Social Science - Sociology Assignment 9

Process evaluations are often conducted at multiple points throughout the implementation of a program. Because the program is in progress, each evaluation may lead to findings that offer practical, real-time adjustments. In this way, a plan for ongoing evaluations allows for continuous monitoring and improvement.

Of course, planning a process evaluation does not just require thought about future evaluations. It also requires careful consideration of factors such as the central purpose and questions seeking to be answered, timing, the selection of an evaluator, and data collection and analysis. In this Assignment, you address these factors as you plan a process evaluation to be conducted on the potential program that you proposed earlier in the course.

Resources

Be sure to review the Learning Resources before completing this activity.

Click the weekly resources link to access the resources.

WEEKLY RESOURCES

To Prepare

Recall the program that you proposed in Week 4. Attached separately If needed, review your previous work related to the program, client needs, and the logic model. Process evaluation considers the inputs, including resources and activities, recorded in the logic model and how they have been applied.

Suppose your program proposal was approved, and the program was implemented at your agency, practice, or community setting. You must now develop a plan to evaluate the process of implementation. In other words, you must determine if the program is working as it was originally intended.

ASSIGNMENT BELOW

Submit a 3- to 4-page plan for a process evaluation based on the new program that you proposed earlier in the course.

Provide a summary of the program and the needs of the target population.

Explain why a process evaluation would be important for the program.

State the type of process evaluation and stage of implementation (when in the program it will occur) and why.

Determine who will conduct the process evaluation (internal or external evaluator).

Include a broad question to be answered by the process evaluation (overarching question).

Identify specific questions to be answered by the process evaluation (subquestions).

Describe a plan for gathering and analyzing the information.

Describe a plan for ongoing evaluations (how often, etc.).

Use the Learning Resources and peer-reviewed scholarly journal articles to support your paper. Make sure to include appropriate APA citations and a reference list.

submission information

Before submitting your final assignment, you can check your draft for authenticity. To check your draft, access the Turnitin Drafts from the Start Here area.

To submit your completed assignment, save your Assignment as WK9Assgn+last name+first initial.

Then, click on Start Assignment near the top of the page.

Next, click on Upload File and select Submit Assignment for review.

Rubric

SOCW_6311_Week9_Assignment_Rubric

SOCW_6311_Week9_Assignment_Rubric

Criteria Ratings Pts

This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeSubmit a 3- to 4-page plan for a process evaluation based on the new program that you proposed earlier in the course....Provide a summary of the program and the needs of the target population.

12 to >10.68 pts

Exceeds Expectation 90%-100%

Response meets expectations and exceeds through insightful connection to social work research and practice and/or additional details and examples from the Learning Resources, peer-reviewed research, or other relevant sources.

10.68 to >9.48 pts

Meets Expectation 80%–89%

Response fully summarizes the program and the needs of the target population. ... Response demonstrates clear connection to the Learning Resources.

9.48 to >8.28 pts

Fair 70%–79%

Response provides a limited, incomplete, or vaguely developed summary of the program and the needs of the target population. ... Response may show evidence of connection to the Learning Resources, but it is vague or poorly connected.

8.28 to >0 pts

Needs Improvement 0%–69%

Response makes little or no attempt to summarize the program and the needs of the target population. ... Response does not demonstrate connection to the Learning Resources. No resources are used to support the response.

12 pts

This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeExplain why a process evaluation would be important for the program....State the type of process evaluation and stage of implementation (when in the program it will occur) and why....Determine who will conduct the process evaluation (internal or external evaluator).

16 to >14.24 pts

Exceeds Expectation 90%-100%

Response meets expectations and exceeds through insightful connection to social work research and practice and/or additional details and examples from the Learning Resources, peer-reviewed research, or other relevant sources.

14.24 to >12.64 pts

Meets Expectation 80%–89%

Response fully explains why a process evaluation would be important for the program. ... Response clearly states the type of evaluation, stage of implementation, and who will conduct the evaluation. Choices are fully justified through reference to the Learning Resources or other peer-reviewed research.

