CSU Extension, Engagement and the Logic model
Upcoming SlideShare
Loading in...5
×

Like this? Share it with your network

Share

CSU Extension, Engagement and the Logic model

  • 2,393 views
Uploaded on

Presentation delivered to graduate class Principles of Extension. ...

Presentation delivered to graduate class Principles of Extension.

Much of the material generated in this lecture were from the extension, logic model, scholarship of engagement were taken from the University of Wisconsin-Extension, Program Development and Evaluation program.

http://www.uwex.edu/ces/pdande/evaluation/evallogicmodel.html

More in: Education
  • Full Name Full Name Comment goes here.
    Are you sure you want to
    Your message goes here
    Be the first to comment
    Be the first to like this
No Downloads

Views

Total Views
2,393
On Slideshare
2,393
From Embeds
0
Number of Embeds
0

Actions

Shares
Downloads
23
Comments
0
Likes
0

Embeds 0

No embeds

Report content

Flagged as inappropriate Flag as inappropriate
Flag as inappropriate

Select your reason for flagging this presentation as inappropriate.

Cancel
    No notes for slide

Transcript

  • 1. Extension and Engagement for the21stCentury Land Grant Institution
    The Logic Model and the Scholarship of Engagement
    Steven E. Newman, Ph.D., A.A.F.
    Greenhouse Crops Extension Specialist
    and Professor of Floriculture
  • 2. Traditional Extension Model
    Outreach and Service
    Client based
    Outreach delivery
    Continuing education
    Laboratory testing
    Field days
    Youth development
    Ag consultation
    Food and nutrition
  • 3. The Scholarship of Engagement
    What is the scholarship of engagement?
    Is it service?
    Service is often seen as somehow outside the "real" work of scholars.
  • 4. The Scholarship of Engagement
    What is the scholarship of engagement?
    Is it service?
    Service is often seen as somehow outside the "real" work of scholars.
    Faculty members can extend their intellectual curiosity into their service activities bringing together their teaching, research, and service in a synergistic way, to the benefit of each aspect of their work and the benefit of those with whom they work.
  • 5. The Scholarship of Engagement
    What is the scholarship of engagement?
    Is it service?
    Is it legitimate scholarship?
  • 6. The Scholarship of Engagement
    What is the scholarship of engagement?
    Is it service?
    Is it legitimate scholarship?
    To make faculty service more legitimate, the institution must treat outreach and service activities as scholarly activities in the same way that research always has been and teaching is increasingly being treated.
    When faculty and administrators finally embrace a scholarship of engagement and acknowledge the important role of service in both the internal and external functioning and health of the campus, then faculty can begin to experience integrated academic lives.
  • 7. The Scholarship of Engagement
    Engagement provides a conduit of information to flow from units not normally considered part of the outreach mission of an institution.
    This must include:
    Stakeholders
    Consumers
    All faculty
    Students
  • 8. Evaluation of Engagement
  • 9. The Logic Model
  • 10. The Logic Model
    Five Components:
    Resources or inputs
    Program activities
    Outputs
    Outcomes
    Impacts
  • 11. A logic model is…
    A depiction of a program showing what the program will do and what it is to accomplish.
    A series of “if-then” relationships that, if implemented as intended, lead to the desired outcomes
    The core of program planning and evaluation
    University of Wisconsin-Extension, Program Development and Evaluation
  • 12. Simplest form
    INPUTS
    OUTPUTS
    OUTCOMES
    University of Wisconsin-Extension, Program Development and Evaluation
  • 13. Logic models can be applied to: a small program, a process (i.e. a team working together), a large, multi-component program, or even to an organization or business.
    University of Wisconsin-Extension, Program Development and Evaluation
  • 14. LOGIC
    the principles of reasoning
    reasonable
    the relationship of elements to each other and a whole
    MODEL
    small object representing another, often larger object (represents reality, isn’t reality)
    preliminary pattern serving as a plan
    tentative description of a system or theory that accounts for all its known properties
    The American Heritage Dictionary, 2nd Ed
    University of Wisconsin-Extension, Program Development and Evaluation
  • 15. “If you don’t know where you are going, how are you gonna’ know when you get there?”
    Yogi Berra
    Where are you going?
    How will you get there?
    What will show that you’ve arrived?
    University of Wisconsin-Extension, Program Development and Evaluation
  • 16. Many people say a logic model is a road map
    University of Wisconsin-Extension, Program Development and Evaluation
  • 17. Logic model may also be called…
    Theory of change
    Program action
    Model of change
    Conceptual map
    Outcome map
    Program logic
    University of Wisconsin-Extension, Program Development and Evaluation
  • 18. What gets measured gets done
    If you don’t measure results, you can’t tell success from failure
    If you can’t see success, you can’t reward it
