|

|
|
Incorporating Practice
into Theory-Based Curriculum
by Lyn Paleo, Public Health
I co-teach a graduate-level
course on program evaluation at the School of Public Health. I believe
that students in a practice-based field such as this should receive a
combination of theory and skills development. Theory-based lectures are
critical; however, they alone are insufficient to the task of teaching
people how to design and conduct evaluations for health promotion programs.
These days many, perhaps most,
health promotion programs target vulnerable populations such as immigrants,
homeless families, gang youth, or substance abusers. People in these groups
generally have either low English-language literacy skills or a strong
aversion to taking tests. I tell my students that if you invite people
to a nutrition education workshop, a gang violence prevention program,
or a parenting class and impose upon them a written test at the end of
the first session--worse yet, give them a pre-test on material they are
supposed to learn in the subsequent weeks--they will be less motivated
to return. Written pre- and post-tests are considered an indispensable
tool for evaluation, but I assert that there are better alternatives that
are no less valid and much less burdensome to program participants.
During the four class sessions
devoted to designing surveys and tests, I incorporate skills-building
activities along with lectures on measurement theory. First and foremost,
but not an innovation of mine, is the tradition that all students partner
with a community agency and develop a viable evaluation plan for a real
program. This tradition is an indication that the school also values practice-based
learning. My innovation lies in the classroom interactive exercises that
help students figure out how to design, write, and critique surveys and
tests. In several sessions, students in small groups put up on large sheets
of paper sample post-test questions to demonstrate their understanding
of the theoretical concept for that session. We then spend a few minutes
critiquing the questions and identifying better approaches. In another
session, each group gets a stack of two dozen actual surveys and post-tests
and has half an hour to find examples of all the types of problems in
writing questions which we discussed in preceding class sessions.
During these sessions, students
themselves experience alternatives to the typical paper-and-pencil post-test,
and we examine each method for its validity, reliability, and participant
response and discuss the implications for analysis. For example, students
each are given a dozen sticker-dots to together place on a large flip-chart
grid, indicating by the number of dots in each square their aggregate
opinion of which quantitative method has higher cost, bias, and response
rate. We then discuss how this method might be used in a nutrition class
with plastic food models before which participants place sticker-dots
to show which they think is the ideal serving size. On another day, students
receive a sheet with 30 mailing labels onto which are printed a mixed-up
set of ten concepts, indicators, and measures; they peel off and rearrange
the labels to match up the ten sets. This always has been a popular exercise,
and it is easy, then, to discuss how labels can be used as a post-test
assessment, perhaps one that incorporates drawings more than words. Through
the combination of these (and other) classroom activities and presentations
of theory, students come to consider differences in test-taking modalities:
they recognize that some people test fine on a standard written instrument,
but other times the better option is an oral test or a skills demonstration.
The proof is in the pudding--or
in this case in the final product. Students' evaluation plans show not
only their facility with the theoretical material, but also their own
innovations in gearing health promotion programs' post-tests to both the
purpose of the program and the inclinations and language abilities of
the target group.
|