Questionnaire Design: Strengths And Weaknesses Explained

Questionnaire Designthere Are Strengths And Weaknesses In Des

There are strengths and weaknesses inherent in designing questionnaires for program evaluation. Some weaknesses include bias or a poorly worded question. Write 3-5 biased or poorly worded questions and identify the weakness of each question. Discuss this topic and how you can lessen these types of questions in your mock program review.

Paper For Above instruction

Designing effective questionnaires is a critical component of program evaluation, providing essential insights into the effectiveness, challenges, and areas for improvement within a program. However, questionnaire design presents inherent strengths and weaknesses. Among the notable weaknesses are biases and poorly worded questions that can distort data, leading to inaccurate conclusions. This paper explores examples of biased or poorly worded questions, discusses their weaknesses, and recommends strategies to minimize these issues in the context of a mock program review, specifically focusing on the Bridge Program implemented by Queensland's education authorities.

Examples of Biased or Poorly Worded Questions and Their Weaknesses

1. Question 1: "Don't you agree that the Bridge Program is the best initiative for at-risk youth?"
2. Weakness: This question is leading because it presumes the respondent already believes the program is the best initiative. It sways respondents toward a positive response, inducing social desirability bias, which compromises objectivity and inflates favorable responses.
3. Question 2: "How often do you think the staff in the Bridge Program neglect their responsibilities?"
4. Weakness: This question is negatively framed and assumes negligence, encouraging respondents to focus on faults rather than balanced perspectives. It may also provoke defensive responses, biasing results toward negative perceptions.
5. Question 3: "The Bridge Program has significantly improved students’ behavior; do you agree?"
6. Weakness: This question is double-barreled, attributing two outcomes—behavior and program effectiveness—in one question, potentially confusing respondents and making it difficult to distinguish their true opinions.
7. Question 4: "In your opinion, how ineffective is the Bridge Program at helping youth find employment?"
8. Weakness: The question is biased toward viewing the program as ineffective by framing the issue negatively, which can lead respondents to default to negative answers, especially if they already have skeptical views.
9. Question 5: "Would you say the Bridge Program is a waste of government funds?"
10. Weakness: This highly accusatory question presumes the respondent believes the program is a misallocation of funds, which biases responses toward negative judgments and inhibits honest, balanced opinions.

Strategies to Lessen Bias and Improve Question Wording

To mitigate biases and poorly worded questions in program evaluations such as the Bridge Program, evaluators should follow several best practices:

• Use Neutral Language: Frame questions in an impartial manner without implying a desired response, e.g., "How would you rate the effectiveness of the Bridge Program in supporting at-risk youth?"
• Avoid Leading or Suggestive Questions: Ensure questions do not suggest a particular answer or judgment, maintaining objectivity.
• Focus on One Aspect per Question: Use clear, concise questions that address a single topic or issue to prevent confusion and obtain specific insights.
• Use Balanced Scales: Incorporate both positive and negative response options to encourage honest feedback and reduce response bias.
• Pre-test Questions: Conduct pilot tests with a small sample to identify ambiguous or biased questions, then refine accordingly.

Applying these strategies in the context of the mock program review for the Bridge Program can lead to more accurate, reliable data collection. For example, reframing leading questions into neutral, objective language will help gather genuine stakeholder opinions, providing a more comprehensive evaluation of the program's strengths and areas for improvement. This process enhances the credibility of the evaluation findings and informs better decision-making for program development.

Conclusion

Questionnaire design plays a vital role in program evaluation, but inherent weaknesses such as bias and poorly phrased questions can undermine the validity of collected data. Identifying biased questions, understanding their weaknesses, and employing best practices in question formulation—such as neutrality, clarity, and pre-testing—are crucial for obtaining reliable evaluations. Implementing these improvements in assessments like the Bridge Program ensures more accurate insights, ultimately supporting effective program enhancements and better outcomes for target populations.

References

• Bradburn, N. M., Sudman, S., & Wansink, B. (2004). Asking Questions: The Definitive Guide to Questionnaire Design. Jossey-Bass.
• Dillman, D. A., Smyth, J. D., & Christian, L. M. (2014). Internet, Phone, Mail, and Mixed-Mode Surveys: The Tailored Design Method. John Wiley & Sons.
• Fink, A. (2015). How to conduct surveys: A step-by-step guide. Sage Publications.
• Groves, R. M., et al. (2009). Survey Methodology (2nd ed.). Wiley.
• Krosnick, J. A., et al. (2002). The impact of 'don't know' response options on survey data quality. Public Opinion Quarterly, 66(3), 321-352.
• Marušić, A., et al. (2011). How to design effective questionnaires: A stepwise approach. Springer.
• Patton, M. Q. (2008). Utilization-Focused Evaluation. Sage.
• Schonlau, M., et al. (2009). Conducting surveys via e-mail and the web. RAND Corporation.
• Sudman, S., & Bradburn, N. M. (1982). Asking Questions: A Practical Guide to Questionnaire Design. Jossey-Bass.
• Tourangeau, R., & Yan, T. (2007). Sensitive questions in surveys. Psychological Bulletin, 133(5), 859-883.