AEA365 | A Tip-a-Day by and for Evaluators

CAT | Disabilities and Underrepresented Populations

I’m Sondra Stegenga, an occupational therapist, home visitor, educational administrator, and Ph.D. student at the University of Oregon.  Evidence has shown that meaningful family involvement is key to long-term outcomes for children. In early intervention and early childhood (EC) systems we are charged with basing services, supports, and goals on family needs and priorities. Given the varied learning needs and contextual and cultural values of families, and the lack of research on involving families in data practices, this process may be unintentionally overlooked or underutilized. In a recent study, Brawley and Stormont found that although 82% of EC teachers identified sharing data with families as important, only 42% reported regularly doing so. Data collection in EC programs can become a rote task, completed without much meaning or family involvement. Failing to include families in data processes not only violates foundational tenets of early intervention and early childhood but more importantly deprives families of valuable learning and reflection, greater involvement in their child’s plan, and improved chances of successful outcomes.

Lessons Learned:

  • In 20+ years of working with children and families I learned the impact of involving families in data practices. This lines up with what researchers and evaluators have noted that involving families in data processes leads to increased communication and better outcomes.

Hot Tips:

  • To engage parents in data practices we must first engage families in the whole educational process. Consider cultural, contextual, and family needs. Engagement may look different to each family, but should be conveyed thorough mission, goals, and formal practices explicitly outlining the importance of and practices supporting family involvement. Gathering input from through a variety of methods (via smartphone, in-person, and times convenient for the family) is imperative to meaningful family engagement.
  • Involve families from the beginning as “partners” in data collection, reflection, and use. This will demystify the process and support full, meaningful family engagement. Explain reasoning for data, timelines, and gathering data. Take time to understand parents’ prior experience, fears, and questions related to data. Ask parents what is meaningful to them and discuss how they would like to measure their child’s progress.
  • Use various modes of data presentation. Graphs and visualizations are shown to be powerful communicators of data. In addition, telling the story of the data and linking to family’s needs, priorities, and contexts is key to understanding.

Rad Resources:

The American Evaluation Association is hosting the Disabilities and Underrepresented Populations TIG (DUP) Week. The contributions all week are focused on engaging DUP in your evaluation efforts. Do you have questions, concerns, kudos, or content to extend this aea365 contribution? Please add them in the comments section for this post on the aea365 webpage so that we may enrich our community of practice. Would you like to submit an aea365 Tip? Please send a note of interest to aea365@eval.org. aea365 is sponsored by the American Evaluation Association and provides a Tip-a-Day by and for evaluators.

· ·

Greetings, I am Brian Molina, a graduate student at in Western Michigan University’s Industrial/Organizational Behavior Management doctoral program. I have conducted single subject research and implemented performance improvement projects across many different settings and organizations.

Lessons Learned:

  • Single subject research is used to evaluate program effectiveness across large groups. The belief that single subject research can only be used with one person at a time is a common (yet understandable) misconception. The number of people in the analysis depends upon the frame of reference we are interested in evaluating. For example, we may easily choose to evaluate the performance of a single individual, a single team, a single department, a single organization…and so on.
  • The methodology is friendly toward organizations with limited resources or experience in evaluation.  Evaluation can be as intimidating! For organizations that are new to the process, interpreting and understanding large group statistical analyses may be difficult. Single subject research typically results in data that show behavior change over time, which can easily be interpreted by researchers and clients alike. Easier data collection and analyses make it more likely that organizations will begin and continue evaluation of their activities.
  • Single subject designs allow for more maximum flexibility in implementing program changes. Conducting research is rarely an orderly process that goes precisely according to plan. Single subject methodology accommodates this unpredictability well. Changes in behavior are rapidly observable during the course of program implementation, not simply at the conclusion of sometimes-lengthy data collection. This allows leaders to make on-the-go changes to the intervention that best serve the client, without contaminating the results of an experimental evaluation.

Rad Resources:

Single Subjects example

The American Evaluation Association is hosting the Disabilities and Underrepresented Populations TIG (DUP) Week. The contributions all week are focused on engaging DUP in your evaluation efforts. Do you have questions, concerns, kudos, or content to extend this aea365 contribution? Please add them in the comments section for this post on the aea365 webpage so that we may enrich our community of practice. Would you like to submit an aea365 Tip? Please send a note of interest to aea365@eval.org. aea365 is sponsored by the American Evaluation Association and provides a Tip-a-Day by and for evaluators.

