|
Approaching Extension Evaluation From the Beneficiaries Point of View
|
| Presenter(s):
|
| Virginia Gravina, Universidad de la republica, virginia@fagro.edu.uy
|
| Virginia Rossi, Universidad de la republica, cairossi@adinet.com.uy
|
| Pedro De Hegedus, Universidad de la republica, phegedus@adinet.com.uy
|
| Abstract:
This research study took place in Uruguay, South America, in order to evaluate the effect of an extension program, oriented towards rural development of a small community of beef cattle family farmers. The program was implemented during six years by a multidisciplinary extension team from the Universidad de la Republica. The program goal was generating social capital among beneficiaries.
This paper's purpose is to contribute to enrich extension evaluation practice by introducing Q 'methodology, as a powerful tool. Regarding extension, Q methodology, allowed us to bring out not only the cognitive domain, but also the affective one, which is, in the end the one that is going to determine what beneficiaries are really going to do.
Three different perceptions of the program results came up, that can be considered as the way beneficiaries understood their world; and can also be regarded, as their own evaluation, of the extension program.
|
|
Engaging Youth in Program Evaluation: Using Clickers to Make Evaluation Fun!
|
| Presenter(s):
|
| Lynne Borden, University of Arizona, bordenl@ag.arizona.edu
|
| Joyce Serido, University of Arizona, jserido@email.arizona.edu
|
| Christine Bracamonte-Wiggs, University of Arizona, cbmonte@email.arizona.edu
|
| Abstract:
There are many challenges in collecting program evaluation data from high risk and disenfranchised youth. Lack of trust and concerns about how the information will be used deters many youth from participating in focus groups or interviews. Many young people find filling in surveys, whether online or in paper/pencil format, to be boring and meaningless. Moreover, a growing number of our youth lack the reading skills needed to understand and accurately respond to the questions. Technology, specifically, wireless student response systems, or 'clickers,' may provide a promising alternative to collecting data with young people. In this session, we present our findings using clicker technology to evaluate community programs serving at-risk and disadvantaged youth populations in both urban and rural settings. We will administer an interactive survey during the session to provide participants a hands-on demonstration of the approach.
|
|
Evaluation Planning for 4-H Science, Engineering and Technology Programs: A Portfolio From Cornell Cooperative Extension
|
| Presenter(s):
|
| Monica Hargraves, Cornell University, mjh51@cornell.edu
|
| Abstract:
Science, Technology, Engineering and Mathematics education has become a national priority in many arenas, including the 4-H system. The Cornell Office for Research on Evaluation (CORE) is conducting an NSF-funded research project that established 'Evaluation Partnerships' with twenty Cornell Cooperative Extension Offices to develop Evaluation Plans for 4-H Science, Engineering and Technology (SET) programs. The Evaluation Partnerships follow a Systems Evaluation Protocol developed by CORE that includes stakeholder and lifecycle analyses, and logic and pathway modeling. The selected 4-H SET programs cover a range of science topic areas and program delivery modes. This paper describes and analyzes the evaluation plans developed by this cohort, and examines the types of evaluation questions, measures, and designs identified in these plans. Of particular interest are questions of commonality of needs and transferability of solutions. The paper considers the implications of this research for evaluation theory and practice.
|
| | |