12.64 to >11.04 pts

Fair 70%–79%

Response provides a limited, incomplete, or vaguely developed explanation for why a process evaluation would be important for the program. ... Response states the type of evaluation, stage of implementation, and who will conduct the evaluation. Justification is limited, incomplete, or vague and/or does not reference the Learning Resources or other peer-reviewed research.

11.04 to >0 pts

Needs Improvement 0%–69%

Response makes little or no attempt to explain why a process evaluation would be important for the program. ... Response may state the type of evaluation, stage of implementation, and who will conduct the evaluation. However, there is little or no attempt to justify these choices through reference to the Learning Resources or other peer-reviewed research.

16 pts

This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeInclude a broad question to be answered by the process evaluation (overarching question)....Identify specific questions to be answered by the process evaluation (subquestions).

12 to >10.68 pts

Exceeds Expectation 90%-100%

Response meets expectations and exceeds through more than two clear, appropriate, and specific subquestions and/or through strong alignment between specific questions and the broad/overarching question.

10.68 to >9.48 pts

Meets Expectation 80%–89%

Response identifies at least two clear, appropriate, and specific subquestions to be answered by the process evaluation.

9.48 to >8.28 pts

Fair 70%–79%

Response includes an appropriate overarching question to be answered by the process evaluation. ... Response identifies two appropriate subquestions to be answered by the process evaluation. Questions lack specificity and/or clarity.

8.28 to >0 pts

Needs Improvement 0%–69%

Overarching question to be answered by the process evaluation is inappropriate or missing. ... Response identifies fewer than two subquestions, subquestions are inappropriate, or they are missing.

12 pts

This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeDescribe a plan for gathering and analyzing the information.

16 to >14.24 pts

Exceeds Expectation 90%-100%

Response meets expectations and exceeds through insightful connection to social work research and practice and/or additional details and examples from the Learning Resources, peer-reviewed research, or other relevant sources.

14.24 to >12.64 pts

Meets Expectation 80%–89%

Response fully describes plans for gathering and analyzing the information. Specific details and examples are included. ... Response demonstrates clear connection to the Learning Resources.

12.64 to >11.04 pts

Fair 70%–79%

Response provides a limited, incomplete, or vaguely developed description of plans for gathering and analyzing the information. General details and examples are included. ... Response may show evidence of connection to the Learning Resources, but it is vague or poorly connected.

11.04 to >0 pts

Needs Improvement 0%–69%

Response makes little or no attempt to describe plans for gathering and analyzing the information. No details or examples are included. ... Response does not demonstrate connection to the Learning Resources. No resources are used to support the response.

16 pts

This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeDescribe a plan for ongoing evaluations (how often, etc.).

12 to >10.68 pts

Exceeds Expectation 90%-100%

Response meets expectations and exceeds through insightful connection to social work research and practice and/or additional details and examples from the Learning Resources, peer-reviewed research, or other relevant sources.

10.68 to >9.48 pts

Meets Expectation 80%–89%

Response fully describes plans for ongoing evaluations. Specific details and examples are included. ... Response demonstrates clear connection to the Learning Resources.

9.48 to >8.28 pts

Fair 70%–79%

Response provides a limited, incomplete, or vaguely developed description of plans for ongoing evaluations. General details and examples are included. ... Response may show evidence of connection to the Learning Resources, but it is vague or poorly connected.

8.28 to >0 pts

Needs Improvement 0%–69%

Response makes little or no attempt to describe plans for ongoing evaluations. No details or examples are included. ... Response does not demonstrate connection to the Learning Resources. No resources are used to support the response.

12 pts

This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeWriting

12 to >10.68 pts

Exceeds Expectation 90%-100%

Paper meets length requirements, meets expectations, is generally error-free (two or fewer), and further exceeds by showcasing an exemplary scholarly voice to develop its message or communicate ideas. ... Paper appropriately paraphrases sources, using one or fewer quotes. Presents polished APA Style. Citations, reference list, and paper formatting are generally error-free (two or fewer). ... Tone and presentation of ideas are free from bias and objective, unless otherwise directed in the prompt.

