Skip all navigation and go to page content

NEO Shop Talk

The blog of the National Network of Libraries of Medicine Evaluation Office

Update Your Evaluation Toolbox: Two Great Conferences

It’s the fall, also known as the beginning of conference season. It’s a very exciting time if you like evaluation/assessment.  If you want to improve your evaluation skills, two great conferences are coming up, back to back.  Take a look at some of these highlights and pick one to go to!

Oct. 24-29, 2016 Evaluation 2016, Atlanta GA

Eavlaution 2016 October 24-29, Atlanta, GA

This is the annual conference of the American Evaluation Association, an international organization with over 7000 members, and interest groups that cover topics like Assessment in Higher Education; Collaborative, Participatory & Empowerment Evaluation; and Data Visualization and Reporting.  The theme of this year’s conference is Evaluation + Design.

The conference has 40 workshops and 850 sessions.  Here are some example programs:

  • From crap to oh snap: Using DIY templates to (easily) improve information design across an organization
  • Developing Evaluation Tools to Measure MOOC Learner Outcomes in Higher Education
  • Evaluation Design for Innovation/Pilot Projects

There’s still time for Early Bird Registration (ends October 3)!

Oct. 31-November 2, 2016 Library Assessment Conference, Arlington VA

Library Assessment Conference 2016

This conference only happens every other year and is co-sponsored by the Association of Research Libraries (ARL) and the University of Washington (UW) Libraries (disclosure – the NEO is part of the UW Libraries–something we’re quite proud of).   The theme for this conference is Building Effective, Sustainable, Practical Assessment.

This conference is bookended by workshops like Getting the Message Out: Creating a Multi-Directional Approach to Communicating Assessment and Learning Analytics, Academic Libraries, and Institutional Context: Getting Started, Gaining Traction, Going Forward.

Scholarly papers and posters with titles like “How Well Do We Collaborate? Using Social Network Analysis (SNA) to Evaluate Engagement in Assessment Program” and “Consulting Detectives: How One Library Deduced the Effectiveness of Its Consultation Area & Services” are organized around a variety of topics, such as Organizational Issues; Ithaka S+R; and Analytics/Value.

 

This is an exciting time to be in the assessment and evaluation business.  Take this amazing opportunity to go to one of these conferences.

Save

Save

Save

Save

Save

Save

Save

Save

Save

Save

Save

Save

Save

Save

A Diagram is Worth a Thousand Words: Visual Evaluation Plans

What would you rather look at?  Some paragraphs of text and bullet points that explain in a step-by-step fashion your process and outcomes evaluation plans, or a diagram of those plans?  For me the answer is easy: a diagram.  Diagrams have the advantage of being quickly understandable, interesting to look at, invite participation of the viewer, and possibly most important for me, they’re colorful.  A textual explanation can walk me through the same process, but I would play a much more passive role, and I might not understand the big picture without having, well, a big picture.

birthday-party-evaluation-plan

Obviously you would also need the text.  Somewhere you need to explain the details of what you’re going to do in your evaluation. But a diagram can make the plan immediately comprehensible, and the reader can then read the textual explanation while understanding the overall context.

Bethany Laursen, an evaluation consultant, posted some examples of what she calls visual evaluation plans in her blog, Laursen Evaluation and Design.  These are created by students in a class at the University of Wisconsin-Madison.  I like them because by looking at them I have a basic understanding of their projects and how they will be evaluated.

Her blog post presents visual evaluation plans as a way of getting non-evaluators to understand your evaluation plans.  But I think they can also be a way that people (whether evaluators or non-evaluators who find themselves writing evaluation plans) could begin to think about how to plan their evaluation strategy to fit their project.

Microsoft products like Word and Power Point have drawing tools that can work to make diagrams.  But I think best with pen and paper, so if I were designing an evaluation plan for my daughter’s birthday party (see February 4, 2016 post), I would do something like the drawing here. Then I could create a plan for evaluating each of the process evaluation questions (in blue arrows) and each of the outcome evaluation questions (in red arrows).

This video, Faster Program Evaluation Planning: a New Visual Approach, shows how you could use a product like DoView to create a snazzy looking evaluation plan that also can link images to the textual description of the evaluation, and even further, link to your actual evaluation.

That famous phrase in the title, “a picture is worth a thousand words,” works really well to show how you can use your diagram to communicate your evaluation plan to others.  But if you’re using a diagram to design your plan in the first place, the quote that might work better is Gloria Steinem’s: “Without leaps of imagination or dreaming, we lose the excitement of possibilities. Dreaming, after all is a form of planning.”

And as Winnie-the-Pooh says “Nobody can be uncheered with a balloon.”

