SOCW 6311 Social Work Research Assignment
Order ID 53563633773 Type Essay Writer Level Masters Style APA Sources/References 4 Perfect Number of Pages to Order 5-10 Pages
SOCW 6311 Social Work Research Assignment
Please note that this is a master level course so master level work. Please check the grammar, use APA format and you have to use the reading that I have provided to you. You must answer all the questions that I post. Thank you. Please NOTE that my school is checking for plagiaries through Safe Assign
- Dudley, J. R. (2014). Social work evaluation: Enhancing what we do. (2nd ed.) Chicago, IL: Lyceum Books.
Chapter 8, “Improving How Programs and Practice Work” (pp. 167–207)
- Becker, L. A. (1999). Statistical and clinical significance. Retrieved from https://www.uccs.edu/lbecker/clinsig
- Man-Son-Hing, M., Laupacis, A., O’Rourke, K., Molnar, F. J., Mahon, J., Chan, K. B., & Wells, G. (2002). Determination of the clinical importance of study results. Journal of general internal medicine, 17(6), 469–476. Retrieved from Walden Databases.
- Plummer, S.-B., Makris, S., & Brocksen S. (Eds.). (2014b). Social work case studies: Concentration year. Baltimore, MD: Laureate International Universities Publishing. [Vital Source e- reader]. Read the following section:
o “Social Work Research: Qualitative Groups” (pp. 68–69)
- Bliss, M. J., & Emshoff, J. G. (2002). Workbook for designing a process evaluation. Georgia Department of Human Resources, Division of Public Health. Retrieved from http://beta.roadsafetyevaluation.com/evaluationguides/info/workbook-for-designing-a-process-evaluation.pdf.
Assignment: Drafting a Process Evaluation
The steps for process evaluation outlined by Bliss and Emshoff (2002) may seem very similar to those for conducting other types of evaluation that you have learned about in this course; in fact, it is the purpose and timing of a process evaluation that most distinguishes it from other types of evaluation. A process evaluation is conducted during the implementation of the program to evaluate whether the program has been implemented as intended and how the delivery of a program can be improved. A process evaluation can also be useful in supporting an outcome evaluation by helping to determine the reason behind program outcomes.
There are several reasons for conducting process evaluation throughout the implementation of a program. Chief among them is to compare the program that is being delivered to the original program plan, in order to identify gaps and make improvements. Therefore, documentation from the planning stage may prove useful when planning a process evaluation.
For this Assignment, you either build on the work that you completed in Weeks 6, 7, and 8 related to a support group for caregivers, or on your knowledge about a program with which you are familiar. Review the resource “Workbook for Designing a Process Evaluation”.
Week 6 assignment
Tobacco Control Program
A social worker needs to create a precise, thorough plan to verify the success of program evaluation. For instance, it should portray the description of the objective of the program evaluation, information required and the analysis and methods that will be used. Also, it should recognize and solve all the worries of the participants (Dudley, 2014). All the information should be presented in away all the partners will understand. All of these assist the public servant to get the provision required to conduct a practical assessment.
The Stakeholders and Their Role
These are persons who are affected by the consumption of tobacco, such as clients, public affiliates and elected officials. Secondly, they are individuals in management such as program directors and managers, the staff, associates, the subsidy organization and the political unions (Chapter 1). Also, they include the people who can be able to decide on the decisions of the project, for example; policymakers, associates, subsidy agencies, political parties, and the public.
The funders provide financial investments into the program. Also, the program staff brings changes to people’s lives as planned by the program. The program constituents participate by giving feedback on what way it is assisting them to achieve their objectives. Community leaders ensure that the program is making a difference in the community. They could also make changes to the executive team if the application is not working well (Chapter 3). The policymakers check if the program is supporting or opposing their views to help their stories and make their arguments more persuasive.
The stakeholders had matters such as an appropriate manner of the financial statements, the influence of administration retirement and moral ways.
This initiative uses the process of formative evaluation, which pursues to comprehend whether the approach or application is still carried out, asses the effort if it is marching the outcomes, recognizes firmness plus weakness of the energy and is crucial in communicating to accommodate the hard work (Dudley, 2014). Process evaluation contains four purposes associated with the field of tobacco control and the field of tobacco control: oversee the program, improving it, developing successful models and initiative liability.
This plan of action audit comprises the following, recording and brief contributions plus productivities of the program. For instance, the total amount of money used, turnouts of volunteers, or staff assimilated into events of the plan of action, the number of people reached and others. The improvement of the program to standards by comparing the inputs, activities, and outputs. Such as checking if we are entering the intended targets or if they have the required expertise (Chapter 6). Also, by creating powerful versions, it assesses how by identifying the most effective models the process is connected to conclusions.