·

Greetings! Caitlyn A. Bukaty here sharing some exciting insights with you during Disabilities and Underrepresented Populations Topical Interest Group week.

Today I want to offer a few ideas my fellow evaluators might find helpful in making their evaluations more accessible to a wide range of stakeholders. This information comes from my experience collecting feedback from young adults with intellectual disabilities who participated in a workplace problem-solving intervention, but one of my favorite features of these techniques is how helpful they are to a wide range of stakeholders! This concept is known as Universal Design, and the premise is that an option you might offer to one groups of stakeholders, for example those who have difficulty reading, actually makes accessing your evaluation materials easier for other groups, such as stakeholders for whom English is not their first language, or those with visual impairments.

Without further ado, let’s explore some ideas to help your evaluations reach for the stars in terms of accessibility!

Hot Tips:

  •  Add pictures – A well-connected photo can help stakeholders link a question to a certain event, or clarify a response.

In this example, a series of question are linked to a certain part of the intervention using a picture of the person with whom participants interacted:

Example 1

Here responses are clarified with “thumbs up” and “thumbs down” symbols

Example 2 Thumbs up

 

 

  • Go digital – Offering traditionally “print” materials in digital format opens up a universe of accessibility for stakeholders. Users can access screen reader software, text-to-speech features, and even translation applications to better understand the material. This is even more effective if materials are offered on a mobile friendly platform, mobile web access is widely reported as overtaking desktop computer use.
  • Be all ears – Prepare to accept responses from your stakeholders in a variety of creative ways. Offering stakeholders multiple options for response may mean gathering responses from those who would not have been able to participate via a single mode of response. Written or typed responses to forced choice and open ended questions may be traditional, but what if someone wants to dictate a response…can you make a scribe available in person or via telephone to support his or her participation? How about a participant wishing to record a response? This can be achieved via a voice or video recorder on many mobile devices. Depending on the question a pictorial response, such as indicating time spent on a circle graph, might even encourage respondents to participate.

Rad Resources:

  • Creative Commons Zero (CC0) Imagery – This is the name given to images free from copyrighting. In addition to taking or requesting photos specific to the topic of your evaluation there are resources linking you directly to CCO images such as Pixabay and Unsplash. Web search platforms, such as Google Images also allow you to specify reuse policies during an imae search.
  • Web-based Survey Platforms – These are useful for creating digital surveys or questionaires. Many are mobile friendly, and several platform offer free features or use. Try SurveyMonkey, SurveyGizmo, QuestionPro, or Google Forms.

Lesson Learned:

  • The idea behind today’s post is to maximize stakeholder participation by inviting them to take part in an evaluation in whatever way is most convenient and effective. To learn more about universal design geared towards materials development and response check out the Universal Design for Learning materials offered through CAST.

The American Evaluation Association is hosting the Disabilities and Underrepresented Populations TIG (DUP) Week. The contributions all week are focused on engaging DUP in your evaluation efforts. Do you have questions, concerns, kudos, or content to extend this aea365 contribution? Please add them in the comments section for this post on the aea365 webpage so that we may enrich our community of practice. Would you like to submit an aea365 Tip? Please send a note of interest to aea365@eval.org. aea365 is sponsored by the American Evaluation Association and provides a Tip-a-Day by and for evaluators.

· · ·

Greetings! We are Della Thomas and Marcia Kolvitz. Della works with local school districts to providing language access services to students who are deaf or hard of hearing. Marcia is an educational consultant who focuses on professional development in the areas of transition planning and postsecondary opportunities for students and youth who are deaf or hard of hearing (D/HH). Both of us have worked with a large-scale initiative to support collaborative activities that engage stakeholders from across the United States to address issues in deaf education. Our participants represented a variety of stakeholder groups, and many of them were D/HH. We’ve considered ways to ensure that our diverse group of participants have the opportunity to participate in these collaborative activities equally. Additionally, as travel funds become scarce and stakeholders’ schedules become busier, we’ve supplemented face-to-face meetings with technology use as a means of building community and supporting team activities.

