Learning Resources
Required Readings
Dudley, J. R. (2020). Social work evaluation: Enhancing what we do (3rd ed.) Oxford University Press.
Chapter 8, “Improving How Programs and Practice Work” (pp. 171208)
Becker, L. A. (1999). Statistical and clinical significance. Retrieved from https://www.uccs.edu/lbecker/clinsig
Man-Son-Hing, M., Laupacis, A., O’Rourke, K., Molnar, F. J., Mahon, J., Chan, K. B., & Wells, G. (2002). Determination of the clinical importance of study results. Journal of general internal medicine, 17(6), 469-476.
Plummer, S.-B., Makris, S., & Brocksen S. (Eds.). (2014b). Social work case studies: Concentration year. Baltimore, MD: Laureate International Universities Publishing. [Vital Source e-reader].
Read the following section:
“Social Work Research: Qualitative Groups” (pp. 6869)
Document: Bliss, M. J., & Emshoff, J. G. (2002). Workbook for designing a process evaluation. Retrieved from http://beta.roadsafetyevaluation.com/evaluationguides/info/workbook-for-designing-a-process-evaluation.pdf (PDF)
Georgia Department of Human Resources, Division of Public Health.
Optional Resources
QSR International. (n. d.). NVivo 10. Retrieved October 17, 2013, from http://www.qsrinternational.com/products_nvivo.aspx
Use this webpage to view a demonstration of how qualitative data analysis can be assisted by software. You may explore any of the demos, but it is recommended that you start with NVivo eDemo. In order to view this demo, you will need to register, and download (or enable) the latest Adobe Flash Player.
Examples of Process Evaluation
Boyce, C., & Neale, P. (2006). Conducting in-depth interviews: A guide for designing and conducting in-depth interviews for evaluation input. Pathfinder International Tool Series: Monitoring and Evaluation 2. Retrieved from http://www.cpc.unc.edu/measure/training/materials/data-quality-portuguese/m_e_tool_series_indepth_interviews.pdf
Hesselink, A. E., & Harting, J. (2011). Process evaluation of a multiple risk factor perinatal programme for a hard-to-reach minority group. Journal of Advanced Nursing, 67(9), 20262037.
Note: Retrieved from the Walden Library databases.
Lee, E., Esaki, N., & Greene, R. (2009). Collocation: Integrating child welfare and substance abuse services. Journal of Social Work Practice in the Addictions, 9(1), 5570.
Note: Retrieved from the Walden Library databases.
Maxwell, N., Scourfield, J., Holland, S., Featherstone, B., & Lee, J. (2012). The benefits and challenges of training child protection social workers in father engagement. Child Abuse Review, 21(4), 299310.
Note: Retrieved from the Walden Library databases.
Discussion: Reporting a Process Evaluation
Just as in needs assessments, interviews and focus groups are common tools for obtaining information about the processes involved in the implementation of programs. Process evaluation should include specifics about purpose, questions which the evaluation will address, and methods that social workers will use to conduct evaluations.
Review the many examples of process evaluation results described in Chapter 8 of Dudley, J. R. (2020). Social work evaluation: Enhancing what we do. (3rd ed.) Chicago, IL: Lyceum Books, or in the optional resources. Select an example of a process evaluation that produced valuable information. Compare the description of those results with the Social Work Research Qualitative Groups case study located in this week’s resources..
By Day 3
Post a description of the process evaluation that you chose and explain why you selected this example. Describe the stage of program implementation in which the evaluation occurred, the informants, the questions asked, and the results. Based upon your comparison of the case study and the program evaluation report that you chose, improve upon the information presented in the case study by identifying gaps in information. Fill in these gaps as if you were the facilitator of the focus group. Clearly identify the purpose of the process evaluation and the questions asked.
SOCW 6311 Assignments
Our Service Charter
1. Professional & Expert Writers: Homework Discussion only hires the best. Our writers are specially selected and recruited, after which they undergo further training to perfect their skills for specialization purposes. Moreover, our writers are holders of masters and Ph.D. degrees. They have impressive academic records, besides being native English speakers.
2. Top Quality Papers: Our customers are always guaranteed of papers that exceed their expectations. All our writers have +5 years of experience. This implies that all papers are written by individuals who are experts in their fields. In addition, the quality team reviews all the papers before sending them to the customers.
3. Plagiarism-Free Papers: All papers provided by Homework Discussion are written from scratch. Appropriate referencing and citation of key information are followed. Plagiarism checkers are used by the Quality assurance team and our editors just to double-check that there are no instances of plagiarism.
4. Timely Delivery: Time wasted is equivalent to a failed dedication and commitment. Homework Discussion is known for timely delivery of any pending customer orders. Customers are well informed of the progress of their papers to ensure they keep track of what the writer is providing before the final draft is sent for grading.
5. Affordable Prices: Our prices are fairly structured to fit in all groups. Any customer willing to place their assignments with us can do so at very affordable prices. In addition, our customers enjoy regular discounts and bonuses.
6. 24/7 Customer Support: At Homework Discussion, we have put in place a team of experts who answer to all customer inquiries promptly. The best part is the ever-availability of the team. Customers can make inquiries anytime.