Research Proposal on "Program Evaluation -- Things Happen Systematic Inquiry"

Home > Topics > Ethics & Morality My Account

Research Proposal 5 pages (1494 words) Sources: 0

[EXCERPT] . . . .

Program Evaluation -- Things Happen

Systematic Inquiry

The principle of systematic inquiry becomes obvious even before the evaluator took on the responsibility of surveying the program and its effects. Respecting this principle was a complex task due to the existence of a previous study and the need to review the direction and results of the already taken survey. It even constituted a reason that could have determined me not to take on the task. However, once I did, I was forced to properly conduct my own survey. Otherwise put, the work I was hired to perform and the existence of a previous study forced me to integrate the two sets of data into a single integrant set of findings. In order to achieve this desiderate while also following the principles of systematic inquiry, I decided to add some additional questions to the initial survey. The measure ensured that I would be able to consider the two types of information, increase the efficiency of the survey and come up with a unified conclusion.

Another instance that proves the following of the mentioned principle revolves around the numerous situations in which I engaged in open conversations with the staff members in order to form a clear and unbiased opinion. The conversations carried on for six months and were aimed to retrieve multifaceted arguments and opinions.

2. Competence

In terms of competence, the evaluator possessed sufficient skills and capabilities to handle the task at hand. Additionally, I enjoyed the experience of previous evaluation tasks, which helped me in the process of data collection. Additionally, I have decided to interview as many i

Continue scrolling to

download full paper ⤓

ndividuals as possible. In the previous section, this decision was explained through the desire to ensure the respectability of the systematic inquiry principle. However, at this stage, the interview of numerous stakeholders has also served the purpose of revealing high levels of competence on the part of the evaluator. It was as such necessary to engage in open conversations with more individuals in order to become acquainted with the multiple sides of the same story. This then ensured me with the ability to form an independent opinion, based on the more sides heard as well as the direct observations made within the working environment.

The objective of all these endeavors was to create an unbiased and objective conclusion. While the evaluator's competences were revealed at numerous stages of the evaluation process, the formation of the ultimate result was impeded by personal judgments and fears. This might lead to two conflicting conclusions. On the one hand, it could mean that the evaluator is biased and insufficiently capable to make an objective opinion. On the other hand, it could mean that the evaluator has not forgotten that the tasks he evaluates are about people and that realization could be in the overall benefit of the entire program.

3. Integrity/Honesty

The evaluator was honest and integrant at all stages of the evaluation processes. I commenced by clearly stating by reasons for the reluctance in taking on the evaluation, but in the end agreed that the job could still be done. Additionally, I engaged in open communications with various staff members and revealed compassion, understanding and most importantly, honesty at all stages of the conversation. The reason behind this integrant behavior is a twofold one, on the one hand being the actual nature of the evaluator and on the other hand being the requirement imposed by the job and the benefits such a behavior could generate. Otherwise put, honesty and integrity in the behavior of the evaluator generate honesty and integrity in the behavior of the interviewed persons, through the power of example. Despite these efforts however, the staff members at the support program chose to not disclose valuable pieces of information to the evaluator. This changed the entire course of the program, which could have been improved had the evaluator been told about the robbery incident, and placed the evaluator is an ethical dilemma.

Integrity was revealed in other instances as well, such as the communication of the means to be used in retrieving the necessary information. An instance that could cast a shadow of doubt upon the ultimate integrity of the evaluator is represented by the end of the support program, at which time the evaluator is uncertain on what his report should state.

4. Respect for People

The evaluation process was conducted with the utmost respect for all those involved, from the nurses interviewed to the staff members in charge… READ MORE

Download Full Paper

Write a New Paper for Me

Quoted Instructions for "Program Evaluation -- Things Happen Systematic Inquiry" Assignment:

“

The Scenario:

Things Happen

For the past 2 years, the local visiting nurses association has sponsored a program that provides a network of services to the elderly in low-income sections of the city. Less than a year ago, the association initiated a support program for the nurses who work in this intensive and demanding outreach effort. Shortly after the latter program began, you were hired to evaluate its impact on participants***** self-reported beliefs, attitudes, feelings, skills, and interests. At first you were reluctant to take on the job, given that the staff overseeing the support program had already administered a pretest survey they had designed to measure these variables. This meant that you would have to work within the constraints imposed by this instrument. You decided that it would be possible to conduct a valid evaluation under these circumstances, and added a number of questions to the original survey that would be used in the follow-up survey at the end of the 6-month support intervention. You also planned to interview as many of the participating nurses as you could after the program ended.