    If you can’t reward success, you’re probably rewarding failure
    If you can’t see success, you can’t learn from it
    If you can’t recognize failure, you can’t correct it.
    If you can demonstrate results, you can win public support.
    Reinventing Government, Osborne and Gaebler, 1992
    Accountability era
    University of Wisconsin-Extension, Program Development and Evaluation
  • 19. What logic model is not…
    A theory
    Reality
    An evaluation model or method
    It is a framework for describing the relationships between investments, activities, and results.
    It provides a common approach for integrating planning, implementation, evaluation and reporting.
    University of Wisconsin-Extension, Program Development and Evaluation
  • 20. A bit of history
    Dates to late 1960’s
    Current accountability demands; logic model in widespread use
    Public Sector - GPRA
    Non-Profit Sector
    Private Sector
    International Agencies
    Evaluation
    University of Wisconsin-Extension, Program Development and Evaluation
  • 21. Why the hype? What’s the benefit?
    Focus on and be accountable for what matters – OUTCOMES
    Provides common language
    Makes assumptions EXPLICIT
    Supports continuous improvement
    Promotes communications
    University of Wisconsin-Extension, Program Development and Evaluation
  • 22. Logic modelling is a way of thinking…not just a pretty graphic
    “We build the road and the road builds us.”
    -Sri Lankan saying
    University of Wisconsin-Extension, Program Development and Evaluation
  • 23. Everyday example
    H
    E
    A
    D
    A
    C
    H
    E
    Feel better
    Getpills
    Takepills
    Situation
    INPUTS
    OUTPUTS
    OUTCOMES
    University of Wisconsin-Extension, Program Development and Evaluation
  • 24. Everyday example
    H
    U
    N
    G
    R
    Y
    Feel better
    Getfood
    Eat food
    University of Wisconsin-Extension, Program Development and Evaluation
  • 25. Every day logic model –
    Family Vacation
    Family Members
    Drive to state park
    Family members learn about each other; family bonds; family has a good time
    Budget
    Set up camp
    Car
    Cook, play, talk, laugh, hike
    Camping Equipment
    OUTPUTS
    OUTCOMES
    INPUTS
    University of Wisconsin-Extension, Program Development and Evaluation
  • 26. Assumptions
    Assumptions underlie much of what we do. It is often these underlying assumptions that hinder success or produce less-than-expected results. One benefit of logic modeling is that it helps us make our assumptions explicit.
    University of Wisconsin-Extension, Program Development and Evaluation
  • 27. Assumptions
    The beliefs we have about the program, the participants, and how the program will work. Includes ideas about:
    the problem or existing situation
    program operations
    expected outcomes and benefits
    the participants and how they learn, behave, their motivations
    resources
    staff
    external environment: influences
    the knowledge base
    etc.
    University of Wisconsin-Extension, Program Development and Evaluation
  • 28. Assumptions
    As you left the house today and came to this workshop, what were some of your assumptions about the day?
    Why is it important that we think about assumptions?
    University of Wisconsin-Extension, Program Development and Evaluation
  • 29. A youth financial literacy program
    Teens establish sound financial habits
    Teens make better decisions about the use of money
    Teens gain knowledge and skills in money management
    A high school financial planning program – 7 unit curriculum - is developed and delivered in high schools
    Partners invest resources
    University of Wisconsin-Extension, Program Development and Evaluation
  • 30. Business Counseling Example
    Improved business performance
    These owners gain knowledge and change practices resulting in
    A variety of educational activities are provided to business owners who participate
    Agency invests time and resources
    University of Wisconsin-Extension, Program Development and Evaluation
  • 31. Parent Education Program – Logic model
    SITUATION: During a county needs assessment, majority of parents reported that they were having difficulty parenting and felt stressed as a result
    OUTCOMES
    INPUTS
    OUTPUTS
    Parents increase knowledge of child dev
    Assess parent ed programs
    Parents identify appropriate actions to take
    Reduced stress
    Staff
    Parents
    of 3-10
    year
    olds
    attend
    Parents better understanding their own parenting style
    Improved child-parent relations
    Design- deliver evidence-based program of 8 sessions
    Money
    Parents use effective parenting practices
    Partners
    Parents gain skills in new ways to parent
    Research
    Facilitate support groups
    Parents gain confidence in their abilities
    University of Wisconsin-Extension, Program Development and Evaluation
  • 32. Example: Water quality
    University of Wisconsin-Extension, Program Development and Evaluation
  • 33. Logic model of a training workshop
    Situation: Funder requires grantees to include a logic model in their funding request; grantees have limited understanding of logic models and are unable to fulfill the funding requirement
    OUTCOMES
    -Participants will increase knowledge of logic models