Lessons Learned:

  • Open captions during presentations benefit everyone. Communication Access Realtime Translation (CART) services are considered an accommodation for participants who are D/HH. However, background noise can make it difficult for other participants to hear the speaker, and some participants may find their attention wandering. The use of CART captions is a good example of Universal Design during a conference.
  • Telephone communication doesn’t always work. Participants who are D/HH may request sign language interpreters during teleconferences to facilitate communication among team members. A simple way to provide this is by using videoconferencing for all participants. Not only does this include the D/HH member, but the non-verbal cues such as facial expressions or body language can provide all participants with additional information.
  • Use a professional for important event (aka evaluation). The standard for a CART provider using a steno keyboard is a minimum of 180 words per minute (wpm) and an accuracy rate of 96%.

Although these lessons learned came as the result of planning large-scale interagency collaborative activities, their value extends beyond individuals with hearing loss. Enhancing large group presentations via CART and small group meetings via videoconferencing will not only provide greater linguistic access for participants, but will send a message of inclusivity for all.

Rad Resources:

RIT Job Board

RIT Job Board

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

  • Want to add captions yourself?  Try MAGPie free software for adding captions and video descriptions to QuickTime, Windows Media, Real and Flash multimedia.
MAGpie2

Media Access Generator – MAGpie2

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

The American Evaluation Association is hosting the Disabilities and Underrepresented Populations TIG (DUP) Week. The contributions all week are focused on engaging DUP in your evaluation efforts. Do you have questions, concerns, kudos, or content to extend this aea365 contribution? Please add them in the comments section for this post on the aea365 webpage so that we may enrich our community of practice. Would you like to submit an aea365 Tip? Please send a note of interest to aea365@eval.org. aea365 is sponsored by the American Evaluation Association and provides a Tip-a-Day by and for evaluators.

· · · ·

Greetings and welcome from the Disabilities and Underrepresented Populations TIG week.  We are June Gothberg, Chair and Caitlyn Bukaty, Program Chair.  This week we have a strong line up of great resources, tips, and lessons learned for engaging typically underrepresented population in evaluation efforts.

You might have noticed that we changed our name from Disabilities and Other Vulnerable Populations to Disabilities and Underrepresented Populations and may be wondering why.  It came to our attention during 2016 that sever of our members felt our previous name was inappropriate and had the potential to be offensive.  Historically, a little under 50% of our TIGs presentations represent people with disabilities, the rest are a diverse group ranging from migrants to teen parents.  The following Wordle shows the categorical information of presentations our TIGs presentation

Categories represented by the Disabilities and Underrepresented Populations presentations from 1989-2016

TIG members felt that the use of vulnerable in our name set up a negative and in some cases offensive label to the populations we represent.  Thus, after discussion, communications, and coming to consensus we proposed to the AEA board that our name be changed to Disabilities and Underrepresented Populations.

Lessons Learned:

  • Words are important! Labels are even more important!
  • Words can hurt or empower, it’s up to you.
  • Language affects attitudes and attitudes affect actions.

Hot Tips:

  • If we are to be effective evaluators we need to pay attention to the words we use in written and verbal communication.
  • Always put people first, labels last. For example, student with a disability, man with autism, woman with dyslexia.

The nearly yearlong name change process reminded of the lengthy campaign to rid federal policy and documents of the R-word.  If you happened to miss the Spread the Word to End the Word Campaign, there are several great video and other resources at r-word.org.

High School YouTube video

YouTube Video – Spread the Word to End the Word

 

 

 

 

 

 

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kTGo_dp_S-k&feature=youtu.be

Bill S. 2781 put into federal law, Rosa’s Law, which takes its name and inspiration for 9-year-old Rosa Marcellino, removes the terms “mental retardation” and “mentally retarded” from federal health, education and labor policy and replaces them with people first language “individual with an intellectual disability” and “intellectual disability.” The signing of Rosa’s Law is a significant milestone in establishing dignity, inclusion and respect for all people with intellectual disabilities.

So, what’s in a name?  Maybe more than you think!

 

· · · · · · ·

Hi. We’re Sherry Campanelli, Program Compliance Manager and Laura Newhall, Clinical Training Coordinator, from the University of Massachusetts Medical School’s Disability Evaluation Services (DES). DES serves many individuals with limited English proficiency (LEP) who are applying for public benefits due to a disability. As an organization, we are committed to promoting meaningful access for individuals with LEP by ensuring effective oral and written communication.

