Step 1: Description of my chosen social program
Social Program: “Building Inclusive Schools”:
Description: Providing free webinars and resources for educators to create more inclusive schools by educating teachers on inclusivity and anti-cyberbullying.
Overall goals: Improve the lives of 2SLGBTQI persons through advocacy, research, and education.
Specific program goals: Creating inclusive and supportive school environments by training teachers online in 2SLGBTQI knowledge and issues, and providing free, online resources for educators to reduce harm and improve support for 2SLGBTQI students. (https://egale.ca/training-workshops/)
Size and Scope: The web-based inclusivity training program (according to their 2020 Annual Report) provided training for 19 organizations/government bodies, had 490 in-person participants, and 1,172 online participants. They conducted 45 training sessions (23 in-person and 22 online) at a variety of workplaces (Egale, 2021a).
Funding: In 2020, they received $2,833,582 in revenue from projects, donations, and subsidies (Egale, 2021a). $676,347 of this was spent directly on projects and $1,739,377 was spent on salaries. In 2021, Ontario announced $50,000 provided to Egale in funding to improve supportive environments for 2SLGBTQI youth (in addition to $100,000 for at-risk 2SLGBTQI youth) (Ontario Supporting 2SLGBTQI+ Students, 2021).
Target population: Canadian educators. Similar programs exist for other workplaces. (https://egale.ca/egale-in-action/inclusive-schools/)
Stakeholder Identification (Sanders, 1994) and other interested parties:
Ontario government trustee association (Ontario Supporting 2SLGBTQI+ Students, 2021). (Note: The government and/or members of the government presumably have an interest in the program being successful for various altruistic and non-altruistic reasons. If there is a specific indication of government interest beyond funding, it could change the stakeholder interests (ex. positive results could help re-election campaign, negative results can justify funding reduction.)
The public, including taxpayers, voters, parents/guardians, and students.
Teachers, other staff members, students, 2SLGBTQI students and student allies, parents and guardians connected to schools that take part in the program.
Egale donors, staff members, and board of directors.
Resources and methods that make up the program:
- Introduction to 2SLGBTQI Inclusion: 90-minute webinar with companion introduction module:
- Cyberbullying and 2SLGBTQI Youth: 90-minute webinar with accompanying resources for teachers:
- Free online resources with information and strategies for improving support and combatting discrimination and bullying:
Step 2: My Evaluation
Purpose: An outcome evaluation to determine positive program results and possible process adjustments (Center for Disease Control).
Considering the scope of the evaluation: Stakeholder goals (Sanders, 1994): Are the outcomes benefiting students, educators, and/or community members, and is it accomplishing the goals of the organization? The program received government funding: are the interests of the government a priority? Since the organization is focused on improving the lives of 2SLGBTQI people, any donors and the government would have an understanding that creating a supportive school environment is the priority and goal of the program before becoming involved in the program.
Therefore the effectiveness of the program should primarily be evaluated based on the impact on 2SLGBTQI students and the connected community.
Guiding evaluation questions:
- How have teachers reacted to taking part in this program? Are positive or negative reactions related to the overall idea of the program, or to the process of the program? Consider: Is the program mandatory (externally-imposed) or voluntary? How does that potentially interact with positive engagement? How many teachers and schools have taken part and why did they choose to engage with this program?
- How have students been affected by the teacher training? Is there evidence to demonstrate the effectiveness of the program in improving school environments? Is there evidence demonstrating that teachers are applying what they learned in the webinar to the classroom or school environment?
- Is a webinar an effective method for “teacher training” in general and in this specific context? Is there an alternative delivery method (keeping in mind the current COVID-19 situation) or adjustments to be made to the process of this program?
Sanders, James R. (1994). The Joint Committee on Standards for Educational Evaluation: The Program evaluation Standards (2nd ed.). Sage. [PDF]. Retrieved May 14, 2022, from https://www.oecd.org/dev/pgd/38406354.pdf
Egale. (2021, December 7). Awareness. https://egale.ca/awareness/
Egale. (2021a, December 7). About. https://egale.ca/about/
Egale. (2022a, January 31). Genderbread Person: Components of Human Identity. https://egale.ca/awareness/the-genderbread-person/
Egale. (2022b, May 11). Building Inclusive Schools. https://egale.ca/egale-in-action/inclusive-schools/#introduction-inclusive-schools
Ontario Supporting 2SLGBTQI+ Students. (2021, June 15). Government of Ontario. Retrieved May 14, 2022, from https://news.ontario.ca/en/release/1000346/ontario-supporting-2slgbtqi-students
Center for Disease Control. Types of Evaluation. https://www.cdc.gov/std/Program/pupestd/Types%20of%20Evaluation.pdf