Save

Save

Save

Save

Save

Save

Save

Save

My Report Writing Toolkit

kit-2160_640

I once heard evaluator extraordinaire Michael Patton say that an evaluator could staple an executive summary to a bunch of pages ripped from a phone book and no one would notice. Possibly our readers have developed a fear of drowning in numbers and technical information?

(For our younger blog followers, a phone book is that thick paperback that materializes on your doorstep about once a year and you trip over it a few times before throwing it in your recycling bin.)

Many of us are trying to write better reports, thanks to proactive efforts in our professional associations.  Many such organizations provide excellent training on report writing, often to sold-out audiences. The first step toward better reporting is better synthesis of our evaluation findings.  You yourself must understand your data well before you can effectively share findings with others.  However, there are many other design elements in a report that you can use to help your readers understand key points and retain important information. Nonverbal elements such as color, font choice, page layout, and graphic design, all contribute to effective evaluation reporting.

I have picked up a few tricks of the trade over the past few years.  So in today’s blog, I’m giving you my personal report-writing toolkit.

PowerPoint:  You may think of PowerPoint as a presentation tool, but I have discovered it is also a great tool for producing written reports.  Slide layouts provide flexibility in organizing graphics and text on a page.  The text boxes also force me to be succinct with written content. My favorite resource for PowerPoint reports is Nancy Duarte’s Slidedocs.  You can download free PowerPoint templates at her website, but truthfully, I seldom use them.  They never seem quite right for what I want to present and I don’t think all of them are accessible (508 compliant).  However, I use them to guide my design.  The templates provide examples of good layout and color palettes.  Also, Duarte’s templates exemplify effective practices for readability, such as ideal column width and line spacing.

“Presenting Data Effectively” by Stephanie Evergreen. I routinely consult this primer on presenting data when I write evaluation reports. Her book gets into the nitty-gritty of reporting evaluation results.  How do you choose font type? Where do you place data labels in a chart? How do you layout a page to incorporate text and charts. She leaves no stone unturned in this book.

Free photos: Photos have their place in both written reports and presentation slides, particularly when they serve as visual metaphors for key findings. Google’s advance search has a “usage rights” option that allows you to quickly find images online that are free to use or share. However, the quality of images from Google searches is variable.  I prefer to start with Pixabay, which provides consistently high quality pictures that are free to use.

Color Picker Tools:  Accent colors add visual interest to reports and direct readers’ attention to key findings. There are two color picker tools that I use routinely to find accent colors for my headers and graphics. PowerPoint now has an “eye dropper” feature that allows you to add custom colors that match images in your reports..  This is the fastest way to add a custom color to your theme palette.

However, when I have time to perfect my color choices, I rely on Adobe Color. You upload your image and Adobe Color shows you a palette of complementary colors to choose from. (I like to use my report cover photo or a screen snip of a logo or web page as my image.)  Adobe Color will allow you to adjust your palette to find, for example, brighter or more muted versions of your colors. Once you have the colors you want, you can get the RGV codes to create a custom color scheme for your report.

Two views of a line graph with four lines (four groups). The left is the graph as seen by the graph creator. It has a three black lines and a red line to emphasize results from a subgroup. The right version of the graph shows how a color-blind person sees it. The red line is black and the other lines are lighter gray

Color blindness checker: This exciting new multi-colored reporting world has its downside.  A small percentage of people are colorblind, so improper color choices may make your reports less understandable to them.  (The American Academy of Ophthalmologists estimates that colorblindness affects 8% of men and .5% of women.) So it’s a good idea to check your images through an app like Vischeck.

The two charts on the left show the results of a Vischeck on a line graph  I designed, where I made one line red to draw attention to results for one group. If you are not color blind, you will see that the left-hand chart has a red line to highlight a specific finding. The right chart shows what colorblind readers see: the line is darker, but it is not red. The darkness of the line does provide some contrast, so it is probably acceptable. But a different color or possibly a wider line would make that finding noticeable for all readers.

Printer: If your report is going to be printed and reproduced, chances are the copies will not be in color. I have learned the hard way to print my reports in black-in-white before distributing them to be sure the contrasts are still visible without color. If not, you can try varying intensity (gray versus black) or patterns (solid versus dotted lines).

There you have it: my go-to tools for creating evaluation reports. If you have others, I hope you’ll visit the NEO’s Facebook page and share them!

Here’s the full test for Stephanie Evergreen’s book: Evergreen, SDH. Presenting data effectively. Los Angeles, CA: Sage, 2014.