DES employs a number of bilingual staff to address the needs of people with LEP, primarily Spanish speakers, accessing DES services. The primary services provided by our bilingual staff are customer service contacts with applicants and translation of applications from Spanish to English for use in the eligibility determination process.

Federal and state regulations require organizations to ensure the competency of interpreters and the accuracy of translated materials.  Don’t assume fluency.  It is important that bilingual staff have the language level required to perform their specific assigned work tasks.  Objective assessment of competence in both languages is key to assuring the quality of LEP services.

To assess how we’re meeting these requirements, we evaluated our bilingual staff’s fluency. Our first step included consultation with the university’s Area Health Education Center (MassAHEC) and their cultural competency program which specializes in training and testing medical interpreters (http://massmedicalinterpreting.org/).

MassAHEC provided the following services:

  • Reviewed tasks requiring proficient bilingual communication
  • Reviewed form letters written in Spanish to ensure accuracy of content compared to English
  • Reviewed the level of complexity of translation including medical terminology requirements
  • Developed customized oral and written competency testing of English and native/other language skills to meet our language proficiency requirements
  • Tested bilingual staff for basic competency in English and their native/other language
  • Provided testing results to management and certificates of basic proficiency to bilingual staff

DES is supporting continuous improvement in LEP services by:

  • Assessing (English and other) language skills of prospective bilingual hires
  • Encouraging staff retention by providing pay incentives for bilingual employees who earn a certificate of basic proficiency
  • Encouraging enhanced skill development by providing financial support for formal medical interpreter training for bilingual staff

Hot Tip:

Consult experts in language proficiency assessment. For organizations in the health care field, the Area Health Education Center (AHEC) is a great resource. Most states have an AHEC program which is funded by the federal government to improve access to health care for underserved populations.

Lessons Learned:

“The single biggest problem in communication is the illusion that it has taken place.” – George Bernard Shaw

In order to provide quality services to individuals with LEP, you need to ensure the proficiency of bilingual staff in both English and their native/other language(s). Utilize experts in language proficiency assessment to assist you in testing bilingual staff.

Rad Resources:

Limited English Proficiency (LEP):  A Federal Interagency Website 

Health Resources and Services Administration which funds AHECs

Do you have questions, concerns, kudos, or content to extend this aea365 contribution? Please add them in the comments section for this post on the aea365 webpage so that we may enrich our community of practice. Would you like to submit an aea365 Tip? Please send a note of interest to aea365@eval.org . aea365 is sponsored by the American Evaluation Association and provides a Tip-a-Day by and for evaluators.

No tags

Greetings, I am June Gothberg, the Chair of the Disabilities and Other Vulnerable Populations TIG. We have been honored to be included in aea365 and hope that you have gained in your knowledge and expanded your evaluator toolbox this week.

I would like to wrap up our week with the broad topic of inclusive evaluation. I was introduced to the term in the late 90s by our past AEA President, Donna Mertens. In her 1999 AJE article, she stated “Inclusive evaluation has the potential to contribute to an enhanced ability to assert truth, objectivity, credibility, validity, and rigor… based on a review of world history, certain groups have been systematically excluded from having meaningful participation in the design, implementation, and use of evaluations that impact them”. It’s my belief that in order for evaluators to provide unbiased, accurate, and useful results, they must attend to those in the margins.

Lessons Learned and Hot Tips:

  1. Increasing participation from marginalized populations increases evaluation validity and reliability. Think about it, without the voices of all, how do we make recommendations for all?
  2. Marginalized populations may include more than you know. In addition to people with mental or physical disabilities there are: addicts, historically oppressed, homeless, LGBTQ, low-income, low-literate, the aging, those from the non-dominate culture, trauma survivors, veterans, and women and girls.
  3. Persons from marginalized or vulnerable groups may be hard to identify. Many vulnerabilities are invisible. For example, people with learning disabilities, veterans with PSTD, people that have experienced abuse, or people with mental health issues.
  4. Learn the language. Professions outside evaluation are also tackling this issue but may use differing terms: education uses inclusion, mainstreaming, least restrictive environment, employers tend to use the terms integrated and equal access; community planners and agencies use terms like independent, universal, accessible, and livable.
  5. Accommodations tend to benefit more than the marginalized person. I recently attended a MIhiddentalent.org conference where employers discussed the advantages of diverse work populations. On a large panel of the nation’s top employers, every one of them said the benefits to all employees far exceeded the cost of accommodating employees.

