| Evaluation Problem: | | | | the trained facilitator, and group members will sign a |
| Current social and cultural conditions demand an | | | | statement of confidentiality in regards to the sharing of |
| understanding by parents; the need for their children to | | | | identities of participants. Participants will sign a project |
| become good at making choices, and a need for | | | | permission document as seen in (Appendix D). The |
| parents to consider modifying their parenting styles are | | | | reinforcement pay for consistent attendance will be |
| keys to effective parenting (Dinkermeyer, Mckay | | | | acknowledged and participants will be informed of the |
| & Dinkermeyer, 1997). In order for parents to | | | | amount they will receive for their participation (Royse, |
| modify their parenting styles, they must obtain | | | | et al., 2006). Participants will be informed that they |
| research based parenting knowledge that will assist | | | | have the right to withdraw from the evaluation group |
| with modifying and enhancing their abilities to | | | | at anytime (Royse, et al., 2006). However, |
| effectively parent their children. | | | | non-voluntary court appointed individuals will be |
| Research Question: | | | | informed that upon voluntary withdraw from the |
| When the Systematic Training for Effective Parenting | | | | evaluation they will be referred to another parenting |
| curriculum is taught toa parental education support | | | | group that will meet the requirements of the court. |
| group, will parent participants display an increase in | | | | Measurement - (See Appendix B for Instrument / |
| curricular knowledge under conditions that express a | | | | Itemized Measure examples) |
| high amount of fidelity? | | | | The outcome evaluation will seek to measure through |
| Goal of Evaluative Proposal: | | | | the implementation of a pre and post test if an |
| The goal of this evaluation is to evaluate if group | | | | increase in knowledge was found significant. The |
| members have learned program objectives that relate | | | | knowledge survey and itemized measures will be |
| to good parenting and to evaluate if implementation | | | | based upon the research based information that has |
| conditions meet standards of high fidelity. | | | | constructed each of the sixteen objectives within the |
| This proposal has three objectives: | | | | STEP parenting program curriculum. A total of sixteen |
| 1. To increase level of knowledge: | | | | itemized measures based upon curriculum objectives |
| Literary Support: Quantitative methods and the use of | | | | over eight sessions will be constructed with a true or |
| a pre and post test evaluate learning outcomes in | | | | false option of choice as seen in (Appendix C). These |
| relation to fidelity of implementation (Mark, 1996). | | | | measures are considered to be at the interval level. |
| Activities: Administer a quantitative method; initial pre | | | | Each measure is considered to be valued as one point. |
| and post test knowledge survey. | | | | To increase validity and reliability the pre and post |
| 2. To verify through a single-person observation of | | | | knowledge survey will be constructed with clear |
| implementation standards: | | | | instructions, items will be clear, explanatory and direct |
| Literary Support: Research shows that facilitators who | | | | (Mark, 1996). The instrumentation and measures will |
| have standards of implementation that are connected | | | | meet human subject standards and be examined by a |
| to key elements of high fidelity assist's in effective | | | | panel of experts. |
| teaching (Dusenbury, Branningan, Falco, & Hansen, | | | | The process evaluation will seek to measure if |
| 2003). Single-subject design methods through | | | | conditions represented high fidelity based upon the |
| direct-observation are employed to evaluate direct | | | | expression and implementation by the facilitator over |
| service processes (Mark, 1996). | | | | eight teaching sessions of five measurable items that |
| Activities: Single-subject design method with direct | | | | relate to good communication and curriculum |
| observation by curriculum expert; analyze facilitator's | | | | information. An expert observer and trained public |
| utilization and expression of standards of | | | | speaker will observe each session to verify |
| implementation regarding the curriculum over eight | | | | expressed standards. The measurable standards are |
| sessions. A noticeable increase in expressive skill | | | | research based and constructed by the researcher |
| should be indicated. | | | | for the purpose of the process observation evaluation. |
| 3. To monitor member's motivation to attend all eight | | | | The measurable standards are as follows; |
| sessions: | | | | Standard one: According to Franken & Gelman |
| Literary Support: Attendance is required if a member is | | | | (1998), reviewing with good understanding and |
