The Harvard Family Research Project separated from the Harvard Graduate School of Education to become the Global Family Research Project as of January 1, 2017. It is no longer affiliated with Harvard University.
Volume V, Number 2 & 3, 1999
Issue Topic: Methodology
Special Feature
The Evaluation Exchange Readers' Survey
JuNelle Harris of Harvard Family Research Project reveals the results of the recent satisfaction survey of The Evaluation Exchange readers.
HFRP has sought to make The Evaluation Exchange an interactive newsletter from its inception. Recently, in order to be able to evolve in response to reader feedback, we invited readers to complete a satisfaction survey. Readers were asked to rate the newsletter based upon four qualities: informative, readable, useful, and thought-provoking. We also asked them to identify which sections of the newsletter they found most and least useful. Finally, we gave readers an opportunity to offer specific comments on The Evaluation Exchange and to suggest changes in the format or the types of issues addressed. While we were pleased to discover that the majority of respondents were satisfied with the newsletter—praising it as “relevant,” “useful,” and “readable”—we also appreciated the constructive criticism that we received. Of particular interest to us were issues and methods readers identified as worthy of more attention. These are briefly discussed below, along with the immediate steps HFRP is taking to better tailor The Evaluation Exchange to the needs of our readership.
Response to the survey also helped to reveal the diversity of our readership, which represents a variety of national, state, and local agencies and institutions, both public and private. Answers showed that readers turn to The Evaluation Exchange for help in addressing a broad range of needs and concerns. Still, reader comments tended to correspond to three major areas of interest: (1) interest in evaluation methodology, including specific evaluative practices; (2) interest in particular demographic populations or policy issues; and (3) interest in broader organizational or professional resource development issues. Many comments and concerns also involved intersections of the three areas.
Area 1: Interest in evaluation methodology, including specific evaluation practices. Five subcategories of interest were isolated in this area: (1) how to start evaluations from scratch or with limited resources; (2) how to conduct multi-agency/cross-site evaluation; (3) how to demonstrate community impact; (4) how to use targeted populations in evaluation practice; and (5) how to employ specific evaluative methods. In response to these concerns, HFRP will be featuring several items of interest in future issues of The Evaluation Exchange. First, in the current issue on methodology, we respond to several methods concerns including the use of logic models, cost-benefit analysis, and evaluating collaborative endeavors. We will continue to include topics on specific evaluation methods in future issues. Second, in our next issue, we will be unveiling an “Ask the Expert” section in which a featured evaluator will respond to your “on the ground” evaluation questions. Third, in our most recent issue on youth development and in upcoming issues focused on areas such as out-of-school time, we discuss topics like how to incorporate youth voices in evaluation.
Area 2: Interest in specific demographic populations or policy issues. Evaluation of programs directed at children and youth was most commonly cited as an area of interest by readers. In response to your needs, our most recent edition focused on youth development. Our next edition will focus on children and youth in the out-of-school hours. Other populations and issues of concern, including family support services and welfare reform, will also be targeted in upcoming editions of The Evaluation Exchange. Many readers were also concerned more generally about the connections between evaluation and policymaking. This is a subject of particular interest to HFRP. In this issue of the newsletter, our discussion with Michael Scriven touches on this subject; future editions will further explore these connections in conversations with and articles by both evaluators and policymakers.
Area 3: Interest in broader organizational or professional resource development. Evaluation Exchange readers identified several subcategories of interest under this area: (1) professional resource development; (2) small agency development; (3) learning how to educate others about the importance of evaluation; and (4) funding practices for evaluation. The Evaluation Exchange will continue to strive to keep its readers updated about the latest literature and developments in the evaluation field. In addition, future issues, including the forthcoming edition on out-of-school time, will address capacity-building in small agencies and funding strategies for evaluation. We will also be producing a future edition devoted to strategic communication issues that will help to address the links between evaluation and communication. Finally, look for upcoming work on adult learning theory and how it can inform evaluation and communication strategy.
HFRP looks forward to better meeting your needs as readers, and to continuing to receive your responses to our efforts. We would like to thank all of our readers who took the time to complete surveys and remind you that we are always interested in hearing from you.
JuNelle Harris, Graduate Research Assistant, HFRP