Like it addresses the weaknesses and strengths in distinct mechanisms in a multiple-stage program or what is the best way for getting the precise outcome, such as attaining no-smoking directions accepted. Finally, program answerability demonstrates to financing in which the program’s assets are used well or if funds have been allocated efficiently (Chapter 4).
According to Dudley (2014), some of the questions asked to determine the organization’s evaluation capacity include; does the organization have leaders who are willing to take the risk, share their learning with funders, board members and staff? Does your organization provide funds for evaluation support? Does your evaluation have a culture of using data and knowledge? Does your organization share data across program locations and have a system or process for protecting the data? Does the organization have a staff that has some amount of time dedicated to providing evaluator or funder?
Type of Evaluation
This contains the formative process achievement measure. The evaluators also will assist in projecting partners to collect required data regarding Tobacco control measures. Formulating evaluating approaches leads to productiveness concerning the plan of action, performs and in ways of executing the plan considering the proposed timeline (Logan & Royse, 2010). Throughout the project, formative evaluation data will be shared with all the partners. The proposed schedule is three years to implement and evaluate the effectiveness of the project. Finally, the outcomes shall be encompassed in the findings semi-quarterly.
Addressing the Concerns
According to Dudley (2014), stakeholders should always be assured that their concerns will be discussed and clarified. The ethical dilemma is solved by identifying the problems and making sure they are honest and are founded on real proofs. All the given information must be verified, and it is crucial to determine if there is a conflict of values that should be discussed.
The financial concerns are addressed by assuring the stakeholders that the resources are used most efficiently to ensure the objectives are solved
Monitoring programs, building a successful initiative version, and show obligation are one of the essential parts in identifying ways to improve your program through process evaluation (W. K. Kellogg Foundation, 2017). Process assessment helps to focus your resources and time better to provide the most significant advantage when used in coordination with outcome evaluation. Overtime helps you modify activities and program components efficiently as required. This is as a result of the systematic collection of process information. This increases your capability in solving the health costs of drug usage and approval for funding the program.
Chapter 1, “Evaluation and Social Work: Making the Connection” (pp. 1–26)
Chapter 4, “Common Type of Evaluations” (pp. 71–89)
Chapter 4, “Overview of the Evaluation Process That Reflects Evaluation Thinking”
Chapter 5, “Focusing an Evaluation” (pp. 90–105)
Chapter 5, “Preparing for the Evaluation”
Chapter 6, “Determine Stakeholders and Engage Them in Evaluation”
Chapter 7, “Developing a Logic Model, Evaluation Questions, “Measurement Framework, and Evaluation Plan”
Chapter 8, “Data Collection and Analysis”
Chapter 9, “Summarize, Communicate and Reflection on Evaluation Findings”
Dudley, J. R. (2014). Social work evaluation: Enhancing what we do. (2nd ed.) Chicago, IL: Lyceum Books.
Logan, T. K., & Royse, D. (2010). Program evaluation studies. In B. Thyer (Ed.), The handbook of social work research methods (2nd ed., pp. 221–240). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
- K. Kellogg Foundation. (2017). The step-by-step guide to evaluation: How to become savvy evaluation consumers. Retrieved from https://www.wkkf.org/resource-directory/resource/2010/w-k-kellogg-foundation-evaluation-handbook
Drafting a Process Evaluation
a 4- to 5-page plan for a process evaluation. Include the following minimal information:
- A description of the key program elements
- A description of the strategies that the program uses to produce change
- A description of the needs of the target population
- An explanation of why a process evaluation is important for the program
- A plan for building relationships with the staff and management
- Broad questions to be answered by the process evaluation
- Specific questions to be answered by the process evaluation
- A plan for gathering and analyzing the information
SOCW 6311 Social Work Research Assignment
QUALITY OF RESPONSE NO RESPONSE POOR / UNSATISFACTORY SATISFACTORY GOOD EXCELLENT Content (worth a maximum of 50% of the total points) Zero points: Student failed to submit the final paper. 20 points out of 50: The essay illustrates poor understanding of the relevant material by failing to address or incorrectly addressing the relevant content; failing to identify or inaccurately explaining/defining key concepts/ideas; ignoring or incorrectly explaining key points/claims and the reasoning behind them; and/or incorrectly or inappropriately using terminology; and elements of the response are lacking. 30 points out of 50: The essay illustrates a rudimentary understanding of the relevant material by mentioning but not full explaining the relevant content; identifying some of the key concepts/ideas though failing to fully or accurately explain many of them; using terminology, though sometimes inaccurately or inappropriately; and/or incorporating some key claims/points but failing to explain the reasoning behind them or doing so inaccurately. Elements of the required response may also be lacking. 40 points out of 50: The essay illustrates solid understanding of the relevant material by correctly addressing most of the relevant content; identifying and explaining most of the key concepts/ideas; using correct terminology; explaining the reasoning behind most of the key points/claims; and/or where necessary or useful, substantiating some points with accurate examples. The answer is complete. 