PDCoP-Evaluation May 2009 Meeting Notes

From Extension Collaborative Wiki

May 6, 2009 Core Leadership Meeting eXtension Evaluation Community of Practice Meeting Notes

Present: Ben Silliman, Heather Boyd, Suzanne LeMenestrel, Michael Duttweiler, Sorrell Brown, Allison Nichols, Melissa Cater, Kimberly Keller We missed: Mary Arnold, Michael Newman, Becky White

Below is a first draft of the notes, using the proposed agenda as guidance.

I. Core principles and operating structure as a CoP (intro discussion estimated 30 minutes)

A. What do we want as our ground rules for CoP leadership group discussion? B. How shall we structure ourselves as a group? C. In what ways do we want to work together? D. What shall we consider our working mission, vision and values? E. How much time might we each be able to commit between now and November 2010?

We discussed these as our ground rules and values: The ten tips for learning communities shared by Nancy Franz (elluminate Webinar) Interactive Democratic Learning over tasks Learning over information Low stress yet still productive

We will calendar meetings between now and the end of 2009. Then, we will calendar for 2010. We assume that we are working virtually/online considering the budget issues Extension systems are facing. Heather will get help from her administrative assistant to get dates set.

We reminded ourselves of our purpose and mission.

A reminder from one of our members is: Ours is a Professional Development CoP which by definition is internally focused and separate from public eXtension content. (http://collaborate.extension.org/wiki/PDCoP_Application_Procedure) Success is defined internally: "The ultimate success of all PDCoPs is the positive demonstrable impact on these faculty/staff."

II. Review the accepted plan and scope of work http://about.extension.org/wiki/eXtension_Evaluation_CoP#CoP_Application

A. Scope of Work for the proposed PDCoP through December 31 2010. (estimated 40 minutes) Number of Moodle courses created: 3 For the next conference call, we discussed having an informal review of Moodle modules that Joseph and Mike created. Joseph and Mike both generously said that we could review them for possible use by the CoP.

We did not decide on what would constitute an informal peer review during the conference call. For the next call, we will discuss: 1) suggestions for the authors; 2) things we learned about program evaluation in Extension from the modules and 3) whether we would place these Moodle courses on our site. What other suggestions does anyone have for this peer review process?

Joseph’s Course 1: "Program Planning and Evaluation" is intended to be the first program planning and evaluation course an agent or specialist takes when employed. Joseph developed the course content, and Richard Karel assisted him with developing the files. Richard used Captivate to crate the "movie-like" features. http://extol.tennessee.edu/extolsdbx1/

All members of the CoP should click the Course Category labeled "For Guest Access" to see the two courses Joseph created. Access does not require login.

Joseph’s Course 2: "Outcome Measurement" is intended as a six-week, structured course for more experienced specialists and agents. I created this course in Moodle. So, it has a completely different look and feel than the "Program Planning and Evaluation" course. I intended to offer it about twice a year over the six-week period. This course was developed as part of my Ph.D. program to demonstrate instructional technology competence. (You know evaluators, we have all these competencies we have to demonstrate with authentic assessment!) Anyway, this is a very bare bones course, but I do think functionally, it is a good course to demonstrate Moodle features to those who are new to the platform.

Mike’s Course Options: Mike is willing to facilitate a guided discussion. Access to his courses is more limited. See his note below: If you want to take a look at the courses, indicate your name and preferred times in this Doodle poll. If the dates don't work, Mike will come up with another one or two. http://www.doodle.com/p64aa6gq477xwwzy

Number of published FAQs: 30 2-3 topics per core leader Content outline: 90 4-H Evaluation for Impact Content ACA Program Evaluation Standards Number of basic information pages: 8 (overview plus one page for each Evaluation for Impact area)

B. Address how we can go about planning for the pieces we committed to, whether we want to make changes, etc.

C. Review commitments made to complete different portions - who committed to what o Allison Nichols —Analyzing and Interpreting Data o Ben Silliman—Methods and Tools o Becky White—Program Planning o Melissa Cater—Collecting and Handling Data o Lisa Guion – Multicultural issues o Whom did we miss from the last volunteer round?

We had additional (or reminder) volunteers for the remaining modules. Michael Duttweiller – Communicating Results Sorrell Brown – Help with a marketing plan for marketing the site and Community to the Extension system Kimberly Keller – Focusing Evaluation By the next conference call, each issue area person is going to put some more detail around how they see their roles and what they consider as part of their scope. Each issue area person will also oversee the FAQ list related to their topic so as to have broad understanding and to track the content.

Additional volunteers needed: 1) Tech person 2) Liasion with Mike Lambur for tracking use of the CoP, evaluating user experiences, etc. 3) Other?

III. Plan for another number of teleconferences and possible in person meeting at AEA (estimated 20 minutes)

We acknowledged that budgets would probably not allow an in-person meeting at AEA, so we will plan to meet online for the remainder of 2009.