10.68 to >9.48 pts

Meets Expectation 80%–89%

Paper meets length requirements and is clear and coherent. Errors in grammar, sentence structure, and punctuation are minor, minimal (three to five), and do not interfere with the scholarly message. The paper displays effective organization and focus to communicate ideas. ... Paper appropriately paraphrases sources. Paper may use two to three short quotes but provides appropriate reference. Consistently documents sources in APA Style. Uses citations for ideas requiring attribution, with a few minimal errors (three to five). The reference list is complete and contains only minimal errors (three to five). Paper formatting is appropriate. There is a clear distinction between cited content and original thought. ... Tone and presentation of ideas are free from bias and objective, unless otherwise directed in the prompt.

9.48 to >8.28 pts

Fair 70%–79%

Paper does not meet length requirements (either somewhat too short or too long). The paper is somewhat clear and coherent. Errors in grammar, sentence structure, and punctuation are minor but frequent (5–10) and occasionally interfere with the message. The paper lacks clear organization or occasionally strays from the focus. ... Paper may rely on four short quotes or one to two long quotes (over 40 words) and/or does not sufficiently paraphrase material from other resources into student’s own words. Attempts to document sources in APA Style. Citations are present but contain frequent APA errors or omissions. A reference list is provided but is incomplete and/or contains frequent APA errors. Paper formatting may be incorrect (e.g., single-spaced or without a title page). ... Occasionally lacks a clear distinction between cited content and original thought. ... Tone and presentation of ideas are free from bias and objective, unless otherwise directed in the prompt.

8.28 to >0 pts

Needs Improvement 0%–69%

Paper does not meet length requirements (either significantly too short or too long). The paper lacks clarity and coherence. Errors in grammar, sentence structure, and punctuation are major, pervasive (11+), and interfere with the message. The paper is not organized or lacks focus. ... Paper relies excessively on quoting (five or more short quotes or three or more long quotes [over 40 words]) and/or uses quoted material without paraphrasing or referencing the source of the material. Little or no attempt has been made to document sources in APA Style. Citations are infrequent or missing, and a reference list is not provided. Little or no attempt has been made to format the paper in APA Style. ... There is no distinction between cited content and original thought. ... Tone and presentation of ideas reveal bias and subjectivity.

12 pts

Total Points: 80

Process evaluations are often conducted at multiple points throughout the implementation of a program. Because the program is in progress, each evaluation may lead to findings that offer practical, real-time adjustments. In this way, a plan for ongoing evaluations allows for continuous monitoring and improvement.

Of course, planning a process evaluation does not just require thought about future evaluations. It also requires careful consideration of factors such as the central purpose and questions seeking to be answered, timing, the selection of an evaluator, and data collection and analysis. In this Assignment, you address these factors as you plan a process evaluation to be conducted on the potential program that you proposed earlier in the course.

Resources

Be sure to review the Learning Resources before completing this activity.

Click the weekly resources link to access the resources.

WEEKLY RESOURCES

To Prepare

Recall the program that you proposed in Week 4. Attached separately If needed, review your previous work related to the program, client needs, and the logic model. Process evaluation considers the inputs, including resources and activities, recorded in the logic model and how they have been applied.

Suppose your program proposal was approved, and the program was implemented at your agency, practice, or community setting. You must now develop a plan to evaluate the process of implementation. In other words, you must determine if the program is working as it was originally intended.

ASSIGNMENT BELOW

Submit a 3- to 4-page plan for a process evaluation based on the new program that you proposed earlier in the course.

Provide a summary of the program and the needs of the target population.

Explain why a process evaluation would be important for the program.

State the type of process evaluation and stage of implementation (when in the program it will occur) and why.

Determine who will conduct the process evaluation (internal or external evaluator).

Include a broad question to be answered by the process evaluation (overarching question).

Identify specific questions to be answered by the process evaluation (subquestions).

Describe a plan for gathering and analyzing the information.

Describe a plan for ongoing evaluations (how often, etc.).

Use the Learning Resources and peer-reviewed scholarly journal articles to support your paper. Make sure to include appropriate APA citations and a reference list.

submission information

Before submitting your final assignment, you can check your draft for authenticity. To check your draft, access the Turnitin Drafts from the Start Here area.

To submit your completed assignment, save your Assignment as WK9Assgn+last name+first initial.

Then, click on Start Assignment near the top of the page.

Next, click on Upload File and select Submit Assignment for review.

Rubric

SOCW_6311_Week9_Assignment_Rubric

SOCW_6311_Week9_Assignment_Rubric

Criteria Ratings Pts

This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeSubmit a 3- to 4-page plan for a process evaluation based on the new program that you proposed earlier in the course....Provide a summary of the program and the needs of the target population.

12 to >10.68 pts

Exceeds Expectation 90%-100%

Response meets expectations and exceeds through insightful connection to social work research and practice and/or additional details and examples from the Learning Resources, peer-reviewed research, or other relevant sources.

10.68 to >9.48 pts

Meets Expectation 80%–89%

Response fully summarizes the program and the needs of the target population. ... Response demonstrates clear connection to the Learning Resources.

9.48 to >8.28 pts

Fair 70%–79%

Response provides a limited, incomplete, or vaguely developed summary of the program and the needs of the target population. ... Response may show evidence of connection to the Learning Resources, but it is vague or poorly connected.

8.28 to >0 pts

Needs Improvement 0%–69%

Response makes little or no attempt to summarize the program and the needs of the target population. ... Response does not demonstrate connection to the Learning Resources. No resources are used to support the response.

12 pts

This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeExplain why a process evaluation would be important for the program....State the type of process evaluation and stage of implementation (when in the program it will occur) and why....Determine who will conduct the process evaluation (internal or external evaluator).

16 to >14.24 pts

Exceeds Expectation 90%-100%

Response meets expectations and exceeds through insightful connection to social work research and practice and/or additional details and examples from the Learning Resources, peer-reviewed research, or other relevant sources.

14.24 to >12.64 pts

Meets Expectation 80%–89%

Response fully explains why a process evaluation would be important for the program. ... Response clearly states the type of evaluation, stage of implementation, and who will conduct the evaluation. Choices are fully justified through reference to the Learning Resources or other peer-reviewed research.

12.64 to >11.04 pts

Fair 70%–79%

Response provides a limited, incomplete, or vaguely developed explanation for why a process evaluation would be important for the program. ... Response states the type of evaluation, stage of implementation, and who will conduct the evaluation. Justification is limited, incomplete, or vague and/or does not reference the Learning Resources or other peer-reviewed research.

11.04 to >0 pts

Needs Improvement 0%–69%

Response makes little or no attempt to explain why a process evaluation would be important for the program. ... Response may state the type of evaluation, stage of implementation, and who will conduct the evaluation. However, there is little or no attempt to justify these choices through reference to the Learning Resources or other peer-reviewed research.

16 pts

This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeInclude a broad question to be answered by the process evaluation (overarching question)....Identify specific questions to be answered by the process evaluation (subquestions).

12 to >10.68 pts

Exceeds Expectation 90%-100%

Response meets expectations and exceeds through more than two clear, appropriate, and specific subquestions and/or through strong alignment between specific questions and the broad/overarching question.

10.68 to >9.48 pts

Meets Expectation 80%–89%

Response identifies at least two clear, appropriate, and specific subquestions to be answered by the process evaluation.

9.48 to >8.28 pts

Fair 70%–79%

Response includes an appropriate overarching question to be answered by the process evaluation. ... Response identifies two appropriate subquestions to be answered by the process evaluation. Questions lack specificity and/or clarity.

8.28 to >0 pts

Needs Improvement 0%–69%

Overarching question to be answered by the process evaluation is inappropriate or missing. ... Response identifies fewer than two subquestions, subquestions are inappropriate, or they are missing.

12 pts

This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeDescribe a plan for gathering and analyzing the information.

16 to >14.24 pts

Exceeds Expectation 90%-100%

Response meets expectations and exceeds through insightful connection to social work research and practice and/or additional details and examples from the Learning Resources, peer-reviewed research, or other relevant sources.

14.24 to >12.64 pts

Meets Expectation 80%–89%

Response fully describes plans for gathering and analyzing the information. Specific details and examples are included. ... Response demonstrates clear connection to the Learning Resources.

12.64 to >11.04 pts

Fair 70%–79%

Response provides a limited, incomplete, or vaguely developed description of plans for gathering and analyzing the information. General details and examples are included. ... Response may show evidence of connection to the Learning Resources, but it is vague or poorly connected.

11.04 to >0 pts

Needs Improvement 0%–69%

Response makes little or no attempt to describe plans for gathering and analyzing the information. No details or examples are included. ... Response does not demonstrate connection to the Learning Resources. No resources are used to support the response.

16 pts

This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeDescribe a plan for ongoing evaluations (how often, etc.).

12 to >10.68 pts

Exceeds Expectation 90%-100%

Response meets expectations and exceeds through insightful connection to social work research and practice and/or additional details and examples from the Learning Resources, peer-reviewed research, or other relevant sources.

10.68 to >9.48 pts

Meets Expectation 80%–89%

Response fully describes plans for ongoing evaluations. Specific details and examples are included. ... Response demonstrates clear connection to the Learning Resources.

9.48 to >8.28 pts

Fair 70%–79%

Response provides a limited, incomplete, or vaguely developed description of plans for ongoing evaluations. General details and examples are included. ... Response may show evidence of connection to the Learning Resources, but it is vague or poorly connected.

8.28 to >0 pts

Needs Improvement 0%–69%

Response makes little or no attempt to describe plans for ongoing evaluations. No details or examples are included. ... Response does not demonstrate connection to the Learning Resources. No resources are used to support the response.

12 pts

This criterion is linked to a Learning OutcomeWriting

12 to >10.68 pts

Exceeds Expectation 90%-100%

Paper meets length requirements, meets expectations, is generally error-free (two or fewer), and further exceeds by showcasing an exemplary scholarly voice to develop its message or communicate ideas. ... Paper appropriately paraphrases sources, using one or fewer quotes. Presents polished APA Style. Citations, reference list, and paper formatting are generally error-free (two or fewer). ... Tone and presentation of ideas are free from bias and objective, unless otherwise directed in the prompt.

10.68 to >9.48 pts

Meets Expectation 80%–89%

Paper meets length requirements and is clear and coherent. Errors in grammar, sentence structure, and punctuation are minor, minimal (three to five), and do not interfere with the scholarly message. The paper displays effective organization and focus to communicate ideas. ... Paper appropriately paraphrases sources. Paper may use two to three short quotes but provides appropriate reference. Consistently documents sources in APA Style. Uses citations for ideas requiring attribution, with a few minimal errors (three to five). The reference list is complete and contains only minimal errors (three to five). Paper formatting is appropriate. There is a clear distinction between cited content and original thought. ... Tone and presentation of ideas are free from bias and objective, unless otherwise directed in the prompt.

9.48 to >8.28 pts

Fair 70%–79%

Paper does not meet length requirements (either somewhat too short or too long). The paper is somewhat clear and coherent. Errors in grammar, sentence structure, and punctuation are minor but frequent (5–10) and occasionally interfere with the message. The paper lacks clear organization or occasionally strays from the focus. ... Paper may rely on four short quotes or one to two long quotes (over 40 words) and/or does not sufficiently paraphrase material from other resources into student’s own words. Attempts to document sources in APA Style. Citations are present but contain frequent APA errors or omissions. A reference list is provided but is incomplete and/or contains frequent APA errors. Paper formatting may be incorrect (e.g., single-spaced or without a title page). ... Occasionally lacks a clear distinction between cited content and original thought. ... Tone and presentation of ideas are free from bias and objective, unless otherwise directed in the prompt.

8.28 to >0 pts

Needs Improvement 0%–69%

Paper does not meet length requirements (either significantly too short or too long). The paper lacks clarity and coherence. Errors in grammar, sentence structure, and punctuation are major, pervasive (11+), and interfere with the message. The paper is not organized or lacks focus. ... Paper relies excessively on quoting (five or more short quotes or three or more long quotes [over 40 words]) and/or uses quoted material without paraphrasing or referencing the source of the material. Little or no attempt has been made to document sources in APA Style. Citations are infrequent or missing, and a reference list is not provided. Little or no attempt has been made to format the paper in APA Style. ... There is no distinction between cited content and original thought. ... Tone and presentation of ideas reveal bias and subjectivity.

12 pts

Total Points: 80