IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/epplan/v33y2010i2p165-171.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Blazing an evaluation pathway: Lessons learned from applying utilization-focused evaluation to a conservation education program

Author

Listed:
  • Flowers, Alice B.

Abstract

In 2005, state fish and wildlife agency wanted to examine how one of its conservation education programs was providing science-based understanding and outdoor experiences by evaluating students' knowledge, skills, attitudes and intended behavioral outcomes related to fish, fishing and aquatic habitats in Montana. A key factor in this study was the acceptance by program stakeholders to conduct the evaluation using a utilization-focused evaluation approach to promote usability and accuracy of evaluation results. Using a quasi-experimental non-equivalent group design, more than 2000 students in participating classrooms throughout Montana received a pre-survey, post-survey and an extended post-survey; 114 teachers participated in an Internet survey and 16 program instructors took part in a structured open-ended telephone interview. The participatory approach and mixed methods enhanced abilities to interpret results of student surveys in particular. The user-focused approach was discovered to be personal and situational, allowed the facilitation of the evaluation process with consideration for increased application of evaluation findings and implementation of recommendations from beginning to end. Further development of evaluation pathways is needed to more effectively evaluate outcomes and implement practical and transferable measures to determine if environmental education activities produce desired participant outcomes.

Suggested Citation

  • Flowers, Alice B., 2010. "Blazing an evaluation pathway: Lessons learned from applying utilization-focused evaluation to a conservation education program," Evaluation and Program Planning, Elsevier, vol. 33(2), pages 165-171, May.
  • Handle: RePEc:eee:epplan:v:33:y:2010:i:2:p:165-171
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0149-7189(09)00071-8
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Kroufek, Roman & Cincera, Jan & Kolenaty, Miloslav & Zalesak, Jan & Johnson, Bruce, 2023. "“I had a spider in my mouth”: What makes students happy in outdoor environmental education programs," Evaluation and Program Planning, Elsevier, vol. 99(C).
    2. Pascua, Liberty & Chang, Chew-Hung, 2015. "Using intervention-oriented evaluation to diagnose and correct students’ persistent climate change misconceptions: A Singapore case study," Evaluation and Program Planning, Elsevier, vol. 52(C), pages 70-77.
    3. Monroe, Martha C., 2010. "Challenges for environmental education evaluation," Evaluation and Program Planning, Elsevier, vol. 33(2), pages 194-196, May.
    4. Crohn, Kara & Birnbaum, Matthew, 2010. "Environmental education evaluation: Time to reflect, time for change," Evaluation and Program Planning, Elsevier, vol. 33(2), pages 155-158, May.
    5. Susan Roelofs & Nancy Edwards & Sarah Viehbeck & Cody Anderson, 2019. "Formative, embedded evaluation to strengthen interdisciplinary team science: Results of a 4-year, mixed methods, multi-country case study," Research Evaluation, Oxford University Press, vol. 28(1), pages 37-50.
    6. Marshall, Brittany & Salabarría-Peña, Yamir & Douglas, Chelsea & Nakelsky, Shoshanna & Pichon, Latrice C., 2022. "The utility of evaluation in optimizing implementation and improvement of HIV prevention programming," Evaluation and Program Planning, Elsevier, vol. 90(C).
    7. Burford, Gemma & Velasco, Ismael & Janoušková, Svatava & Zahradnik, Martin & Hak, Tomas & Podger, Dimity & Piggot, Georgia & Harder, Marie K., 2013. "Field trials of a novel toolkit for evaluating ‘intangible’ values-related dimensions of projects," Evaluation and Program Planning, Elsevier, vol. 36(1), pages 1-14.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:eee:epplan:v:33:y:2010:i:2:p:165-171. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Catherine Liu (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.elsevier.com/locate/evalprogplan .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.