Program evaluation | Nursing homework help


  

Program Evaluation
In this Discussion, you and your colleagues realize a doctrine or standard for evaluation and prove embezzle forms of evaluation for your programs.
As famed in Week 3 of this method, a detail doctrine or standard is not necessarily embezzle for perfect program. It is thinkable to think the unfairs of the problem and the target population when making that preoption. This is thinkable to guard in liking, besides, as you prove theories and standards kindred to program evaluation. In this solicitation, sundry facets of the program such as sights and objectives should be smitten into thinkation. Once clarified, doctrine can cater a framework for evaluation.
In importation, there are independent purposes for the elements of tribute addressed this week: enterprise delineation, instructoring, and summative evaluation. How do you forecast these being applied in your program?


To prepare:

  • Reinspection this week’s Learning      Resources. You may effort to re-examination the Week 3 Learning Resources as courteous,      which may be ancilla.
  • Consider the sundry facets of your      program artifice, such as your program sight(s) and objectives.
  • Choose the evaluation doctrine or standard      (from nursing or kindred grounds) most embezzle to your program. Be      prepared to exonerate the rare of your standard as it relates to your      program.
  • Based on the program you keep      developed:
    • Create a span continuity for when to do       measuring, when to utensil instructoring, and when to evaluate program       outcomes.
    • What types of axioms would you deficiency to       collect in ordain to appraise enterprise, instructor the growth of the       program, and assess the program outcomes?

By tomorrow Tuesday 1/22/19 6 pm, transcribe a 550 signification essay in APA format delay a narrowness of 3 references (see required lection roll under). Include the raze headers as numbered under:

Post a ropy versed counterpart that addresses the following:

1) Realize an evaluation doctrine or standard that is most embezzle to foundation your program artifice. Explain which ground plain this doctrine or standard and picture how it has been applied in grounds other than nursing. Foundation your counterpart delay attraction from the attainment (See secure finish on week 3 argument).

2) Share a span continuity that articulates how and when you would gain in sundry elements of evaluation for the program you keep been discloseing. Be as unfair as potential and cater your rationale for each firmness top (no succeeding than 2020).

Required Readings

Hodges, B. C., & Videto, D. M. (2011). Tribute and artificening in bloom programs (2nd ed.). Sudbury, MA: Jones & Bartlett Learning.

· Stipulation 6, "The Importance and Use of Theories in Bloom Teaching and Bloom Promotion"

The authors picture sundry theories, noting that theories are not universally ancilla to perfect program.

· Stipulation 10, “Program Evaluation: Background and Basics”

Chapter 10 outlines trudges for maneuvering evaluation during program artificening.

Kettner, P. M., Moroney, R. M., & Martin, L. L. (2017). Maneuvering and managing programs: An effectiveness-based path (5th ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.

· Stipulation 2, "The Contribution of Doctrine to Program Planning"

This stipulation proves the collision of doctrine in program artificening.

· Re-examination Stipulation 10, “Performance Measurement, Monitoring, and Program Evaluation”

· Stipulation 11, “Impact Program Evaluation and Hypothesis Testing”

· Re-examination Stipulation 10 and learn Stipulation 11 to prove aspects of evaluation imported to program artificening.

Berhane, A., Biadgilign, S., Berhane, A., & Memiah, P. (2015). Male involvement in nobility artificening program in Northern Ethiopia: An collision of the Transtheoretical standard. Patient Teaching and Counseling 98, 469–475

Kroelinger, C.D., Rankin, K. M., Chamgers, D.A., Diez Roux, A.V., Huges, K., & Grigorescu, V. (2014). Using the principles of complicated regularitys thinking and utensilation sceice to repair maternal and slip bloom program artificening and donation. Maternal Slip Bloom Journal, 18, 1560–1564. doi 10.1007/s10995-014-1586-9

Silverman, B., Champney, J., Steber, S., & Zubritsky, C. (2015). Collaborating for consensus: Considerations for convening Coalition stakeholders to prefer a gender-based path to addressing the bloom deficiencys of sex workers. Evaluation and Program Planning 51,17–26 doi.org/10.1016/j.evalprogplan.2014.12.002

Smith, T.L., Barlow, P.b., Peters, J.M., & Skolits, G.J. (2015). Demystifying impercipient manner: Using the DATA standard to repair evaluators’ authoritative activities. Evaluation and Program Planning, 52, 142–147.

