The Evaluation Skill-a-Thon: Evaluation Model for Meaningful Youth Engagement

Authors

  • Elizabeth Sparks Pima County Cooperative Extension; Tucson Village Farm
  • Michelle Molina Connecting Evidence
  • Natalie Shepp Pima County Cooperative Extension; Tucson Village Farm
  • Fiona Davey Pima County Cooperative Extension; Tucson Village Farm

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.5195/jyd.2021.968

Keywords:

participatory evaluation, youth engagement, Skill-a-Thon, 4-H, evaluation model

Abstract

Active engagement of youth participants in the evaluation process is an increasingly sought out method, but the field can still benefit from new methods that ease youth participatory evaluation implementation. Meaningful youth engagement in the evaluation process is particularly advantageous under the 4-H thriving model because of its potential to contribute to positive youth development, foster relationship building, enhance evaluation capacity, and improve program quality through improved evaluations. This program sought to facilitate actively engaging youth in the evaluation process by breaking it up into clear and manageable steps including evaluation design, data collection, data interpretation and analysis, reporting results, and outlining programmatic change. To achieve this aim, program staff designed the Evaluation Skill-a-Thon, a set of self-paced, experiential evaluation activities at various stations through which youth participants rotate. Actively involving youth participants in the evaluation process using the Skill-a-Thon model resulted in youth being able to identify and design programmatic changes, increased participation and response rates in other evaluations, and several youth participants’ gaining an interest in evaluation and working to design evaluations in later years. The Evaluation Skill-a-Thon holds promise for actively engaging youth participants in the entire evaluation process, easy implementation, and increasing evaluation capacity.

References

Arnold, M. E. (2006). Developing evaluation capacity in Extension 4-H field faculty: A framework for success. American Journal of Evaluation, 27, 257-269. https://doi.org/10.1177/1098214006287989

Arnold, M. E. (2018). From context to outcomes: A thriving model for 4-H youth development programs. Oregon State University. Retrieved September 15, 2020, from https://www.researchgate.net/publication/323457161_From_Context_to_Outcomes_A_Thriving_Model_for_4-H_Youth_Development_Programs

Arnold, M. E., & Cater, M. (2011). From then to now: Emerging directions for youth program evaluation. Journal of Youth Development, 6(3). http://jyd.pitt.edu/ojs/jyd/article/view/176/162

Arnold, M. E., & Gandy J., (2019) Youth participatory evaluation: Matching 4-H youth experience to program theory. Journal of Extension, 57(4), Article rb4. https://archives.joe.org/joe/2019august/rb4.php

Brown, J. S. (2006). Rethinking concept mapping for youth participatory evaluation in the context of youth development programs. Journal of Youth Development, 1(2). http://jyd.pitt.edu/ojs/jyd/article/view/388/374

Checkoway, B., & Richards-Schuster, R. (2003). Youth participation in community evaluation research. American Journal of Evaluation, 24(1), 21-33.

Fox, J., & Cater, M. (2011). Participatory evaluation: Factors to consider when involving youth. Journal of Extension, 49(2), tt2. https://archives.joe.org/joe/2011april/tt2.php

Goodyear, L. K. (2003). Engaging young people in evaluation as a strategy for evaluation field-building and innovation. Community Youth Development Journal, 4(1).

Guijt, I. (2014). Participatory approaches: Methodological briefs - impact evaluation No. 5, Methodological Briefs no. 5. UNICEF Office of Research. https://www.unicef-irc.org/publications/750-participatory-approaches-methodological-briefs-impact-evaluation-no-5.html

Lewis, K., Ewers, T., Bird, M., & Wilkins, T. (2019). Engage stakeholders in program evaluation: Throw them a party! Journal of Extension, 57(4), iw5. https://archives.joe.org/joe/2019august/iw5.php

O’Connor, C., & Zeldin, S. (2005). Program assessment and improvement through youth-adult partnership: The YALPE resource kit. Journal of Extension, 43(5), tt4. https://archives.joe.org/joe/2005october/tt4.php

Patton, M. Q. (1997). Utilization-focused evaluation, 3rd edition. Sage.

