"The stakeholders in our school and community believe that the mixed method approach will provide us with valuable insight to determine program effectiveness."

"We are using a mixed method approach that involves the collection of quantitative data for academic achievement and incidents of behavior. The data is then entered in to our Safe Schools Alert System. We also collect qualitative data through focus groups."

"I know that the stakeholders expect both quantitative and qualitative evaluation data. I strongly believe that both are beneficial. I already use both methods and feel comfortable that everyone is able to take at least one thing from the evaluation data and find it useful."

"We will be using a mixed method approach. We have taken the Search A&B Survey and I have held focus groups at the high school level. I will be holding more focus groups in the fall. We are also conducting a community survey, parent survey, and teacher survey to measure attitudes, perceptions, and readiness. We have a school data base called Power School that allows easy access to absentee, truancy, failure, etc. rates for the quarter, semester, year, and past years. This is a great tool for gathering quantitative data."

"Since we utilize the participatory method of evaluation, we decided that both quantitative and qualitative data would be the better way to go in reporting our findings. This way, the stakeholders have a more comprehensive picture of what is occurring in the schools, both pre and post evaluation. Surveys and focus group interviews have helped in gaining much of this information. In addition, we have our data-base system that gives us up to date info on students, as well as the state survey info that we use as well."

"For my survey on 'The Extent of Bullying in Your School', the evaluator has recommended a quantitative approach. He has indicated that we can reach more stakeholders by using this approach."

"Stakeholders in our district will be more comfortable with quantifiable evaluation methods. Due to size of our middle school campus with over 3000 students, data is readily available and the utility and ease of presentation makes this approach easily understandable. I have been successful in presenting in chart form data that district staff had not seen before and have found it useful in planning for the future years."

"We used some new anti-smoking materials in the health classes. I collected some process stats on it, but I knew it was effective when I was walking through the school and saw a student's English essay where she wrote about the danger of second hand smoke and quoted some of the new material. I just got chills from the top to bottom and knew that we accomplished something. I got a copy of the essay and saved it for the evaluator."

"I believe most of the stakeholders initially would prefer to use a quantitative approach simply because it is easier. However, since the initiation of our antibullying training, I am finding that the teachers seem to respond more to a qualitative approach. One of their major concerns is that no one hears them. By giving them an opportunity to talk, I receive responses that are much more enlightening than using a quantitative approach."

"I know as a teacher, I learned so much from my students and parents when comments and evaluations were in narrative form."

"Protecting the confidentiality of children was difficult at first. I pulled some kids that were recently identified as bullies for a focus group and their teachers immediately wanted me to tell them everything that one the students had said. I said no and that teacher was really angry. It was months before she would let me pull kids from her class. A lot of people don't understand our roles. I am not a cop, I am a coordinator. It might have been easier for an evaluator to have done the focus group, but I have rapport with those students. They knew that I was a school employee and were willing to open up. I don't think they would do that for an outsider. So I set ground rules. You say something in a focus group, I write it down, but not your name. After the fact, I have no record of who said what. (I also have someone from guidance there, so if an issue comes up and the student wants to follow it up they can with someone who knows what went on)."

"We require that each student and family that participates understands that all the information is strictly confidential. We have consent forms and surveys that families sign and fill out. We have focus groups that are optional for students and parents. Considering we have such a great turn out, I believe that our families feel protected and confident that the information they share is confidential."

"We go to great lengths to protect the anonymity of students. We send out permission forms by postal service as well as have a copy of the survey in the school office for parents to view."

"We are using an interview methodology that keeps everything private in the data collection process. Only the responses are recorded. No one knows who said what."

"It's been a challenge with our evaluator. Trying to get him to understand what we want and how we want it. It's really frustrating."

"I feel that traditional evaluation is very limited. It gives very little opportunity for voice and choice."

"I prefer, in general, the traditional form of evaluation. My reasoning is that all of the information is being interpreted by one person and it leaves little room for discrepancy."

"One advantage to this approach is the evaluator is outside of the school/district and has an objective position."

"Time remains the number one significant factor. With deadlines, priorities, etc., it is extremely difficult to put in the time needed to conduct a participatory evaluation in an effective manner."

"It's especially important to document and share situations indigenous to one's campus when using an outside evaluator. For example, some schools have high teacher turnover rates affecting their program implementation, continuity, and outcomes. Combine that with a student mobility rate of over 50% and a coordinator has a formidable task given that the key to incident reductions across the board is one's feeling of being connected to school. Of course there are also positive indigenous factors that contribute to successes that would otherwise go unexplained to an outside evaluator."

"We are fortunate to work with an evaluator who was internal for almost five years, but now she has moved to California, making her external. She was familiar with the inner workings of every program in our Department, which is a tremendous asset. Now that she is external, we still have access to her and she knows us. She was here for a two week period and came to our school sites to familiarize herself when we send our information in. We communicate now by e-mail and that works, since California has a three hour time difference."

"Our evaluator has previously worked in our school district. He is currently employed outside the school district, so I would consider him a hybrid. His memory allows him to merge present observations with past experiences to support us in our endeavor."

"In addition to the quarterly meeting, we turn in a detailed monthly report on all of the activities related to MSC responsibilities. The challenge of working with this evaluator is keeping up with the paperwork, but the benefit is having a good working relationship with the evaluator which translates into having a stronger prevention program for our individual school sites."

"The evaluator has contact with all 10 middle school coordinators either at our monthly meeting or through E-mail correspondence."

"Each county has received a State Incentive Grant (SIG). This grant is very similar to ours in terms of requirements etc. We have found that the evaluator that is being used for the SIG Grants in our counties fits our grant very well. We meet with her tomorrow to work out the details for her to sign a contract. I am very excited because all of our work between CESA and SIG and the MSC grant meld wonderfully and I am hoping that this joint involvement will really help with sustainability for everyone involved!"

"Our district contracted with the writer of our grant as the evaluator. It was a positive move due tot he fact he was very in tune to our goals. Our district has now created a testing and assessment dept. so we will in the future save on cost with an internal evaluator."

"The logic model can be applied to many areas of the MSC initiative. Presentation to stakeholders, rationale for selection of prevention program, and use in crisis planning are the areas I know I will be able to apply this model."

"I have used Logic Models before and feel this is a concrete way for my Board to look at program accomplishments."