| expected to learn all course objectives. | | | | preparing to explain information to others is an |
| Activities: Analyze client log to gain insight on | | | | important process in the explanation of any materials. |
| percentage of attendance. | | | | Standard two: Ryan & Kuhs, (1993) identifies that |
| Problematic Conditions | | | | organization of presentation notes and materials is a |
| Currently values of authoritarian parenting no longer | | | | more affective way of teaching. |
| are functional avenues for parenting (Dinkermeyer, et | | | | Standard three: According to Westra (1996), using |
| al., 1997). Children need authoritative parenting in which | | | | direct and specific speaking skills allows the clients to |
| they have choices and feelings of control regarding | | | | communicate and effectively understand the |
| their behavior and consequences; this will prepare | | | | exchanged messages (p.115). Standard four: According |
| them for the ever complicated and changing society in | | | | to Westra (1996) good eye contact is a very |
| which we now live (Dinkermeyer, et al., 1997). Reducing | | | | important non-verbal behavior to use in a consistent |
| much of the stress within family systems through | | | | and periodic manner in order for the worker and client |
| education can also reduce the chances of violence | | | | to retain good attention (p.62) . Standard five: |
| against children and others within the home (Bird & | | | | According to Fine & Glasser (1996) asking open |
| Melville, 1994). This research is why court systems | | | | ended questions should be utilized in order for the |
| order some parents to mandatory parental educational | | | | facilitator or teacher to gain a clear message of how |
| support groups such as the STEP program. Divorce | | | | the listener is understanding the message. According to |
| and blended families are now more than ever a | | | | Fine & Glasser (1996) open ended questions allow |
| consistent fabric within the family structures of society. | | | | expression of feelings and processes relevant to |
| These changes and transitions within family systems | | | | communicating understanding (p.69). The response by |
| demand greater understandings of ones role, structure | | | | the listeners should reveal and allow the expression of |
| and perceptions (Gelles, 1995). According to Bird & | | | | feelings and processes relevant to communicating |
| Melville (1994) standards and expectations are also | | | | understanding of the curriculum. |
| reevaluated in blended families. Parenting educational | | | | The Likert Scale measuring numerals were |
| support groups such as STEP assist with identifying | | | | constructed by the researcher for this current process |
| the child and parents roles, the expectations, and | | | | observation evaluation. |
| finding positive ways to address the child's behavior. It | | | | These measuring variables should be chosen |
| is also clearly understood that there is no exam or | | | | according to the observations of the curriculum expert |
| licensing that declares parents are ready or | | | | and the level of expression by the teaching facilitator |
| understand the difficulty and challenges of parenting. | | | | should be clearly indicated. The level of measurement |
| Many at times need a great deal of support to help | | | | based upon the constructed questioner and measures |
| deal with the challenges of parenting especially if their | | | | can be clarified as ordinal. To increase validity and |
| child is suffering from a disability or medical condition | | | | reliability the observation questioner will also be |
| (Barkley, 2005). According to Hunter, (2005) parents | | | | constructed with clear instructions, items will be clear |
| need emotional and social support. The existence of | | | | and based on research, explanatory and direct (Mark, |
| parenting educational support groups can assist in | | | | 1996). The instrumentation and measures will also meet |
| giving parents an opportunity of meeting these needs | | | | human subject standards and be examined by a panel |
| (Hunter, 2005). These groups also allow parents to | | | | of experts. |
| speak their voice regarding ideas, desires, fears, and | | | | The evaluation of the client log will be monitored by the |
| acknowledgments that parents would ordinarily have | | | | expert observer after each session. The observer will |
| no one to turn to for expression (Hunter, 2005). | | | | sustain a weekly log indicating attendance over the 8 |
| Problem solving is an excellent benefit with parenting | | | | week period. Issues of validity and reliability include: The |
| group membership; many parents are able to solve | | | | curriculum expert observer verifying through |
| problems in more effective ways due to the | | | | observation the attendance of correct number of |
| experiences and input of others in the group (Hunter, | | | | participants for each session based upon member's |
