The prenatal exercise program for urban Aboriginal women could be effectively evaluated by one of a variety of models. However, I would recommend a mixed approach using a combination of Scriven’s simple approach to program evaluation and Lincoln and Guba’s Naturalistic approach.
Scriven advocates looking closely at the goals of a program in order to determine its success. Although the program goals are not clearly outlined in the description, there is enough information to deduce the key objectives. The program is intended to, “function as both a means and an end to address health-related issues in the participants” (p.1). The specific health issue mentioned is type 2 diabetes, which it also states is known to be reduced by an increase in physical activity by the individual at risk of developing type 2 diabetes. Therefore, it is fair to evaluate the program based on a measured increase of physical activity by the participants. If this key goal is not reached, then there are serious concerns with the success of the program. Scriven’s approach will accurately guide an evaluator to look for evidence to the success or failure to reach the goal of increased physical activity among participants.
However, Scriven is not overly concerned with the details of how a program is reaching its success, but rather he emphasises the importance of simply observing whether or not the program is reaching its goals (Trochim, 1998). This aspect of his approach is not desirable because it would be important to determine what exactly is motivating the participants to increase their physical activity in order to know what elements of the program to increase or maintain and what elements are not needed. This is especially important because a number of elements for the program require a significant investment of time and money. It would be key to understand the importance of each element because if one element is not contributing to the program success, then organizers can save money by eliminating it. One might want to know if success of the program is due to the free access to transportation? The free child care? The weekly phone call reminding participants of the upcoming class? The night of the week that was chosen? Or the involvement of an Elder? Or the nutritional snacks and social time at the end of the activity period? If one of these elements is considered totally irrelevant to the participants, then it can be eliminated for future projects. This might also make the program more affordable and therefore more likely to expand and reach further success.
Lastly, I would recommend incorporating aspects of the Naturalistic approach to program evaluation because for this type of social program, an evaluation that focuses on social interaction and is non-experimental in nature is more likely to put participants at ease. Once participants are comfortable with the evaluation process the evaluator is in a better position to gain insight into what motivates participants in the program because they would be more likely engage in open and honest dialogue with the evaluator. This dialogue would be key to understanding what motivates the participants to increase their physical activity and therefore the evaluator would be able to get to the heart of what inspires the participants, which is what ultimately determines the success of the program.
Sources:
Klomp, H., Dyck, R., Sheppard, S. (2003). Description and evaluation of a prenatal exercise program for urban Aboriginal women. Canadian Journal of Diabetes, 27: 231-238.
Program Evaluation Course power point handout from Blackboad, “Background to Program Evaluation. AKA: The exciting Theory that is PE”
Trochim, William M. K., “An Evaluation of Michael Scriven’s “Minimalist Theory: the Least Theory that Practice Requires.” (1998) Retrieved on February 3, 2011 from: http://www.socialresearchmethods.net/research/An%20Evaluation%20of%20Michael%20Scriven.PDF
