|
What do you Mean When I say…: A Serendipitous Lesson in Evaluation Design
|
| Presenter(s):
|
| Dan Kaczynski,
University of West Florida,
dkaczys@uwf.edu
|
| Leigh Wood,
Macquarie University,
leigh.wood@mq.edu.au
|
| Abstract:
This paper explores the unexpected significance of terminology in evaluation design. The study was an external formative evaluation sponsored by an Australian university interested in critically examining their implementation of enrollment changes in undergraduate course delivery. The evaluation focused on documenting changes in instructional delivery related to enrollment reduction and establish baseline data on student performance and satisfaction.
During question construction of the qualitative interview guide the external evaluator developed a translation key of academic vocabulary terms. This step was necessary because the external evaluator was from the United States. Although the external evaluator and the stakeholders spoke English, significant differences in meanings of Australian English and United States English became immediately apparent. This design issue was initially considered necessary but insignificant. To the contrary, the translation key revealed more complex meanings during data collection and led to insightful serendipitous results.
|
|
Using Qualitative Methods to Negotiate Racial Identity and Insider/Outsider Status With Stakeholders and Participants
|
| Presenter(s):
|
| Corrie Davis,
Georgia State University,
cdavis@gsu.edu
|
| Sheryl Gowen,
Georgia State University,
sgowen@gsu.edu
|
| Syreeta Skelton,
Georgia State University,
snskelton@gsu.edu
|
| Abstract:
Evaluators that employ qualitative methods are charged with the responsibility of providing voice to participants. Before any interviews or observations are conducted, evaluators must first negotiate between their racial identity and the identity of the various stakeholders in the project. As the lines between an insider and outsider become blurred, it is imperative that a discussion of race enter the dialogue regarding quality evaluative methods. Utilizing examples and experiences from the authors' (with different racial identities) work on a large-scale, multi-site grant, this presentation will focus on how the dynamics of race and ethnic identity mediate qualitative evaluation process and findings.
|
|
Do You See What I See? Do You Hear What I Hear?: Researcher's Role and Subjectivity in Fieldwork Evaluation Experiences, a Student Researcher's Perspective
|
| Presenter(s):
|
| Quiana Cutts,
Georgia State University,
qcutts1@gsu.student.edu
|
| Janice Fournillier,
Georgia State University,
jfournillier@gsu.edu
|
| Sheryl Gowen,
Georgia State University,
sgowen@gsu.edu
|
| Abstract:
The lenses through which we view the world shape our perceptions, experiences, and ideas. Inasmuch as these lenses are created from varied classed, raced, and gendered identities, they under gird a researcher/evaluator's assumptions when conducting research and doing program evaluation. In this respect, researchers/evaluators must be willing to openly address issues of class, race, and gender; and scrutinize how those various identities affect perception of data collected in fieldwork experiences. As evident, researchers/evaluators are encouraged to be self-reflexive with self-reflexivity considered as a problematic, nuanced, complex, and critical entity. In this paper, we focus on the affects of researcher subjectivity on fieldwork experiences in program evaluation as well as the researcher/evaluator's self-reflective practices. By considering subjectivity within this methodological framework, we hope to provide a depiction of the complex nature of researcher self-reflexivity in evaluation research.
|
| | |