    -Participants will increase ability to create a useful logic model of program
    -Participants will Increase confidence in using logic models
    INPUTS
    OUTPUTS
    Fulfill requirement of funder
    Create meaningful logic models
    Use logic models in own work
    3 hour training
    Trainer
    Funds
    Equipment
    Research base
    Training curriculum
    Grantees
    Improved planning
    Improved evaluation
    Accountable here
    University of Wisconsin-Extension, Program Development and Evaluation
  • 37. If-then relationships
    Underlying a logic model is a series of ‘if-then’ relationships that express the program’s theory of change
    IF then
    IF then
    IF then
    IF then
    IF then
    University of Wisconsin-Extension, Program Development and Evaluation
  • 38. Theory of change
    “A theory of change is a description of how and why a set of activities – be they part of a highly focused program or a comprehensive initiative – are expected to lead to early, intermediate, and long-term outcomes over a specified period.”
    (Anderson, 2000)
    University of Wisconsin-Extension, Program Development and Evaluation
  • 39. Logical chain of connections showing what the program is to accomplish
    INPUTS
    OUTPUTS
    OUTCOMES
    Activities
    Participation
    Short
    Medium
    Long-term
    Program investments
    What we do
    Who we reach
    What we invest
    What results
    University of Wisconsin-Extension, Program Development and Evaluation
  • 40. How will activities lead to desired outcomes? A series of if-then relationships
    Tutoring Program Example
    IF then
    IF then
    IF then
    IF then
    IF then
    They will move to next grade level on time
    We invest time and money
    We can provide tutoring 3 hrs/week for 1 school year to 50 children
    They will get better grades
    They will learn and improve their skills
    Students struggling academical-ly can be tutored
    University of Wisconsin-Extension, Program Development and Evaluation
  • 41. Don’t forget the arrows
    Arrows and feedback loops show the links between inputs, outputs and outcomes
    Arrows depict the underlying causal connections
    University of Wisconsin-Extension, Program Development and Evaluation
  • 42. Simplest form of logic model
    INPUTS
    OUTPUTS
    OUTCOMES
    University of Wisconsin-Extension, Program Development and Evaluation
  • 43. A bit more detail
    INPUTS
    OUTPUTS
    OUTCOMES
    Activities
    Participation
    Short
    Medium
    Long-term
    Program investments
    What we invest
    What we do
    Who we reach
    What results
    SO WHAT??
    What is the VALUE?
    University of Wisconsin-Extension, Program Development and Evaluation
  • 44. Fully detailed logic model
    University of Wisconsin-Extension, Program Development and Evaluation
  • 45. Defining the Situation: Critical first step in logic model development
    What problematic condition exists that demands a programmatic response?
    Why does it exist?
    For whom does it exist?
    Who has a stake in the problem?
    What can be changed?
    If incorrectly understood and diagnosed, everything that flows from it will be wrong.
    Factors affecting problems: protective factors; risk factors
    Review research, evidence, knowledge-base
    Traps:
    Assuming we know cause: symptoms vs. root causes.
    Framing a problem as a need where need is actually a program or service. “Communities need leadership training” Precludes discussion of nature of the problem: what is the problem? Whose problem? Leads one to value provision of the service as the result – is the service provided or not?
    University of Wisconsin-Extension, Program Development and Evaluation
  • 46. University of Wisconsin-Extension, Program Development and Evaluation
  • 47. Satisfaction
    University of Wisconsin-Extension, Program Development and Evaluation
  • 48. C H A I N OF O U T C O M E S
    University of Wisconsin-Extension, Program Development and Evaluation
  • 49. Tend not be included in a logic model graphic:
    Situational statement
    Priorities
    List of assumptions
    List of external factors
    Evaluation methods
    University of Wisconsin-Extension, Program Development and Evaluation
  • 50. Actions
    Changes in behaviors and practices
    Learning
    Changes in knowledge, attitudes, skills, aspirations
    Reactions
    Degree of satisfaction with program; level of interest; feelings toward activities, educational methods
    Participation
    Number and characteristics of people reached; frequency and intensity of contact
    Hierarchy of effects
    Social-economic-environmental improvements
    Source: Bennett and Rockwell, 1995, Targeting Outcomes of Programs
    University of Wisconsin-Extension, Program Development and Evaluation
  • 51. Language: What do you mean by…
    Goal = Impact
    Impact = Long-term outcome
    Objectives (participant focused) = Outcomes
    Activities = Outputs
    Outputs may signify “tangible” accomplishments as a result of activities; products
    University of Wisconsin-Extension, Program Development and Evaluation
  • 52. Goal – outcome definition