50 points: The essay illustrates exemplary understanding of the relevant material by thoroughly and correctly addressing the relevant content; identifying and explaining all of the key concepts/ideas; using correct terminology explaining the reasoning behind key points/claims and substantiating, as necessary/useful, points with several accurate and illuminating examples. No aspects of the required answer are missing. Use of Sources (worth a maximum of 20% of the total points). Zero points: Student failed to include citations and/or references. Or the student failed to submit a final paper. 5 out 20 points: Sources are seldom cited to support statements and/or format of citations are not recognizable as APA 6th Edition format. There are major errors in the formation of the references and citations. And/or there is a major reliance on highly questionable. The Student fails to provide an adequate synthesis of research collected for the paper. 10 out 20 points: References to scholarly sources are occasionally given; many statements seem unsubstantiated. Frequent errors in APA 6th Edition format, leaving the reader confused about the source of the information. There are significant errors of the formation in the references and citations. And/or there is a significant use of highly questionable sources. 15 out 20 points: Credible Scholarly sources are used effectively support claims and are, for the most part, clear and fairly represented. APA 6th Edition is used with only a few minor errors. There are minor errors in reference and/or citations. And/or there is some use of questionable sources. 20 points: Credible scholarly sources are used to give compelling evidence to support claims and are clearly and fairly represented. APA 6th Edition format is used accurately and consistently. The student uses above the maximum required references in the development of the assignment. Grammar (worth maximum of 20% of total points) Zero points: Student failed to submit the final paper. 5 points out of 20: The paper does not communicate ideas/points clearly due to inappropriate use of terminology and vague language; thoughts and sentences are disjointed or incomprehensible; organization lacking; and/or numerous grammatical, spelling/punctuation errors 10 points out 20: The paper is often unclear and difficult to follow due to some inappropriate terminology and/or vague language; ideas may be fragmented, wandering and/or repetitive; poor organization; and/or some grammatical, spelling, punctuation errors 15 points out of 20: The paper is mostly clear as a result of appropriate use of terminology and minimal vagueness; no tangents and no repetition; fairly good organization; almost perfect grammar, spelling, punctuation, and word usage. 20 points: The paper is clear, concise, and a pleasure to read as a result of appropriate and precise use of terminology; total coherence of thoughts and presentation and logical organization; and the essay is error free. Structure of the Paper (worth 10% of total points) Zero points: Student failed to submit the final paper. 3 points out of 10: Student needs to develop better formatting skills. The paper omits significant structural elements required for and APA 6th edition paper. Formatting of the paper has major flaws. The paper does not conform to APA 6th edition requirements whatsoever. 5 points out of 10: Appearance of final paper demonstrates the student’s limited ability to format the paper. There are significant errors in formatting and/or the total omission of major components of an APA 6th edition paper. They can include the omission of the cover page, abstract, and page numbers. Additionally the page has major formatting issues with spacing or paragraph formation. Font size might not conform to size requirements. The student also significantly writes too large or too short of and paper 7 points out of 10: Research paper presents an above-average use of formatting skills. The paper has slight errors within the paper. This can include small errors or omissions with the cover page, abstract, page number, and headers. There could be also slight formatting issues with the document spacing or the font Additionally the paper might slightly exceed or undershoot the specific number of required written pages for the assignment. 10 points: Student provides a high-caliber, formatted paper. This includes an APA 6th edition cover page, abstract, page number, headers and is double spaced in 12’ Times Roman Font. Additionally, the paper conforms to the specific number of required written pages and neither goes over or under the specified length of the paper.
GET THIS PROJECT NOW BY CLICKING ON THIS LINK TO PLACE THE ORDER
Do You Have Any Other Essay/Assignment/Class Project/Homework Related to this? Click Here Now [CLICK ME] and Have It Done by Our PhD Qualified Writers!!
Tired of getting an average grade in all your school assignments, projects, essays, and homework? Try us today for all your academic schoolwork needs. We are among the most trusted and recognized professional writing services in the market.
We provide unique, original and plagiarism-free high quality academic, homework, assignments and essay submissions for all our clients. At our company, we capitalize on producing A+ Grades for all our clients and also ensure that you have smooth academic progress in all your school term and semesters.
High-quality academic submissions, A 100% plagiarism-free submission, Meet even the most urgent deadlines, Provide our services to you at the most competitive rates in the market, Give you free revisions until you meet your desired grades and Provide you with 24/7 customer support service via calls or live chats.