| 2005). | | | | assigned numbers (See Appendix E). |
| The STEP curriculum, although thorough and clear in | | | | Analysis |
| theoretical meaning and application for assisting | | | | The analysis of interval level data regarding the |
| parents in gaining research based knowledge is worth | | | | outcome evaluation can be represented through a pre |
| little if members are not monitored for attendance and | | | | and post test chart. The facilitator will be required to |
| if the facilitator does not display standards of | | | | give clear instructions regarding testing procedures |
| implementation. Standards include, organization, good | | | | upon the first meeting prior to session instruction. The |
| understanding of the course objectives, utilize direct | | | | facilitator will be required to retrieve all six knowledge |
| and specific speaking skills, retain good eye contact, | | | | based surveys when all group members have finished |
| and ask open ended questions. These standards | | | | the examination process. The facilitator will collect |
| relate directly to key elements of high fidelity such as, | | | | instruments and place them into a safe keeping area |
| teacher training and teacher characteristics which are | | | | under lock and key until time of analysis. In conclusion |
| very important regarding fidelity of implementation | | | | of the eighth session the facilitator will repeat the entire |
| (Dusenbury, et al., 2003). | | | | process exactly as within the first session. Upon |
| Research Design | | | | collection of all examinations, instrumentation will be |
| The primary research designed to be utilized to | | | | placed in a sealed envelope and given to the |
| address the increase in objective curricular knowledge | | | | researcher. The researcher will perform a Paired |
| regarding objective one, is a quantitative one-group | | | | T-Test Analysis comparing increases in group |
| pretest - posttest design. According to Mark (1996) this | | | | performance from pre test to post test. The total |
| type of research design is an improvement over a one | | | | number of possible correct answers on each |
| shot case study design. With this design the creation | | | | examination is (16). Because there are six participants, |
| and implementation of a knowledge survey based | | | | there is a group total of (96) possible point's per |
| upon curricular chapter objectives for all eight sessions | | | | session. The analysis includes the calculation of the |
| in order to measure an increase in knowledge is | | | | group-mean score per session by summing the total |
| imperative (Mark, 1996). The second objective will utilize | | | | number of correct answers per session and dividing |
| a quantitative single-subject design with direct | | | | each session total by the number of participants which |
| observation by a curriculum expert who will utilize a | | | | is (6) in (Figure 1.3). Group performance percentage |
| research based Likert Scale survey to observe and | | | | can be calculated by dividing the number of items |
| indicate if the teaching facilitator of the parental | | | | correct by the number of possible points within each |
| educational support group implements and expresses | | | | pre or post session. The actual increase in group |
| standards that promotes conditions of high fidelity | | | | percentage performance can be represented by |
| during the teaching of each of the eight sessions. | | | | calculating the difference between pre test |
| According to Mark (1996) single-subject design is | | | | percentage correct and post test percentage correct. |
| appropriate for use of evaluative procedures during | | | | The standard deviation can be correlated by using the |
| observations of direct service. The third objective will | | | | simple standard score converter (North Central |
| utilize a qualitative analysis of the group attendance log | | | | Association, 2007). This converter requires that the |
| to obtain an overall mean score of attendance. | | | | researcher enter the correct mean scores per pre |
| The primary quantitative one-group pre and post test | | | | and post sessions (NCA, 2007). |
| design can be expressed in the following terms; O1 | | | | The analysis of the ordinal level data regarding the |
| represents the selected participants prior to the | | | | process observation evaluation can be represented in |
| implementation of the STEP curriculum. X represents | | | | itemized terms over the extent of eight sessions as |
| the STEP curriculum implementation phase. O2 | | | | indicated. Within the observational data there are two |
| represents post group participants after program | | | | primary areas of interest. First, the total number of |
| implementation. | | | | expressed variables based upon perceived level of |
| Participants will be purposively and randomly chosen | | | | expression. These variables are itemized and |
