Independent Living Skills Program Assignment Evaluation ✓ Solved

Independent Living Skills Programthis Assignment Is To Evaluate The Ou

This assignment is to evaluate the outcome question of the Independent Living Skills Program. The specific outcome question is: How does the independent living skills program help youth succeed academically and in employment, thereby improving their independent living skills?

The evaluation will utilize two different designs: a one-group pre-test/post-test design and a matched comparison group design. The goal is to assess which design best addresses the outcome question, considering validity and practical implementation.

The target population comprises youth aged 16-20 at risk in their academic, employment, and independent living skills, primarily residing in San Jose. The main focus is on how the program influences these youth's success in their academic and employment endeavors, contributing to their overall independence.

Sample Evaluation Design and Methodology

1. One-Group Pre-Test/Post-Test Design (Non-experimental)

This design involves measuring participants' skills before and after participation in the program. The pre-test will involve collecting baseline data on youth’s academic, employment, and independent living skills before they engage with the program. Post-test assessments will be conducted immediately after program completion to measure changes.

Data collection is conducted at two points: prior to program entry (pre-test) and after program completion (post-test). Follow-up data may be collected three to six months afterward to assess sustained outcomes.

The sample includes all youth aged 16-20 enrolled in the program during a specific period. This includes participants who are receiving services without a comparison group, making it a straightforward yet limited design due to potential threats to validity.

2. Matched Comparison Group Design (Quasi-experimental)

This design involves identifying a similar group of youth who do not participate in the program but are matched based on key characteristics such as age, gender, socioeconomic status, and baseline skill levels. The data collection protocol mirrors the pre- and post-assessment methodology but includes a comparison group.

The timing of data collection is similar: pre-intervention assessments before any participation and post-intervention assessments after the comparison group’s equivalent period. Follow-up data can also be gathered to evaluate long-term impacts.

Participants include youth in the program and a matched comparison group not enrolled in the program but similar in demographic and baseline characteristics. This strengthens internal validity by controlling for external factors influencing outcomes.

Strengths and Limitations

One-Group Pre-Test/Post-Test

Strengths include simplicity and feasibility, especially with small or limited resources. It allows measurement of change within the same group over time. However, limitations include threats to internal validity such as history effects (external events influencing outcomes) and testing effects (the impact of repeated testing itself).

Matched Comparison Group

This design offers greater internal validity by controlling for confounding variables through matching, providing a clearer picture of program impact. Nonetheless, it can be resource-intensive, and matching may not account for unmeasured variables, leading to possible selection bias.

Threats to Validity

• Maturation: Youth may naturally develop skills over time regardless of program participation, affecting outcomes.
• Selection bias: Differences between the comparison group and the treatment group, even after matching, could influence results.

Recommended Design

Considering internal validity and resource constraints, the matched comparison group design is recommended. It offers a stronger basis for attributing outcomes to the program by controlling for external influences and baseline differences, despite being more complex to implement.

Cultural and Ethical Considerations

Cultural Considerations

Measures used should be culturally sensitive and appropriate for diverse backgrounds of youth. Data collection should respect cultural norms surrounding privacy, communication styles, and language barriers. Employing bilingual staff or translated materials can facilitate more accurate data gathering.

Ethical Concerns and Responses

• Informed consent: Ensuring youth fully understand the purpose of evaluation and agree voluntarily. This can be addressed through clear explanations and parental consent when appropriate.
• Confidentiality: Protecting participants’ privacy, especially regarding sensitive information about their personal and academic lives. Data should be securely stored and de-identified during analysis.

Discussion

Option A: Focus on Program Importance

I chose to focus on this independent living skills program because supporting youth during critical developmental years is essential for their success as adults. The program's emphasis on areas like academic achievement and employment readiness aligns with core concepts in developmental and educational psychology, such as fostering self-efficacy and resilience (Bandura, 1997). Understanding how targeted interventions can improve independence is vital for social work and youth development fields.

Option B: Participant Focus and Family Involvement

The program primarily targets individual youth aged 16-20. Involving family members could enhance outcomes through increased support and reinforcement of skills learned during the program. Family involvement might include parent workshops or family counseling sessions, which could improve communication and create a supportive environment conducive to sustained independence (Kelly & Gray, 2014). Such involvement could lead to better long-term success and stability for youth transitioning into adulthood.

Conclusion

In sum, evaluating the effectiveness of the Independent Living Skills Program requires careful selection of design that balances internal validity and practicality. The matched comparison group design, coupled with culturally and ethically sensitive data collection strategies, offers a robust approach to understanding the program's impact on youth’s academic and employment success, ultimately fostering their independence.

References

• Bandura, A. (1997). Self-efficacy: The exercise of control. W.H. Freeman.
• Kelly, M., & Gray, M. (2014). Family involvement and youth outcomes: A review of the literature. Journal of Youth and Adolescence, 43(2), 209-221.
• Cook, T. D., & Campbell, D. T. (1979). Quasi-experimentation: Design & analysis issues for field settings. Houghton Mifflin.
• Shadish, W. R., Cook, T. D., & Campbell, D. T. (2002). Experimental and quasi-experimental designs for generalized causal inference. Houghton Mifflin.
• Patton, M. Q. (2008). Utilization-focused evaluation (4th ed.). Sage Publications.
• Fitzpatrick, J. L., Sanders, J. R., & Worthen, B. R. (2011). Program evaluation: Alternative approaches and practical guidelines. Pearson.
• Rossi, P. H., Lipsey, M. W., & Freeman, H. E. (2004). Evaluation: A systematic approach. Sage Publications.
• Harrison, P. (2005). Ethical considerations in program evaluation. New Directions for Evaluation, 2005(105), 37-49.
• Patton, M. Q., & Sawicki, D. S. (2003). Basic concepts of evaluation. In M. Q. Patton (Ed.), Qualitative evaluation and research methods (3rd ed., pp. 63-94). Sage Publications.
• United Nations. (1989). Convention on the Rights of the Child. United Nations.