TY - JOUR
T1 - Effects of multiple stakeholders in identifying and interpreting perceived needs
AU - Lee, Yi Fang
AU - Altschuld, James W.
AU - White, Jeffry L.
N1 - Funding Information:
The context of this study was the Ohio Science and Engineering Alliance (OSEA), a statewide consortium of 15 universities with the purpose of increasing retention and graduation rates of undergraduate minority students in science, technology, engineering, and mathematics (STEM) fields. Students in general are being lost to STEM fields and the attrition is more dramatic among underrepresented minorities (URM)—African-Americans, Hispanic, and Native-Americans ( Center for Institutional Data Exchange and Analysis, 2000 ; Chang, 2002 ; National Science Board, 2002 ). As part of a national effort to increase the quality and quantity of STEM students, OSEA has been funded since 2003 by the National Science Foundation. It is responsible for providing a variety of retention programs and activities (statewide research symposiums, internships, mentoring, tutoring, supplemental education, etc.).
PY - 2007/2
Y1 - 2007/2
N2 - The participation of diverse groups is advocated for planning and implementing needs assessment (NA) procedures. While the involvement of varied constituencies is important, obtaining it requires more effort from the needs assessor and therefore is less commonly employed [Witkin, B.R. (1994). Needs assessment since 1981: The state of the practice. Evaluation Practice, 15(1), 17-27]. In this paper the perspectives held by two groups of stakeholders in an NA were obtained, compared, and when disparate, the groups were queried as to why they were different. A mixed-method design, a quantitative approach followed by a qualitative one, was utilized. Self-report data were collected from the two groups. Group effects, although not strong, were apparent for some items. Understanding the reasons for such differences contributes to a fuller and more meaningful interpretation of needs.
AB - The participation of diverse groups is advocated for planning and implementing needs assessment (NA) procedures. While the involvement of varied constituencies is important, obtaining it requires more effort from the needs assessor and therefore is less commonly employed [Witkin, B.R. (1994). Needs assessment since 1981: The state of the practice. Evaluation Practice, 15(1), 17-27]. In this paper the perspectives held by two groups of stakeholders in an NA were obtained, compared, and when disparate, the groups were queried as to why they were different. A mixed-method design, a quantitative approach followed by a qualitative one, was utilized. Self-report data were collected from the two groups. Group effects, although not strong, were apparent for some items. Understanding the reasons for such differences contributes to a fuller and more meaningful interpretation of needs.
KW - Methodology
KW - Multiple stakeholders
KW - Needs assessment
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=33845869549&partnerID=8YFLogxK
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=33845869549&partnerID=8YFLogxK
U2 - 10.1016/j.evalprogplan.2006.10.001
DO - 10.1016/j.evalprogplan.2006.10.001
M3 - Article
C2 - 17689309
AN - SCOPUS:33845869549
SN - 0149-7189
VL - 30
SP - 1
EP - 9
JO - Evaluation and Program Planning
JF - Evaluation and Program Planning
IS - 1
ER -
