Date: Wednesday, May 27, 2026
Hi readers! We are Je’Kylynn Steen and Kim Gregson with Collaborators Consulting Group. CCG is a team of researchers, evaluators, and strategists who help organizations advance sustainable, transformative change through collaborative, utilization-focused research and evaluation.
In this post, we share our process for designing a student advisory board (SAB) in our external evaluation of the NSF-funded National Research Traineeship (NRT) quantum engineering and technology programs at Colorado School of Mines (Mines) and San Jose State University (SJSU).
How often have you seen STEM evaluations use traditional approaches to understand highly innovative programs? Surveys, interviews, and focus groups are important tools for measuring program success, but they often position students as respondents. Sometimes this means evaluations miss a major opportunity to tap into students’ knowledge, creativity, and desire to help strengthen their own programs.
In our partnership with the innovative, interdisciplinary Mines & SJSU quantum education programs, we saw an opportunity for the evaluation itself to become a space where student leadership could be practiced, not just measured. In line with CCG’s core commitment to collaborative practices, as well as positive youth development and participatory action research, we set out with program faculty to design a SAB, positioning students as agents of change and true learning partners.
To form the SAB, program faculty across both universities shared an invitation with students, and interested students completed a brief interest form. Faculty, staff, and our evaluation team then collaborated to identify students representing a range of experiences and perspectives, rather than only the most engaged or satisfied students.
From the start, we made the SAB’s purpose clear and framed participation as meaningful influence rather than symbolic involvement (see Mines-SJSU SAB Purpose & Goals). SAB members contributed to defining evaluation priorities, refining survey and focus group tools, and encouraging peer participation in data collection. One of these fantastic students even co-presented with our CCG team at the NSF NRT annual conference in March 2026 about the value of the SAB, which sparked meaningful engagement from other NSF evaluators and project directors.
In May 2026, our team will facilitate a collaborative process with SAB members and program faculty to review findings, identify themes that resonate across perspectives, and co-develop actionable recommendations for program leadership. We are especially looking forward to facilitating and learning from this sensemaking process, because it reflects the deeper purpose of the SAB: not only gathering student feedback but creating a structured space where students can help make meaning of the data and inform decisions about the program’s future.
Our biggest takeaway so far is that SABs in higher-education or STEM settings are most effective when they are intentionally designed for shared ownership and authentic collaboration. It is not enough to invite students into the room. Evaluators and program leaders also need to be clear about what decisions students can influence, how their perspectives will be used, and how feedback will flow back to them. When designed with intentionality, SABs can help shift students from being sources of data to partners in learning and change.
A student advisory board need not be overly complicated. We recommend:
The American Evaluation Association is hosting STEM Education and Training TIG Week with our colleagues in the STEM Education and Training Topical Interest Group. The contributions all this week to AEA365 come from our STEM Education and Training TIG members. Do you have questions, concerns, kudos, or content to extend this AEA365 contribution? Please add them in the comments section for this post on the AEA365 webpage so that we may enrich our community of practice. Would you like to submit an AEA365 Tip? Please send a note of interest to AEA365@eval.org. AEA365 is sponsored by the American Evaluation Association and provides a Tip-a-Day by and for evaluators. The views and opinions expressed on the AEA365 blog are solely those of the original authors and other contributors. These views and opinions do not necessarily represent those of the American Evaluation Association, and/or any/all contributors to this site.