| from the incoming referral listing within the Catholic | | | | expressed in mean and percentage of total points |
| Charities Prevention Department. The individuals will be | | | | expressed by the facilitator over eight sessions. During |
| chosen by order and time of referral. Participants will | | | | the eight week process the observer is instructed to |
| be contacted and informed of their opportunity to | | | | place each sessions observation information into |
| participate within the evaluated parent education | | | | sealed envelopes and placed under lock and key. The |
| support group. Once the evaluator is notified that all six | | | | researcher will collect all 8 surveys from the expert |
| participants have agreed to participate with the | | | | observer at the end of the 8th session. The |
| evaluation, a date, location and time will be confirmed | | | | researcher will list each standard of expressive item |
| for first session. | | | | upon a graph. Each item will be allocated with the |
| Strengths regarding the chosen one-group pre and | | | | number indicated regarding expression of the item |
| post test design with knowledge survey includes | | | | based on observation within each session. The sum of |
| maintaining a minimal point of comparison in which can | | | | the total number of points expressed per item over |
| be measured for increases in learned knowledge of | | | | eight sessions is calculated. The sum of all items points |
| curriculum objectives (Mark, 1996). This design process | | | | over eight sessions is calculated and divided by eight |
| is easy to implement and does not require a control | | | | sessions to calculate the mean score. The total |
| group process (Mark, 1996). However; because this is | | | | amount of expressed points earned vs. the total |
| a one-group pre and post test design; without a control | | | | number of points possible over eight sessions per item |
| group process, the following processes must be | | | | is indicated and can be calculated in percentage form |
| addressed to increase internal validity: Participants will | | | | by dividing the amount earned by the total amount of |
| be monitored for client functioning and cognitive | | | | points possible (40). |
| understanding. Measures utilized for the pre and post | | | | Secondly, the researcher will be particularly interested |
| test knowledge survey will be multiple, will be identical in | | | | in the identifying and documenting of the percentage of |
| pre and post test implementation, and based upon | | | | increase in progressive skill expression. The curriculum |
| curriculum research objectives. Every consideration | | | | expert observer within each session as indicated prior |
| and effort will be taken to assure a quiet and available | | | | gives an indicated level of expression for each item. |
| learning environment. Clients chosen will be confirmed | | | | As indicated below it is possible to identify a |
| as first time participants to the STEP parenting | | | | progressive percentage increase in performance of |
| curriculum to avoid repeat parental referrals. | | | | the facilitator over all eight sessions. This is possible by |
| Strengths regarding the single-subject design process | | | | dividing each numeral (1,2,3,4,5) as indicated within |
| include; the ability to observe and collect data in order | | | | (Appendix B) of the observational instrument. Each |
| to understand if there was a change in behavior and if | | | | numeral can be clarified as 20% of a total possible |
| certain interventions were the causation of the change | | | | point attainment for each item, in each session up to 5 |
| in behavior (Mark, 1996). However, because an | | | | or 100% of possible expression. This representation |
| observation requires the detailed examination of | | | | can express the total percentage of progress |
| detailed information, the following processes must be | | | | regarding expression of the standard items from |
| addressed to increase internal validity: The trained | | | | session one through session eight. |
| observer will be certified within the STEP curriculum, | | | | Analysis of client log will include the listing of all six |
| will be a trained public speaker, and will be in | | | | members per session. Log information will also be |
| possession of session objectives during the | | | | placed in envelopes over eight sessions and placed |
| observation. The observer will utilize a Likert Scale | | | | under lock and key until final analysis by researcher. |
| survey with multiple items based upon communication | | | | Each member will indicated the time, date and group |
| and curriculum research. The items and measures will | | | | member identity number as mentioned earlier for |
| be identical over eight separate group sessions. | | | | ensured confidentiality and as seen in (Appendix E). |
| Participants will be monitored for attendance in order | | | | The researcher will indicate through analysis the total |