Save

From Logic Model to Proposal Evaluation – Part 2: The Evaluation Plan

Photo of black and white cat with fangsLast week we wrote some basic goals and objectives for a proposal about teaching health literacy skills to vampires in Sunnydale.  Here’s what the goals and objectives look like, taken from the Executive Summary statement in last week’s post:

Goal: The goal of our From Dusk to Dawn project is to improve the health and well-being of vampires in the Sunnydale community.

Objective 1: We will teach 4 hands-on evening classes on the use of MedlinePlus and PubMed to improve Sunnydale vampires’ ability to find consumer health information and up to date research about health conditions.

Objective 2: We will open a 12-hour “Dusk-to-Dawn” health reference hotline to help the vampires with their reference questions.

There are also three outcomes that we have identified:

  1. Short-term: Increased ability of the Internet-using Sunnydale vampires to research needed health information.
  2. Intermediate: These vampires will use their increased skills to research health information for their brood.
  3. Long-term: Overall, the Sunnydale vampires will have improved health and as a result form better relationships with the human community of Sunnydale.

To get to an evaluation plan from here you have to know that there are basically two kinds of things you’ll want to measure: process and outcomes.

Process assessment measures that you did what you said you would do and the way you said you would do it. For example, you can count the number of classes you taught, how many people attended, and whether their survey responses showed that they thought you did a good job teaching.

Also you might want to show that you were willing to make changes in the plan if review of your process assessment showed that you weren’t getting the results you wanted.  For example, if you planned all your classes in early evening, but few vampires attended, you might interview some vampires and find out that early evening is mealtime for most vampires, and move your classes to a different time to increase attendance.  Your evaluation plan could show that you are collecting that information and that you will be responsive to what you see happening.

Outcome assessment measures the extent to which your project had the impact that you hoped it would on the recipients of the project, or even greater on their overall organizations or communities. We showed the first step of outcome assessment in last week’s assignment, but I’m going to break it down a little more here.  Put in basic terms, to do an outcome assessment, you state your outcome, you add in an indicator, a target, and a time frame to come up with a measurable objective, and then you write out the source of your data, your data collection method, and your data collection timing to complete the picture.  Let’s talk about each item here:

Indicator: This is the evidence you can gather that shows whether or not you met your outcomes.  If one of your outcomes is that the vampires have increased ability to research health information, how would you know if that had happened? The indicator could be their increased confidence level in finding health information, or it could be improvement in skills test scores given before and after a training session.

Target: The target is the goal that makes this project look like a success to you.  For example, if the vampires improve their test scores by 50% over a baseline test, is that enough to say you have successfully reached that outcome?  And how many of the vampires need to reach that 50% goal?  All of them? One of them?  Targets can be hard to identify, because you don’t want them to be too hard to reach but if they’re too easy your funder may not be impressed with your ambition.  Sometimes you can work with the funder or other stakeholders on setting targets that are credible.

Time frame: This is the point in time that when the threshold for success will be achieved.  So if you want to make sure the vampires increased their ability by the end of your training, then the time frame would be by the end of your training.

Data Source: This is the location where your information is found. Often, data sources are people (such as participants or observers) but they also may be records, pictures, or meeting notes. Here are some examples of data sources.

Data Collection Methods: Evaluation methods are the tools you use to collect data, such as a survey, observation, or quiz.  Here is more examples of data collection methods.

Data Collection Timing: The data collection timing is describing exactly when you will be collecting the data.

What does your final evaluation plan look like? 

Here is a sample piece of an evaluation plan for the Dusk to Dawn proposal.

Objective 1: teach 4 hands-on evening classes on the use of MedlinePlus and PubMed to improve Sunnydale vampires’ ability to research consumer health information and up to date research about health conditions.

Process Assessment: The PI will collect the following information to ensure that classes are being taught; expected attendance figures are being reached; teachers are doing a good job teaching classes (including surviving the classes).  Data will be reviewed after each class and changes will be made to the program as needed to reach target goals:

◊ Participant roster to measure attendance figures
◊ Class evaluations to measure teacher performance
◊ Count of number of teachers at the beginning and ending of each class to measure survival of instructors
◊ Project team will meet after the second class to review success and lessons learned and to consider course corrections to ensure objectives are met

Outcome Assessment:
Measureable Objective: In a post-test given immediately after each class, a minimum of 75% of Sunnydale vampire attendees demonstrate that they learned how to find needed resources in PubMed and MedlinePlus by showing at least a 50% improvement over the pre-test.

Based on Level 2 (Learning) in the Kirkpatrick Model, a test will be created with some basic health questions to be researched. Class participants will be given these questions as a pre-test before the class, and then will be given the same questions after the class as a post-test.  This learning outcome will be considered successful if a minimum of 75% of Sunnydale vampire participants demonstrate that their scores improved by at least 50%.

