- Year 2019
- NSF Noyce Award # 1557357
- First Name Nathan
- Last Name Magee
- Institution The College of New Jersey
- Role/Position Principal Investigator on TCNJ Noyce grant; Professor of Physics
- Workshop Category Track 1: Scholarships and Stipends
- Workshop Disciplines Audience Physics
- Target Audience Evaluators/Education Researchers, Project PIs / Co-PIs / Other Faculty/Staff
- Topics Research, Assessment, and/or Evaluation
- Session Length 45 minutes
- Additional Presenter(s)
Susan Eriksson, susan.eriksson@gmail.com, Eriksson Associates, Project External Evaluator
Goals
Participants will:
1. Learn how project design aligns with evaluation
2. Better appreciate how evaluation informs program development
3. Learn about resources to support Noyce program evaluation
Evidence
Michael Quinn Patton quoted Smith (1994) “program failures ‘could be lessened’ or even perhaps eliminated if evaluators become more involved in program development”. This theory of developmental evaluation, commonly applied to large, complex projects, can be applied to smaller, more straightforward Noyce projects in which complexity can arrive from factors such as changing state mandates for preparation of student teachers or dramatic changes in personnel. Developmental evaluation can be characterized by the external evaluator a) working with the internal team to design the project from inception through a maturing project, b) committing to the project’s success, c) changing metrics and instruments as the project matures, d) providing rapid feedback, and e) having creative and critical thinking balanced with rigorous evidence-based perspectives (Patton, 2006; Better Evaluation 2019). We will use the NOYCE project from The College of New Jersey as an example throughout the activities, drawing upon other current and potential partnerships.
Proposal
Noyce project PI Nathan Magee and external evaluator Susan Eriksson will model how the two roles work together in the physics program at The College of New Jersey with participants applying these principles to their own projects. The following information includes the activity/subject, estimated time, presenter and interactive participant activity.
Introduction to Workshop (10 min), Magee: PI perspective and Eriksson: external evaluator perspective, Participant introductions (depending on number of people)
NSF Program Officer on ‘why evaluation’, (5 min), NSF officer TBD, Lecture format
Aligning project goals with outcomes, (15), Magee: Project goals, Eriksson outcomes; Participants will align their own goals with outcomes in a Logic Model.
Aligning project management with evaluation/monitoring (10), Magee: setting up project management; Participants will list major benchmarks
End game: What works and why – purpose of evaluation (5); Eriksson: purpose of evaluation; Participants address utility of their own evaluation
Resources (10), Eriksson: resource overview, Magee: working with other projects and what projects need from NSF; Printed resource list and participant questions
Plans for next steps (5), Magee: participants write out an action item