Albert, D., Fortin, R., Herrera, C., Riley, B., Hanning, R., Lessio, A., & Rush, B. (2013). Strengthening continuous distemper interruption programming: The inland attraction-Informed manner (TEIP) program attraction cat's-paw. Preventing Continuous Disease, 10,1–9

Baron, K., Hodgson, A., & Walshe, C. (2015). Evaluation of an remove concern artificening teaching cunning for nursing homes: A longitudinal perpend. Nurse Teaching Today, 35, 689–695.

Schmitt, C.L., Glasgow, L., Lavinghouze, S.R., Ricker, P.P., Fulmer, E., McAleer, K., & Rogers, T. (2016). Measuring infrastructure: A key trudge in program evaluation and artificening. Evaluation and Program Planning, 56, 50–56 doi.org/10.1016/j.evalprogplan.2016.03.007

Required Media

Laureate Teaching (Producer). (2011). Design and evaluation of programs and projects [Video finish]. Baltimore, MD: Author.

“Performance Measurement, Monitoring, and Evaluation” (featuring Dr. Donna Shambley-Ebron, Dr. Melissa Willmarth, and Dr. Debora Dole)

You may inspection this method video by clicking the integrate or on the method DVD, which contains the identical willing. Once you've opened the integrate, click on the embezzle instrument side.

In this week's videos, Dr. Donna Shambley-Ebron, Dr. Melissa Willmarth, Dr. Debora Dole perpend evaluation for programs.

Optional Resources

Ahmad, F., Roy, A., Brady, S., Belgeonne, S., Dunn, L., & Pitts, J. (2007). Concern method commencement for populace delay psychical disabilities: Collision evaluation. Journal of Nursing Management, 15(7), 700–702.

This time is an in of an collision evaluation.

Gard, C. L., Flannigan, P. N., & Cluskey, M. (2004). Program evaluation: An ongoing disconnected rule. Nursing Teaching Perspectives, 25(4), 176–179.

This time perpendes the use of accreditation standards and office visits as a artifice for ongoing evaluation for a nursing program.

Graff, J. C., Russell, C. K., & Stegbauer, C. C. (2007). Formative and summative evaluation of a manner doctorate program. Nurse Educator, 32(4), 173–177.

Milne, L., Scotland, G., Tagiyeva-Milne, N., & Hussein, J. (2004). Impregnable motherhood program evaluation: Doctrine and manner. Journal of Midwifery & Women's Health, 49(4), 338–344.

This time identifies and evaluates the unanalogous pathes to program evaluation kindred to impregnable motherhood.

Centers for Distemper Control and Prevention. (2007). Continuous distemper indicators [Data set]. Retrieved from https://www.cdc.gov/cdi/.

This office allows you to inquiry and parallel unanalogous regions for unfair continuous distemper indicators.

Hulton, L. J. (2007). An evaluation of a develop-based teenage pregnancy interruption program using a logic standard framework. Journal of Develop Nursing, 23(2), 104–110.

This time pictures the use of the logic standard to disclose, utensil, and evaluate a nursing agency in a develop contrast.

Johnson, S. S., Driskell, M., Johnson, J. L., Prochaska, J. M., Zwick, W., & Prochaska, J. O. (2006). Efficacy of a transtheoretical standard-based facile regularity for antihypertensive superabundance. Distemper Management, 9(5), 291–301.

This time introduces the use of the transtheoretical standard and stages of diversify as applied to agencys aimed at medication superabundance for patients delay hypertension.

Rogers, L. Q., Shah, P., Dunnington, G., Greive, A., Shanmugham, A., Dawson, B., & Courneya, K. S. (2005). Gregarious sensitive doctrine and corporeal distillation during confront cancer texture. Oncology Nursing Forum, 32(4), 807–815.

The gregarious sensitive doctrine is utilized to prove associations delay corporeal distillation in confront cancer patients. This time posits that the gregarious sensitive doctrine can be used as a instrumenttor for agency evaluation delay this population.

W. K. Kellogg Foundation. (2004). Using logic standards to import contemporaneously artificening, evaluation, and action: Logic standard disclosement manage. Battle Creek, MI: W. K. Kellogg Foundation. Retrieved from http://www.wkkf.org/resource-directory/resource/2006/02/wk-kellogg-foundation-logic-model-development-guide.

This fame offers a manage for the use of the logic standard in program artificening and outcome-oriented evaluation for nonprofit projects.