A group of staff met at the 2010 Summer Leadership Institute (June 1-3, 2010) about Community Impact, but their notes were not recorded.
This initiative is being carried forward in 2010-2011 under the heading, "Impact Organizing and Assessment" — which combines a focus on continual evolution of the Bonner Program to support the integration of issue (teams and research) as well as a strategy for community impact assessment.
For the notes from the 2010 Fall Directors Meeting strategy session, please see the page: 2010 Fall Directors Meeting Session — Impact Organizing and Assessment
Below I am adding notes from the previous fall's discussion about Community Impact Assessment, which will also inform the Bonner Foundation's strategy going forward. ~ Ariane Hoy (please contact me to discuss — ahoy@bonner.org)
Community Impact Assessment Strategy for Bonner Program — Discussion at 2009 Fall Directors Meeting
Comments by group participants/ woven in with critical points:
Tracey (Georgia Perimeter) – has an assessment background. She is excited about Bonner working strategically to develop ways to measure the impact of its work in communities and would be happy to lend her knowledge. She offered three key points:
- Identify overarching goals/outcomes based on the type of service
- Utilize other tools (developed by other organizations and networks) to do this
- Develop a set of benchmarks for use by campus-based programs
Kim (WVW) – also has an assessment background. She made the point that Bonner should:
- Develop QUALITATIVE as well as QUANTITATIVE outcomes and instruments, including:
- · Intentional Outcomes for students
- · Intentional Outcomes for partners
- · Intentional Outcomes for campuses
Meta (Berea) – encouraged us to:
- Involve Community Partners (voice/representation) in the process and the structure (e.g., a national Advisory Board).
- Move beyond ‘needs assessment’ to include policy analysis questions
- Also find ways to address more than ‘agency impact’ when assessing community impact (e.g., include residents/clients)
Kristine (Washburn) – noted that they have continued to implement the Student Impact Surveys as well as experiment with CBR assessments. She requested that:
- Bonner should also articulate ongoing (long-term) strategy for Student Impact Assessment (what’s to happen)
- Document/share good models for CBR or service-learning assessment
Andrew (Carson-Newman) – noted they have many examples of anecdotal stories (from partners) and requested that we:
- Develop models/frameworks that can be easily adopted/used by local community partner sites
Jamie (Allegheny) – asked an important question about whether there is a way to increase how students understand and can talk about the power/impact of their service. This brought up the group’s interest in additional training:
- The qualitative strategies/measures should include training and frameworks for students directly—ones that engage them in telling the story of their work in compelling ways (this is something folks want training on at SLI)
Emily (Oxford) – noted they do evaluation surveys with partners at the mid-point and end-of-year that utilize story narratives. She reminded us:
- Ensure the design of our assessment strategy serves—rather than studies—the community
Kim (U of Richmond) – noted that U of R is working with a local assessment expert to develop a replicable model with one partner site. They could be a part of our strategizing. This brought the point that:
- Bonner should/can identify a small number of campuses who are working on these efforts to engage more deeply in the design/thinking process
- The Bonner Foundation may want to identify a few issues and sites to pilot the development of this work with, mirroring what schools (like U of R) are doing
- This process should build around assessment tools or processes that partners already use
Laura (Carleton) – also expressed an interest in moving beyond basic semester evaluations
Richie (UNC) – talked about how his institution has a long, intense history with running community service programs but no history or experience with assessment/evaluation. This brought up the point that:
- The plan/process that Bonner designs and offers should include developmental steps (learning) for campuses as well (how to layer this onto existing programs)
Katie also noted that there other pockets on campuses that may have knowledge/experience with assessment so that we should:
- Include an outreach strategy to find and engage other knowledgeable departments/individuals on participating campuses
Leonard (Dickinson) – expressed an interest in developing ways to assess student learning as connected to community engagement. He also pointed out that a strategic question is how deep/far reaching the assessment strategy/process needs to be. This brought up two points:
- Bonner should connect with other organizations (like AACU’s VALUE project) that have been developed assessments of students learning related to civic engagement
- Bonner’s strategy may need to have levels of assessment that are mapped to levels of partnership (e.g., deep/committed long-term partners as those that adopt a more far-reaching impact assessment strategy)
Beth (Oberlin) – noted that with our emphasis on social media tools:
- The assessment strategy should include ways to use Web 2.0 / Internet tools to capture and disseminate stories/reports of impact
Enrique (Rutgers) – talked about how they are working to launch a new Bonner Program. He noted that one need he has is for information to claim (or persuade others about) the positive impact of the program. This brought up the point that:
- From a strategic point-of-view, newer programs may also need to have information (reports/papers) to share with others while also building in assessment work strategically while they establish their programs
VISION: In sum, we agreed that these points, while they could be reorganized / synthesize, represented key aspects of a vision for Bonner’s community impact assessment strategy.
NEXT STEPS:
Short-range:
1) Develop survey / inventory strategy for Bonner Programs to catalog what they currently have or are doing with community service impact assessment (link with Bobby’s survey)
2) Talk with people in the group who are more deeply knowledgeable already and gather/map out information and approaches
1. Kim Elsener (WVW)
2. Kim Dean (U of R)
3. Tracey (GA Perimeter)
3) Let the Bonner Network know what is happening with this initiative and with Student Impact Assessments (past work) in general
4) Figure out connections of this work with Issue to Impact strategy (piloting with campuses)
Mid-range:
1) Identify and begin moving forward with handful of schools who agree to pilot deeper planning efforts
2) Conduct a fuller inventory of our schools’ work (broader/deeper survey, which asks schools to reach out to pockets on campus/community, other experts)
3) Conduct a broader national inventory to tools by the field / issue (using national networks like cns.gov and National Service-Learning Clearinghouse – also VALUE project for student learning - Ari)
4) Get help from an evaluator (experts) (either as consultants or team of volunteers?)
5) Conduct focus groups / surveys with community partners
6) Develop/launch an online “Clearinghouse” of assessment tools/approaches, indexed according to the considerations outlined (levels of partnership, etc.)
7) Develop and share with network longer-term strategy (1-3 years) for community impact assessment)
Comments (0)
You don't have permission to comment on this page.