After the association had accepted your proposal, you attended a few of the weekly support sessions so that you would not have to rely solely on the written program description to get a sense of the specific dimensions that the intervention was intended to affect. You found that the program in practice reflected quite closely the program as planned. In the months that followed, you were in regular contact with the support program*****s staff, and they consistently assured you that the intervention was running smoothly.

Fast forward to the present. The support program recently ended, and you have begun to interview participants. And all does not appear to be well. About halfway through the program, one of the nurses had been robbed at gunpoint during a visit to a client in a public housing project. At the time, the staff had informed you of the event but said nothing to indicate that the support program had been affected in a way that would have implications for the evaluation. It turns out, however, that in response to the robbery the support sessions increasingly began to focus on issues of safety, often to the neglect of other issues that were supposed to be covered to be covered in the *****curriculum*****. When you review the follow-up surveys completed by participant, your fears are confirmed. On nearly all of the dimensions that the intervention was designed to address, no pre-post differences were found. Surprisingly, this was the case even for the survey items dealing with safety-related concerns. It appears, based on your interviews, that the session facilitators handled discussions of safety in a manner that did not reduce participants***** sense of vulnerability.

It is unfortunate that the support program coordinator did not display more candor in describing to you the influence of the robbery on the sessions. You might have been able to modify the postprogram survey and perhaps add a midcourse survey as well to target in a more refined, responsive fashion some of the areas that the *****revised***** program did manage to address with at least some success. As things currently stand, the data suggest that the support intervention was pretty much of a bust, a verdict that may be excessively bleak.

The bottom line is that you want your data analysis to be fair to the program, and you*****re not sure that the data you have enable you to achieve that goal. However, the intuitive appeal of a support program for these nurses may be affecting your judgment. Is your belief in the inherent worth of such an intervention getting in the way of looking objectively at what actually took place over the past 6 months? You don*****t relish the task of data analysis and interpretation that awaits you, and you*****re not sure of the best way to handle it.

Read the Things Happen scenario. (5 pages)

A. Analyze the extent to which, and the ways in which, each of the Guiding Principles for Evaluators (attached) is relevant to this scenario.

B. Do you bear any ethical responsibility for the failure to adapt the evaluation to the changing circumstances of the support program? Why or why not?

C. If you were the evaluator in this scenario, what would you do now? Explain your reasoning.

Please organize the paper as follows:

Systematic Inquiry

Competence

Integrity/Honesty

Respect for People

Welfare

Your responsibility

What to do?

How to Reference "Program Evaluation -- Things Happen Systematic Inquiry" Research Proposal in a Bibliography

“Program Evaluation -- Things Happen Systematic Inquiry.” A1-TermPaper.com, 2009, https://www.a1-termpaper.com/topics/essay/program-evaluation-things-happen/410453. Accessed 4 Oct 2024.

Program Evaluation -- Things Happen Systematic Inquiry (2009). Retrieved from https://www.a1-termpaper.com/topics/essay/program-evaluation-things-happen/410453

A1-TermPaper.com. (2009). Program Evaluation -- Things Happen Systematic Inquiry. [online] Available at: https://www.a1-termpaper.com/topics/essay/program-evaluation-things-happen/410453 [Accessed 4 Oct, 2024].

”Program Evaluation -- Things Happen Systematic Inquiry” 2009. A1-TermPaper.com. https://www.a1-termpaper.com/topics/essay/program-evaluation-things-happen/410453.

”Program Evaluation -- Things Happen Systematic Inquiry” A1-TermPaper.com, Last modified 2024. https://www.a1-termpaper.com/topics/essay/program-evaluation-things-happen/410453.

[1] ”Program Evaluation -- Things Happen Systematic Inquiry”, A1-TermPaper.com, 2009. [Online]. Available: https://www.a1-termpaper.com/topics/essay/program-evaluation-things-happen/410453. [Accessed: 4-Oct-2024].

1. Program Evaluation -- Things Happen Systematic Inquiry [Internet]. A1-TermPaper.com. 2009 [cited 4 October 2024]. Available from: https://www.a1-termpaper.com/topics/essay/program-evaluation-things-happen/410453

1. Program Evaluation -- Things Happen Systematic Inquiry. A1-TermPaper.com. https://www.a1-termpaper.com/topics/essay/program-evaluation-things-happen/410453. Published 2009. Accessed October 4, 2024.

Related Research Proposals: