Workshop Evaluation

Program evaluation, or in this case, the evaluation of a workshop, is an analytical process of collecting, interpreting, and using the information to determine the workshop's effectiveness, and whether it is accomplishing what it was designed to do. If a program cannot prove its effectiveness, it may be difficult to determine its need or its value. Stake holders, especially the participants in the workshop, must be confident that the service they are purchasing is valuable, valid, and effective (Spaulding, 2008). The workshop evaluation makes this possible. The goal of this paper is to describe the evaluation method appropriate to assess the effectiveness of a stress management workshop, and a justification of the selection.

Evaluating Workshops

For the sake of accountability, programs, such as the Workshop being evaluated, must meet the needs of the intended population, otherwise, they are ineffective and inconsequential (Astramovich, & Coker, 2007). An effective workshop evaluation provides professional worth and proves responsibility and accountability to participants and other stake holders. For the evaluation of the Stress Management Workshop for Parents of Developmentally Disabled Children (the Workshop), a summative evaluation is used. This is a prudent choice because as part of the Workshop development, it is necessary to measure the outcomes of the Workshop according to the participants' experience (Spaulding, 2008). D'Eon, Sadownik, Harrison, and Nation (2008) found that self-assessments, such as the Evaluation for Workshop Participants attached hereto, were valid for evaluating the effectiveness of workshops. Findings from the evaluation may be integrated into the ongoing development of the Workshop.

Questions for Evaluation

A primary goal of the evaluation was to determine participants' thoughts, feelings, and behaviors in several domains, including overall quality of the workshop, changes in experiences of stress, identifiable changes in behavior, program comprehension, and the general workshop environment. In each of these domains, the goal was to ask questions that would contribute to the assessment of how they perceived their experience, how they felt throughout the experience, and what they have done or planned to do because of the experience. In each of the domains, the first question elicits a response of thoughts and perceptions, the second, feelings, and the third, accomplished or intended behaviors. Identifying differences in perception, feeling, and behavior seemed important because the overall intention of the workshop is to effect the individual on various levels of experience. For example, if the participant enjoyed the Workshop, but did not experience behavioral change, the Workshop was not wholly successful. Similarly, if the participant expressed positive behavior changes as a result of the program, yet would not recommend it to others, this may be a point of contention to examine.

Participatory-Oriented Evaluation

The evaluation of the Workshop utilizes a participatory-oriented approach because the workshop developer seeks to identify the Workshop's effects on the population for which it was designed (Spaulding, 2008). It is a results-based, outcome-oriented evaluation developed to provide accountability to the participants and gain diagnostic input to determine its deficiencies and shortcomings according to the Workshop participants. Patton (1988) believed evaluations should be accessible to participants and aim toward responsiveness to participant needs. The feedback is meant to address issues or shortcomings and to integrate the feedback into appropriate alterations to the program or workshop (Spaulding, 2008). Participatory-oriented evaluations have traditionally been employed in educational settings (Cousins & Earl, 1992) and this workshop format seems to fall into an educational category. In any event, evaluating the outcomes experienced by the participants and responding to those experiences is a critical component to measuring the ultimate success of the Workshop.

Post Workshop Evaluation

The evaluation will be implemented during the closing presentation of the Workshop. Participants will be asked to supply an email or physical address to which a follow-up evaluation will be sent six months after the Workshop. The follow-up evaluation will be the same as the post-presentation evaluation and designed to assess participants' durable behavior change and the Workshop's utility over time (Steinert, Boillat, Meterissian, Liben, & McLeod, 2008).

Conclusion

The effectiveness of an intervention, such as the Workshop, depends, at least in part, on the effectiveness of the evaluation and the integration of information gained from this assessment. To gauge its worth for the intended population, a workshop must be thoroughly and accurately evaluated. The attached evaluation is summative, and a results-based, outcome-oriented, self-assessment for participants of the Workshop, designed to evaluate the Stress Management Workshop for Parents of Developmentally Disabled Children.

References

Astramovich, R. L., & Coker, K. J. (2007). Program Evaluation: The Accountability Bridge Model for Counselors. Journal of Counseling & Development, 85(2), 162-172.

Cousins, J. B., & Earl, L. M. (1992). The Case for Participatory Evaluation. Educational Evaluation and Policy Analysis, 14(4), 397. doi: 10.2307/1164283

D'Eon, M., Sadownik, L., Harrison, A., & Nation, J. (2008). Using Self-Assessments to Detect Workshop Success: Do They Work? American Journal of Evaluation, 29(1), 92-98. doi: 10.1177/1098214007312630

Patton, M. Q. (1988). The Evaluator's responsibility for utilization. Evaluation Practice, 9(2), 5- 24. doi: 10.1016/S0886-1633(88)80059-X

Spaulding, D.T. (2008). Foundations of program evaluation. In Program evaluation in practice: Core concepts and examples for discussion and analysis (pp. 3–35). San Francisco, CA: Jossey–Bass.

Steinert, Y., Boillat, M., Meterissian, S., Liben, S., & McLeod, P. J. (2008). Developing successful workshops: A workshop for educators. Medical Teacher, 30(3), 328–330. doi:10.1080/01421590801948059

Evaluation for Workshop Participants

                                                                                                                          

Overall Quality		Strongly Disagree			Disagree	Neither Agree Nor Disagree	Agree	Strongly Agree
1.  I am satisfied with the quality of the Stress Management Workshop (Workshop).
2.  I feel a sense of accomplishment that I completed the Workshop.
3.  I will recommend or have recommended this Workshop to other parents.
Changes in Experience of Stress				Strongly Dis-Agree	Disagree	Neither Agree Nor Disagree	Agree	Strongly Agree
4.  My thinking has changed since I participated in the Workshop.
5.  When I start to feel stressed, I remember that I have the tools to manage it.
6.  I have a different perspective of my circumstances.
Changes in Behavior			Strongly Disagree		Disagree	Neither Agree Nor Disagree	Agree	Strongly Agree
7.  I can see that my behavior has changed.
8.  I am more comfortable with the way I act.
9.  I use the techniques I learned in the Workshop, when I feel stressed.
Program Comprehension			Strongly Disagree		Disagree	Neither Agree Nor Disagree	Agree	Strongly Agree
10.  It was easy to understood the presentations in the Workshop.
11.  The concepts in the program were easy to learn  because of the way they were presented.
12.  I would participate in a follow-up workshop at a later time.
General Workshop Environment		Strongly Disagree			Disagree	Neither Agree Nor Disagree	Agree	Strongly Agree
13. I thought the presenter was helpful and attentive to the participants.
14.  I felt comfortable to ask questions when I needed clarification.
15.  I enjoyed a sense of camaraderie with the other participants.

Additional comments and concerns are welcomed!  Please share them below, or on the reverse side of this form.  Additionally, you can send additional information and your experiences in an email to:  participant.services@workshopforparents.org

Thank you.