Last wishes, I mean, thoughts

This is not a complete evaluation plan, but the purpose of these two posts has been to show how you can go from a logic model to the evaluation plan of a proposal.  Don’t worry if all your outcomes cannot be measured in the scope of your project.  For example, in this Dusk to Dawn project, it might have been dangerous to find out if the vampires had passed on needed health information to their brood, even harder to find out whether the vampires had become more healthy as a result of the information.  This doesn’t mean to leave these outcomes out, but you may want to acknowledge that measuring some outcomes is out of the scope of the project’s resources.

As Grandpa Munster once said “Don’t let time or space detain ya, here you go, to Transylvania.”

Photo credit: Photo of 365::79 – Vampire Cat by Sarah Reid on Flickr under Creative Commons license CC BY 2.0.  No changes were made.

Save

Save

Save

Save

Save

Save

Save

Save

Save

Save

Save

From Logic Model to Proposal Evaluation – Part 1: Goals and Objectives

Vocabulary. Jargon. Semantics.  Sometimes I think it’s the death of us all.  Seriously, it’s really hard to have a conversation about anything when you use the same words in the same context to mean completely different things.

Take Goals and Objectives.  I can’t tell you how many different ways this has been taught to me.  But in general all the explanations agree that a goal is a big concept, and an objective is more specific.

Things get complicated when we use words like Activities, Outcomes, and Measurable Objectives when teaching you about logic models as a way of planning a project.  Which of those words correlate with Goals and Objectives when writing a proposal for the project you just planned?

Bela Lugosi as Dracula

I’m going to walk through an example of how we can connect the dots between the logic model that we use to plan projects, and the terminology used in proposal writing.  There isn’t necessarily going to be a one to one relationship, and it might depend on the number of goals you have.

As has been stated in previous posts, we’ve never actually done any work with the fictional community of Sunnydale, a place where there was, in the past, a large number of vampires and other assorted demons.  But in order to work through this problem, let’s go back to this hypothetical post where we used the Kirkpatrick Model to determine outcomes that we would like to see with any remaining vampires who want to live healthy long lives, and get along with their human neighbors.  For this post, I’m going to pretend I’m writing a proposal to do a training project for them based on those outcomes, and then show how they lead to an evaluation plan.

Goals

The goal can be your long-term outcome or it can be somewhat separate from the outcomes. But either way, your goal needs to be logically connected to the work you’re planning to do.  For example, if you’re going to train vampires to use MedlinePlus, goals like “making the world a better place,” or “achieving world peace,” are not as connected to your project as something like “improving health and well being of vampires” or “improving the health-literacy of vampires so they can make good decisions about their health.”

Here is a logic model showing how this could be laid out, using the outcomes established in the earlier post:

Dusk to Dawn Logic Model

Keep in mind that the purpose of a proposal is to persuade someone to fund your project.  So for the sake of my proposal, I’m going to combine the long-term outcomes into one goal statement.

The goal of this project is to improve the health and well being of vampires in the Sunnydale community.

Objectives

The objectives can be taken from the logic model Activities column. But keep something in mind.  Logic models are small – one page at most.  So you can’t use a lot of words to describe activities.  Objectives on the other hand are activities with some detail filled in. So in the logic model the activity might be “Evening hands-on training on MedlinePlus and PubMed,” while the objective I put in my proposal might be “Objective 1: We will teach 4 hands-on evening classes on the use of MedlinePlus and PubMed to improve Sunnydale vampires’ ability to find consumer health information and up to date research.”

Objectives in Context

Here’s a sample of my Executive Summary of the project, showing goals, objectives, and outcomes in a narrative format:

Executive Summary: The goal of our From Dusk to Dawn project is to improve the health and well being of vampires in the Sunnydale community. In order to reach this goal, we will 1) teach 4 hands-on evening classes on the use of MedlinePlus and PubMed to improve Sunnydale vampires’ ability to find consumer health information and up to date research about health conditions; and 2) open a 12-hour “Dusk-to-Dawn” health reference hotline to help the vampires with their reference questions.  With these activities, we hope to see a) increased ability of the Internet-using Sunnydale vampires to research needed health information; b) that those vampires will use their increased skills to research health information for their brood; and c) these vampires will use this information to make good health decisions leading to improved health, and as a result form better relationships with the human community of Sunnydale.

Please note that in this executive summary, I do not use the word “objectives” to identify the phrases numbered 1 and 2, and I also do not use the word “outcomes” to identify the phrases lettered a, b, and c (because I like the way it reads better without them). However, in detailed narrative of my proposal I would use those terms to go with those exact phrases.