| to assess periods of drop out over the period of eight | | | | percentage of participation in each session. This can |
| sessions. | | | | be done by dividing the number of members who |
| Sample Design & Selection | | | | actually attended by the maximum number of possible |
| For the purpose of this evaluation a random purposeful | | | | participants. Deviations and low percentages in |
| sample will be utilized. Criteria includes the referral or | | | | attendance within certain sessions could explain |
| voluntary joining of the STEP parent support group. | | | | possible differences and incorrect answers upon post |
| Those participants who join or are referred during the | | | | test surveys rather than inferring the low score to low |
| selection process will be asked to participate. | | | | fidelity of implementation. This can be analyzed by the |
| Information will be gathered from inner agency referral | | | | researcher through examining the date of member's |
| listings, participants will be notified by phone. In effort to | | | | absence, the incorrect question, the related objective |
| retain participants and to reduce low participation and | | | | to the question, and the week in which the objective |
| attrition, a reinforcing incentive of $50.00 for attending | | | | curricular information would have been taught. |
| all eight sessions will be offered to participants. | | | | In concluding, it is important to understand that parents |
| Participants will be given $10.00 upon first session | | | | in today's modern society need effective knowledge |
| attendance, $20.00 upon fourth session attendance, | | | | based information that will assist with making clear and |
| and $20.00 payment upon eighth session attendance. | | | | effective decisions when parenting their children. The |
| The members will be told of the reinforcement | | | | rapidly changing environment demands that children |
| payment prior to participation, however, they will not be | | | | interact and develop in an environment in which making |
| told what sessions in which they will receive each | | | | choices and authoritative parenting is the hallmark of |
| payment in an effort to promote consistent attention. | | | | the family system. The overall goal of this evaluation |
| In regard to participant confidentiality and ethical | | | | proposal is to evaluate if group members have learned |
| obligations a number of steps will be taken to ensure | | | | program objectives that relate to good parenting and |
| and protect participants. Participants will be informed | | | | to evaluate if implementation conditions meet |
| by phone and upon the first day of group that their | | | | standards of high fidelity. Because of this goal of |
| participation is voluntary (Royse, Thyer, Padgett & | | | | measuring knowledge outcomes and observing if the |
| Logan, 2006). The purpose of the study, the duration | | | | curriculum was taught in a way in which group |
| of the program implementation, evaluation, and | | | | members could effectively understand curriculum |
| confirmation of group location will be discussed (Royse, | | | | objectives, this evaluation requires outcome and |
| et al., 2006). Topics, acknowledgement of an outside | | | | process evaluations through quantitative pre and post |
| expert observer, and process procedures will also be | | | | t-test measures, single-subject design observations |
| discussed with all participants prior to participation | | | | with quantitative Likert Scale standard measures and a |
| (Royse, et al., 2006). An understanding of the benefits | | | | quantitative analysis of attendance percentages. It is |
| of the evaluation and the risk or dangers of the | | | | expected that a correlation between an expected |
| evaluation process for participants will be a priority | | | | increase in knowledge, conditions of high fidelity based |
| (Royse, et al., 2006). If dangers or risk are found to | | | | upon facilitator compliance in teaching objectives and |
| exist, the evaluation process will cease. Confidentiality | | | | consistent attendance by group members would be |
| will be considered to be of the up most of importance | | | | represented within final analysis when proposed |
| and individuals if they choose to volunteer for the | | | | evaluation is implemented. With the finalized |
| evaluation will not expose their names upon evaluative | | | | understanding of increased knowledge by group |
| instrumentation, instead will be informed prior and | | | | members it is desired that group members will utilize |
| issued a number (01 - 06) in regards to identifying each | | | | obtained research based knowledge to effectively |
| of the six participants (Royse, et al., 2006). Every | | | | assist them in parenting their children. |
| effort will be taken to disclose the identity of the | | | | Laverne J. Riley Jr. |
| participants (Royse, et al., 2006). The expert observer, | | | | |