Powers, J. L., & Tiffany, J. S. (2006). Engaging youth in participatory research and evaluation. Journal of Public Health Management and Practice, 12, S79-S87.

Preskill, H., & Boyle, S. (2008). A multidisciplinary model of evaluation capacity building. American Journal of Evaluation, 29(4). https://doi.org/10.1177/1098214008324182

Silliman, B., & Guin, A. (2012). Tracking evaluation capacity with youth professionals. Journal of Youth Development, 7(1). http://jyd.pitt.edu/ojs/jyd/article/view/150/136

Ullry, L., & Wright, J. (2019). The value of skillathons. News & Press: The Pulse. National Association of Extension 4-H Youth Development Professionals. https://www.nae4hydp.org/news/457715/The-Value-of-Skillathons-.htm

White, D. J., Schoffner, A., Johnson, K., Knowles, N., & Mills, M. (2012). Advancing positive youth development: Perspectives of youth as researchers and evaluators. Journal of Extension, 50(4), a4. https://archives.joe.org/joe/2012august/a4.php

Zukoski, A., & Luluquisen, M. (2002). Participatory evaluation. What is it? Why do it? What are the challenges?. Community-Based Public Health Policy & Practice, (5), 1-6.

Downloads

Published

2021-03-30

Issue

Vol. 16 No. 1 (2021)

Section

Program & Practice Articles

License

Authors who publish with this journal agree to the following terms:

  1. The Author retains copyright in the Work, where the term “Work” shall include all digital objects that may result in subsequent electronic publication or distribution.
  2. Upon acceptance of the Work, the author shall grant to the Publisher the right of first publication of the Work.
  3. The Author shall grant to the Publisher and its agents the nonexclusive perpetual right and license to publish, archive, and make accessible the Work in whole or in part in all forms of media now or hereafter known under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License or its equivalent, which, for the avoidance of doubt, allows others to copy, distribute, and transmit the Work under the following conditions:
    1. Attribution—other users must attribute the Work in the manner specified by the author as indicated on the journal Web site;
    with the understanding that the above condition can be waived with permission from the Author and that where the Work or any of its elements is in the public domain under applicable law, that status is in no way affected by the license.
  4. The Author is able to enter into separate, additional contractual arrangements for the nonexclusive distribution of the journal's published version of the Work (e.g., post it to an institutional repository or publish it in a book), as long as there is provided in the document an acknowledgement of its initial publication in this journal.
  5. Authors are permitted and encouraged to post online a prepublication manuscript (but not the Publisher’s final formatted PDF version of the Work) in institutional repositories or on their Websites prior to and during the submission process, as it can lead to productive exchanges, as well as earlier and greater citation of published work. Any such posting made before acceptance and publication of the Work shall be updated upon publication to include a reference to the Publisher-assigned DOI (Digital Object Identifier) and a link to the online abstract for the final published Work in the Journal.
  6. Upon Publisher’s request, the Author agrees to furnish promptly to Publisher, at the Author’s own expense, written evidence of the permissions, licenses, and consents for use of third-party material included within the Work, except as determined by Publisher to be covered by the principles of Fair Use.
  7. The Author represents and warrants that:
    1. the Work is the Author’s original work;
    2. the Author has not transferred, and will not transfer, exclusive rights in the Work to any third party;
    3. the Work is not pending review or under consideration by another publisher;
    4. the Work has not previously been published;
    5. the Work contains no misrepresentation or infringement of the Work or property of other authors or third parties; and
    6. the Work contains no libel, invasion of privacy, or other unlawful matter.
  8. The Author agrees to indemnify and hold Publisher harmless from Author’s breach of the representations and warranties contained in Paragraph 6 above, as well as any claim or proceeding relating to Publisher’s use and publication of any content contained in the Work, including third-party content.

Revised 7/16/2018. Revision Description: Removed outdated link.