So then, what are Measurable Objectives?

The key to the evaluation plan is creating another kind of objective: what we call a measurable outcome objective. When you create your evaluation plan, along with showing how you plan to measure that you did what you said you would do (process assessment), you will also want to plan how to collect data showing the degree to which you have reached your outcomes (outcome assessment).  These statements are what we call measurable outcome objectives.

Using the “Book 2 Worksheet: Outcome Objectives” found on our Evaluation Resources web page, you start with your outcomes, add an indicator, target and time frame to get measurable objectives  and write it in a single sentence.  Here’s an example of what that would look like using the first outcome listed in the Executive Summary:

Dusk to Dawn Measurable Objective

We’ve gotten through some terminology and some steps for going from your logic model to measuring your outcomes.

Stay tuned for next week when we turn all of this into an Evaluation Plan!

Dare I say it? Same bat time, same bat channel…

 

 

Save

Save

Save

Save

Save

Save

Save

Save

Save

Save

Save

Save

Save

Save

Save

Save

Save

Save

Save

Save

Save

Save

Save

Save

Save

Save

Save

Save

Save

Shop Talk SWOT Hack for Proposal Writers

SWOT (strengths, weaknesses, opportunities, and threats) analysis, strategic planning method presented as diagram on blackboard with white chalk and sticky notes

Every self-respecting workshop has its share of hacks. Today’s post is about the NEO Shop Talk’s SWOT hack.

Most of our readers have heard of SWOT analysis, because of its widespread use in strategic planning. NEO developed its own special version of SWOT analysis to help our readers and training participants with preparation of funding proposals.  Our version of SWOT analysis is one of a number of methods on the NEO’s new resource page for proposal planning featured in last week’s post.

“SWOT” stands for Strengths, Weaknesses, Opportunities, and Threats.  Businesses use SWOT analysis to examine their organizations’ internal strengths and weaknesses, and to identify external opportunities and threats that may impact future success. Strategic plans are then designed to exploit the positive factors and manage the negative factors identified in the analysis.

SWOT analysis can be a great proposal-planning tool. After all, funding proposal are essentially strategic plans. The analysis will prepare you to write a plan that describes the following:

  • Your organization’s unique ability to meet the needs of your primary project beneficiaries (Strengths)
  • The weaknesses in your organization that you hope to address through the funding requested in your proposal. (Weaknesses)
  • Resources external to your organization that you have discovered and can leverage for project success, such as experts, partners, or technology.(Opportunities)
  • Potential challenges you have identified and your contingency plan for addressing them, should they arise. (Threats)

Funding proposal do differ in one key way from organizational strategic plans: they are persuasive in nature. Your proposal must argue convincingly that an initiative is needed. It must also demonstrate your organization’s readiness to address that need. To make your arguments credible, you will need data, and you get that data from a community assessment. (I use the word “community” for any group that you want to serve through your project.) The NEO has tweaked the SWOT analysis process so that it can serve as the first step in the community assessment process.

Every SWOT analysis uses a chart.  We altered the traditional SWOT chart a bit, adding a third column.  In that column, you can record questions that arise during your SWOT discussion to be explored in your community assessment. Our chart looks like this:

NEO's version of the SWOT charts with a third column in gray for the internal and external unknowns

Here are the basic steps we suggest for facilitating a SWOT discussion:

  1. Convene a SWOT team. Ideally, representatives’ expertise and experience will lead to a thorough understanding of the internal and external factors that can impact your project. You want team members who know your organization well and those who know the beneficiary community well.  It’s great if you can find people who know both, such as key informants who belong to the beneficiary group and also use the services of your library or organization.
  2. Ask the group to brainstorm ideas for each of the six squares in the chart above. To record group input, facilitators favor poster-size SWOT charts pinned to the wall and stacks of sticky pads that allow team members to add their ideas to each square.
  3. Once you have exhausted the discussion about the six squares, you now want to see if you have evidence to support the facts and ideas. Examine each idea on the chart, asking the following questions: (a) What source of information exists to support our claims about the identified strengths, weaknesses, opportunities and threats? If you have no real evidence for an idea, it may need to be moved to an “unknown” square (b) How important is it that we include this claim in our proposal (c) If we do need to include it, is our data credible enough to support our claim? It it’s weak, how can we get more persuasive data or additional corroborating information?
  4. Now, work with your “unknowns.” How can you educate yourself about those gray areas? What data sources and methods can you use?
  5. At this point, you now know where to focus your community assessment efforts. Your last step is to make a community assessment plan. Assign tasks to team members and determine a data collection timeline.

