Search

Taking the position that the Classical Experimental Evaluation (CEE) Model does not do justice to the process of acquiring information necessary for decision making re planning, programming, implementing, and recycling program activities, this paper presents the Inductive, System-Process (ISP) evaluation model as an alternative to be used in evaluation of Title V rural development programs. Major components of the ISP model are identified as: scenario negotiation (mutual efforts to determine the purpose of the evaluation, search out program goals and criteria, and identify needed evidence for judgment making); evidence collection (derived from the Context, Inputs, Process, Product Model, emphasizing techniques established via scenario negotiation); judgment (description and evaluation of what occurred via the group process approach, encompassing both summative and formative evaluation). Specific Title V evaluation is described as involving judgments about the organizational adequacy of the overall Title V delivery system and/or the attainment of individual Title V project goals/objectives in terms of required judgments, criteria, evidence, and evaluation procedures. Providing a systematic framework for answering specific questions and structuring the evaluation process, the ISP model is presented as a guide for future Title V evaluations. (JC)

The product of a literature review by scholars in the field, this report is intended for researchers, those funding research, and those whose task is to coordinate organizations. A large number of research needs in the area of interagency coordination were identified, including research on the impacts of social philosophies and administrative principles on the organization of delivery systems; the dynamics of previous coordination strategies; which specific interest groups impact delivery systems; the process by which coordinated systems are developed; the necessary conditions for coordination; a theory of interorganizational coordination; the relationships between horizontal and vertical coordination; the roles of conflict in coordination; the interrelation among the basic forms of organizational interaction; the dynamics of the coordination process; the consequences of different types of coordination strategies; coordination from the perspective of both subjective and objective analysis; and the use of ethnographic and survey techniques to analyze coordination. (Author/JM)

With a major emphasis on cooperative planning in rural development, three elements of development process were identified: (1) integration of units involved, occurring when several organizations contribute to a larger collective effort; (2) decentralized planning and local initiative, occurring when planning initiative is at the local level; (3) balanced contributions from public and private sectors, occurring when there is simultaneous input from public and private sectors. Questionnaires and personal interviews were given to administrators of 160 sample organizations (selected from 16 Iowa counties representative of different socioeconomic problems found throughout the state), which were categorized as Federal agricultural agencies, state and county public agencies, and private associations. Definitions of rural development varied, but economic development headed the list, while development activities most frequently mentioned were agricultural aspects and natural resource conservation. Difference in the focus of the three groups coupled with evaluation of organizational commitment revealed the necessity for assurances of interagency goals, costs, and responsibilities as prevention against conflict of interest. Development priorities were identified as schools and education, agriculture activities with farmers, and agricultural-related business and industry. Assessment of organizational structure and function and administrative attitudes was made to determine the level of cooperation attainable. (JC)

The views of Colorado citizens on a wide variety of issues about higher education in the state were surveyed. A questionnaire was mailed to 3,939 persons 18 years of age or older who were chosen from driver's license lists. From the 1,816 usable responses, information was obtained on respondent background characteristics and the following nine issues: (1) how important to Colorado residents is higher education; (2) what do Colorado residents expect from institutions of higher education; (3) how well is higher education doing; (4) what categories of students should be assisted in attending college; (5) how and at what levels should higher education be financed; (6) what are acceptable alternatives for dealing with changes in the size of student populations at Colorado institutions; (7) where does higher education rank when compared with other state priorities; (8) how should faculty performance be evaluated; and (9) how much should faculty be paid? For each questionnaire item concerning higher education, the overall frequency distribution is examined along with any significant differences related to the respondents' demographic characteristics (sex, age, race, level of education, geographic location, occupation, and income). It was found in general that Colorado citizens: (1) have a favorable attitude toward higher education; (2) support a broad definition of the mission of higher education; (3) favor state funding of higher education; (4) feel that faculty members' performance should be evaluated on the basis of teaching, research, and service to community and government, in that order; and (5) support salaries for faculty members at levels similar to those at colleges and universities in other states as well as the level comparable to private industry. A sample questionnaire and bibliography are appended. (SW)