    Goal represents a general, big-picture statement of desired results. “We find that it is useful to think of goals as the answer to the question ‘What are issues that you would like the program to address?’ (e.g., the goal of the program is to address existing community laws and norms about ATOD use) and outcomes as the answer to: ‘What changes do you want to occur because of your program?’ (e.g., the outcome of the program will be to increase the number of community residents who believe teenaged smoking is dangerous).”
    (Western CAPT)
    University of Wisconsin-Extension, Program Development and Evaluation
  • 53. Outputs vs.outcomes
    Example: Number of patients discharged from state mental hospital is an output. Percentage of discharged who are capable of living independently is an outcome
    Not how many worms the bird feeds its young, but how well the fledgling flies
    (United Way of America, 1999)
    University of Wisconsin-Extension, Program Development and Evaluation
  • 54. Logic Model…
    Represents intention, is not reality
    Focuses on expected outcomes
    Challenge of causal attribution
    Many factors influence process and outcomes
    Doesn’t address: Are we doing the right thing?
    Limitations
    University of Wisconsin-Extension, Program Development and Evaluation
  • 55. From Poister, 2003
    University of Wisconsin-Extension, Program Development and Evaluation
  • 56. Logic model with indicators for Outputs and Outcomes
    Outputs
    Outcomes
    Farmers practice new techniques
    Farm profitability increases
    Program implemented
    Targeted farmers
    Farmers learn
    Number of workshops held
    Quality of workshops
    Number and percent reporting increased profits; amount of increase
    Number and percent of farmers attending
    Number and percent who increase knowledge
    Number and percent who practice new techniques
    University of Wisconsin-Extension, Program Development and Evaluation
  • 57. Typical activity indicators to track
    Amount of products, services delivered
    #/type of customers/clients served
    Timeliness of service provision
    Accessibility and convenience of service
    Location; hours of operation; staff availability
    Accuracy, adequacy, relevance of assistance
    Courteousness
    Customer satisfaction
    # of clients served
    # of consultations
    # of workshops held
    # of attendees
    # of referrals
    Quality of service
    University of Wisconsin-Extension, Program Development and Evaluation
  • 58. Methods of data collection
    SOURCES OF INFORMATION
    Existing data
    Program records, attendance logs, etc
    Pictures, charts, maps, pictorial records
    Program participants
    Others: key informants, nonparticipants, proponents, critics, staff, collaborators, funders, etc.
    DATA COLLECTION METHODS
    Survey
    Interview
    Test
    Observation
    Group techniques
    Case study
    Photography
    Document review
    Expert or peer review
    University of Wisconsin-Extension, Program Development and Evaluation
  • 59. Engagement
    Engagement is the partnership of university knowledge and resources with those of the public and private sectors to enrich scholarship, research, and creative activity; enhance curriculum, teaching and learning; prepare educated, engaged citizens; strengthen democratic values and civic responsibility; address critical societal issues; and contribute to the public good.
  • 60. Benchmarks of Engagement
    Evidence of Institutional Commitment to Engagement
    Evidence of Institutional Resource Commitments to Engagement
    Evidence that Students are Involved in Engagement and Outreach Activities
    Evidence that Faculty and Staff are Engaged with External Constituents
  • 61. Benchmarks of Engagement
    Evidence that Institutions are Engaged with their Communities
    Evidence of Assessing the Impact and Outcomes of Engagement
    Evidence of Resource/Revenue Opportunities Generated through Engagement
  • 62. Assessment of Engagement
    Faculty Evaluation
    Clear goals
  • 63. Assessment of Engagement
    Faculty Evaluation
    Clear goals
    Adequate preparation
  • 64. Assessment of Engagement
    Faculty Evaluation
    Clear goals
    Adequate preparation
    Appropriate methods
  • 65. Assessment of Engagement
    Faculty Evaluation
    Clear goals
    Adequate preparation
    Appropriate methods
    Significant results
  • 66. Assessment of Engagement
    Faculty Evaluation
    Clear goals
    Adequate preparation
    Appropriate methods
    Significant results
    Effective presentation
  • 67. Assessment of Engagement
    Faculty Evaluation
    Clear goals
    Adequate preparation
    Appropriate methods
    Significant results
    Effective presentation
    Reflective critique
  • 68. What is required of you?
    Background of significant scholarship
  • 69. What is required of you?
    Background of significant scholarship
    Diagnostic skills
  • 70. What is required of you?
    Background of significant scholarship
    Diagnostic skills
    Use or development of creative and focused methodologies
  • 71. What is required of you?
    Background of significant scholarship
    Diagnostic skills
    Use or development of creative and focused methodologies
    Information organization and media skills
  • 72. What is required of you?
    Background of significant scholarship
    Diagnostic skills
    Use or development of creative and focused methodologies
    Information organization and media skills, and
    Written and oral skills in interpreting as well as presenting information