Once you have collected your data, your core project team can revisit the SWOT chart. Your community assessment findings should fit neatly into the four SWOT squares and, hopefully, you will have far fewer “unknowns.” Some of your community assessment findings will help you build your rationale for your project. Other information will help you refine your project strategies, which you will work out using another great planning tool from our proposal-planning page: the logic model.  For a group project-planning process, check out the NEO post on tearless logic models.

Save

Evaluation Planning for Proposals: a New NEO Resource

Angry crazy Business woman with a laptop

Have you ever found yourself in this situation?  You’re well along in your proposal writing when you get to the section that says “how will you evaluate your project?”  Do you think:

  1. “Oh #%$*! It’s that section again.”
  2. “Why do they make us do this?”
  3. “Yay! Here’s where I get to describe how I will collect evidence that my project is really working!”

We at the NEO suggest thinking about evaluation from the get-go, so you’ll be prepared when you get to that section.  And we have some great booklets that show how to do that.  But sometimes people aren’t happy when we say “here are some booklets to read to get started,” even though they are awesome booklets.

So the NEO has made a new web page to make it easier to incorporate evaluation into the project planning process and end up with an evaluation plan that develops naturally.

1. Do a Community Assessment; 2. Make a Logic Model; 3. Develop Measurable Objectives; 4. Create an Evaluation Plan

We group the process into 4 steps: 1) Do a Community Assessment; 2) Make a Logic Model; 3) Develop Measurable Objectives for Your Outcomes; and 4) Create an Evaluation Plan.   Rather than explain what everything is and how to use it (for that you can read the booklets), this page links to the worksheets and samples (and some how-to sections) from the booklets so that you can jump right into planning.  And you can skip the things you don’t need or that you’ve already done.

In addition, we have included links to posts in this blog that show examples of the areas covered so people can put them in context.

We hope this helps with your entire project planning and proposal writing experience, as well as provides support for that pesky evaluation section of the proposal.

Please let Cindy (olneyc@uw.edu) or me (kjvargas@uw.edu) know how it works for you, and feel free to make suggestions.  Cheers!

Save

Save

Save

Save

Save

Save

Save

Save

Save

Save

Save

Save

The Kirkpatrick Model (Part 2) — With Humans

Disclaimer: Karen’s blog post last week on the Kirkpatrick Model used an example that was hypothetical.  We want to be clear that the NEO has never evaluated any programs directed toward improving health outcomes for vampires.

However, we can claim success in applying the Kirkpatrick Model for National Network of Libraries of Medicine (NN/LM) training programs.

The NN/LM’s mission is to promote the biomedical and consumer health resources of the National Library of Medicine.  One strategy that is popular with NN/LM’s Regional Medical Libraries, which lead and manage the network, is the “train-the-trainer” program. These programs teach librarians and others about NLM resources so that they, in turn, will teach their peers, patients, or clients. When the NEO provides evaluation consulting for train-the-trainer programs, we rely heavily on the Kirkpatrick Model.

Kirkpatrick Outcomes Levels and Logic Models

For example, the NN/LM’s initiative to reach out to community college librarians incorporated “train-the-trainer” as one of several strategies to promote use of NLM resources in community college health professions programs. While the initiative was multi-pronged, train-the-trainer programs for community college librarians was a major strategy of the project. The Kirkpatrick Model helped our task force define outcomes and develop measures for this activity.

Our logic model led us to the following program theory:

If we train community college librarians to use National Library of Medicine Resources

  • They will respond favorably to our message (Reaction)
  • And discover new, useful health information resources that (Learning)
  • They will use when working with faculty and students (Behavior)
  • Which will lead to increased use of NLM resources among community college faculty and staff (Results)

Slide1

Measuring Outcomes

We developed two simple measurement tools to assess the four outcome levels.  To measure Reaction, RML instructors administered a standard one-page session evaluation form that has been used for years by instructors who provide NN/LM training sessions. The form collects participants’ feedback, including the grade (A through F) they would assign to the class. This form was our measure of participant reaction.

The other three levels were assessed using a follow-up questionnaire sent to the training participants several months after their training. On this questionnaire, we asked them a series of yes/no questions:

Learning: At this training session, did you learn about health information resources that were NEW to you?

Behavior: Regarding the NEW resources you learned at the training, have you done any of the following?

  • Shown these resources to students?
  • Used the resources when preparing lesson plans?
  • Shown the resources to community college faculty or staff?
  • Used the resources to answer reference questions?

Results: Do you know if the resources are being used by

  • Students?
  • Faculty, administration, or staff at your organization?
  • The librarians at your institution?

