debate), and conversational (storytellers and detectives). (SK)

Methods of preparing for and conducting an adult education program evaluation are discussed: using standards and quality indicators, involving stakeholders, collecting program information, conducting a self-evaluation, and participating in the exit interview. (SK)

Presents the purposes, strengths, and weaknesses of these assessment methods for adult basic education: standardized, criterion referenced, curriculum based, performance based, and informal. Discusses ways to establish a supportive assessment environment. (SK)

Assessing effective transfer of training is best done from multiple perspectives: (1) transfer--evidence of skill use in context; (2) enlightenment--what counts as knowledge use; (3) application--evidence of ideas and principles learned; (4) diffusion--spread of innovation over time; and (5) implementation--effects of power, access, and structure…

Summarizes themes from the articles in this issue: distinction between evaluation and assessment, innovation, bias, integration into program delivery, and transfer. (SK)