We knew our Results questions were weak. They obviously were very subjective. Most of the respondents said they didn’t know about use beyond their library staff members. Unfortunately, we did not have resources for a more objective measure of our anticipated results (e.g., surveying faculty and students at participating schools). Our dilemma was not unusual. Many practitioners of the Kirkpatrick Model agree that assessing Results-level outcomes can be costly and challenging.

However, in anticipation that this Results-level measure might not work, we had a back-up plan inspired by Robert Brinkerhoff’s Success Case Method (which we posted about here). In this approach, evaluators ask training participants to describe how their training benefited the organization.  We ended the questionnaire with the following open-ended question: Please describe how the training you received on National Library of Medicine resources has made a difference for you or your organization.

This question worked well, with 57% of respondents providing examples of how the training improved their customer services. They reported using the NLM resources to provide reference services and incorporating NLM resources into their information literacy classes for health professions students.  Some also were talking to faculty about the importance of teaching health professions students about RML resources that students could use after graduation.

In the end, the Kirkpatrick Model helped us get metrics and qualitative information that helped to assess the effectiveness of our train-the-trainer activities.  Most of the training participants who responded to our follow-up questionnaire learned new resources and were promoting them to student and faculty. Their stories showed that the NN/LM training improved the services they were delivering to their users.

The NEO has drawn on the Kirkpatrick Model to design evaluation methods for similar projects, including our own evaluation training programs.  It is a great tool for helping program planners to define concrete objectives and create measures that are closely linked to desired outcomes.

 

Developing Program Outcomes using the Kirkpatrick Model – with Vampires

Are you in the first stages of planning an outreach program, but not sure how to get started?  The NEO generally recommends starting your program planning by thinking about your outcomes.  Outcomes are the results that you would like to see happen because of your planned activities.  They are the “why we do it” of your program.  However, sometimes it can be difficult to develop your outcome statements in ways that lead to measurable evaluation plans. One way to do it is to use the Kirkpatrick Model, a system that was developed 60 years ago.

Let’s start with an example. Let’s say that your needs assessment of the local vampire community found that they have a lot of health concerns: some preventative (how to avoid garlic, identifying holy water); some about the latest research (blood borne diseases, wooden stake survival); and some mental health (depression from having trouble keeping human friends). Further discussion led to finding out that while they have access to the internet from their homes, they don’t have much help with finding health information due to the fact that most of their public libraries are closed when the vampires are out and about.

So you’ve decided to do some training on both MedlinePlus and PubMed (in the evenings), and you want to come up with outcomes for your training program.

The Kirkpatrick Model breaks down training outcomes to 4 levels, each building on the previous one:

The Kirkpatrick Model shown as a pyramid

Level 1: Reaction – This level of outcome is about satisfaction. People find your training satisfying, engaging, and relevant. While satisfaction is not a very strong impact, Kirkpatrick believes it is essential to motivate people to learn.

Level 2: Learning – This outcome is that by the end of your training, people have learned something, whether knowledge, skills, attitude, or confidence.

Level 3: Behavior – This outcome is related to the degree to which people take what they learned in your training and apply it in their jobs or their lives.

Level 4: Results – This level of outcome is “the greater good” – changes in the community or organization that occur as a result of changes in individuals’ knowledge or behavior.

Back to our training example.  Here are some outcome statements that are based on the Kirkpatrick Model.  I am listing them here as Short-term, Intermediate and Long-term, like you might find in a Logic Model (for more on logic models, see Logic Model blog entries).

Short-term Outcomes:

  • Sunnydale vampires found their MedlinePlus/PubMed classes to be engaging and relevant to their “lives.” (Reaction)
  • Sunnydale vampires demonstrate that they learned how to find needed resources in PubMed and MedlinePlus. (Learning)

Intermediate Outcomes:

  • Sunnydale vampires use MedlinePlus and PubMed to research current and new health issues for themselves and their brood. (Behavior)

Long-term Outcomes

  • Healthier vampires form stronger bonds with their human community and there is less friction between the two groups. (Results)

    Dracula leaning over woman

Once you’ve stated your outcomes, you can use them in a number of ways. You can think through your training activities to ensure that they are working towards those outcomes. And you can assign indicators, target criteria, and time frames to each outcome to come up with measurable objectives for your evaluation plan.

Happy Hunting Outcomes!

Save

Save

Save

Save

Save

Save

Save

Save

From QWERTY to Quality Responses: How To Make Survey Comment Boxes More Inviting

The ubiquitous comment box.  It’s usually stuck at the end of a survey with a simple label such as “Suggestions,” “Comments:” or “Please add additional comments here.”

Those of us who write surveys over-idealistic faith in the potential of comment boxes, also known as open-ended survey items or questions.  These items will unleash our respondents’ desire to provide creative, useful suggestions! Their comments will shed light on the difficult-to-interpret quantitative findings from closed-ended questions!

In reality, responses in comment boxes tend to be sparse and incoherent. You get a smattering of “high-five” comments from your fans. A few longer responses may come from those with an ax to grind, although their feedback may be completely off topic.  More often, comment boxes are left blank, unless you make the mistake of requiring an answers before the respondent can move on to the next item. Then you’ll probably get a lot of QWERTYs in your blank space.

Let’s face it.  Comment boxes are the vacant lots of Survey City.  Survey writers don’t put such effort into cultivating them. Survey respondents don’t even notice them.

Can we do better than that?  Yes, we can, say the survey methods experts.

First, you have to appreciate this fact: open-ended questions ask a lot of respondents.  They have to create a response. That’s much harder than registering their level of agreement to a statement you wrote for them. So you need strategies that make open-ended questions easier and more motivating for the survey taker.

In his online class Don’t (Survey)Monkey Around: Learn to Make Your Surveys Work,  Matthew Champagne provides the following tips for making comment boxes more inviting to respondents:

  • Focus your question. Get specific and give guidance on how you want respondents to answer. For example, “Please tell us what you think about our new web site. Tell us both what you like and what you think we can do better.” I try to make the question even easier by putting boundaries on how much I expect from them.  So, when requesting feedback on a training session, I might ask my respondents to “Please describe one action step you will take based on what you learned in this class.”
  • Place the open-ended question near related closed-ended questions. For example, if you are asking users to rate the programming at your library, ask for suggestions for future programs right after they rate the current program. The closed-ended questions have primed them to write their response.
  • Give them a good reason to respond. A motivational statement tells respondents how their answers will be used. Champagne says that this technique is particularly effective if you can explain how their responses will be used for their personal For example, “Please give us one or two suggestions for improving our references services.  Your feedback will help our reference librarians know how to provide better service to users like you.”
  • Give them room to write. You need a sizable blank space that encourages your respondents to be generous with their comments. Personally, when I’m responding to an open-ended comment on a survey, I want my entire response to be in view while I’m writing.  As a survey developer, I tend to uses boxes that are about three lines deep and half the width of the survey page

Do we know that Champagne’s techniques work?  In the Dillman et al.’s classic book on survey methods, the authors present research findings to support Champagne’s advice. Adding motivational words to the open-ended survey questions showed a 5-15 word increase in response length and a 12-20% increase in how many respondents’ submitted answers.  The authors caution, though, that you need to use open-ended questions sparingly for the motivational statements to work well. When four open-ended questions were added to a survey, the motivational statements worked better for questions placed earlier in the survey.

I should add, however, to never make your first survey question an open-ended one.  The format itself seems to make people close their browsers and run for the hills.  I always warm up the respondents with some easy closed-ended questions before they see an open-ended item.

Dillman et al. gave an additional technique for getting better responses to open-ended items: Asking follow-up questions.  Many online software packages now allow you to take a respondent’s verbatim answer and repeat it in a follow-up question.  For example, a follow-up question about a respondent’s suggestions for improving the library facility might look like this:

“You made this suggestion about how to improve the library facility: ‘The library should add more group study rooms.’ Do you have any other suggestions for improving the library facility?” [Bolded statement is the respondents’ verbatim written comment.]

Follow-up questions like this have been shown to increase the detail of respondents’ answers to open-ended questions.  If you are interested in testing out this format, search your survey software system for instructions on “piping.”

When possible, I like to use an Appreciative Inquiry approach for open-ended questions. The typical Appreciative Inquiry approach requires two boxes, for example:

  • Please tell us what you liked most about the proposal-writing workshop.
  • What could the instructors do to make this the best workshop possible on proposal writing?

People find it easier to give you an example rooted in experience.  We are story tellers at heart and you are asking for a mini-story. Once they tell their story, they are better prepared to give you advice on how to improve that experience. The Appreciative Inquiry structure also gives specific guidance on how you want them to structure their responses.  The format used for the second question is more likely to gather actionable suggestions.

So if you really want to hear from your respondents, put some thought into your comment box questions.  It lets them know that you want their thoughtful answers in return.

Source:  The research findings reported in this post are from Internet, Phone, Mail and Mixed-Mode Surveys: The Tailored Design Method (4th ed.), by Dillman, Smyth, and Christian (Hoboken, NJ: John Wiley and Sons, Inc, 2014, pp 128-134.

Last updated on Monday, June 27, 2016

Funded by the National Library of Medicine under Contract No. UG4LM012343 with the University of Washington.