Rad Resources:

  1. AEA’s Cultural Competency Statement http://bit.ly/AEACC
  2. Center for Culturally Responsive Evaluation and Assessment (CREA) http://bit.ly/CREAIL
  3. Mertens, D.M. (2009). Transformative research and evaluation. New York: Guilford Press. http://bit.ly/DMTrans
  4. Thurston & Jenson (2014). Merging Trauma-Informed and Universal Design Principles http://bit.ly/TIUDE

The American Evaluation Association is celebrating the Disabilities and Other Vulnerable Populations TIG (DOVP) Week. The contributions all week come from DOVP members. Do you have questions, concerns, kudos, or content to extend this aea365 contribution? Please add them in the comments section for this post on the aea365 webpage so that we may enrich our community of practice. Would you like to submit an aea365 Tip? Please send a note of interest to aea365@eval.org . aea365 is sponsored by the American Evaluation Association and provides a Tip-a-Day by and for evaluators.

·

This is a post from Sarah von Schrader and Katie Steigerwalt at the Yang Tan institute on Employment and Disability at Cornell University. Sarah is a researcher and evaluator at the Institute, and Katie works with the Northeast ADA Center, which provides information, training, and technical assistance on the Americans with Disabilities Act. One of our missions as an institute is to ensure that whether we are gathering or sharing information, that we create accessible materials for our wide range of audiences.

Lesson Learned:

This week we have highlighted the prevalence of disability in the U.S. and importance of “evaluation for all” and of course this includes sharing our evaluation data. We love data visualization as a powerful way to share information! However, not everyone may be able to access this information in all its visual glory. For example, individuals who are blind, visually impaired, or who have certain cognitive disabilities may not be able to access the critical points that are conveyed through colorful graphics, fancy tables, and detailed pictures. This audience most likely relies on the use of a screen reader, and while technology has made some marked advancements, a screen reader still will not be able to interpret any graphic without a little help.

Therefore, an important step in creating a fully accessible document is developing alternate text, or “alt text” for an image of graphic that is important to the meaning of the document. Alt text is descriptive text manually added to an image that is not visually displayed, but can be read by screen readers. You may notice sometimes when you are scrolling through a PDF and your mouse hovers over an image, descriptive text might spontaneously pop up – that’s alt text!

Hot Tips:

  1. Avoid repetition and wordiness – the descriptions should be concise as possible to get the important information across.
  2. Remember that alt text is primarily for people who are blind or have significant visual impairments – When you describe a chart or graph, give all information that a sighted user would be able to access, without adding extraneous information. The colors of lines in a graph is irrelevant, for example – but the categories and values are important. (How would you verbally describe the image to a colleague over the phone?)
  3. Alt text should be written in a logical order – from high to low, largest to smallest change, most to least important. Depending on the figure, this may not necessarily be the order of the categories listed in the key.
  4. Keep in mind – If you are struggling to generate a useful and concise description for alt text, it may be a sign that the figure is too complex and should be simplified. If you can’t describe it, imagine how your audience might have difficulty understanding the figure, even if they are sighted!

Rad Resources:

  1. Tips on writing good alt text descriptions: http://bit.ly/1lUHtT4
  2. Instruction for adding alt text in Word 2013/2016: http://bit.ly/29DwzPj
  3. Alt text is just a small part of creating an accessible document. Here is a checklist to create fully accessible electronic documents in MS Word 2010 – http://bit.ly/29RchSI

The American Evaluation Association is celebrating the Disabilities and Other Vulnerable Populations TIG (DOVP) Week. The contributions all week come from DOVP members. Do you have questions, concerns, kudos, or content to extend this aea365 contribution? Please add them in the comments section for this post on the aea365 webpage so that we may enrich our community of practice. Would you like to submit an aea365 Tip? Please send a note of interest to aea365@eval.org . aea365 is sponsored by the American Evaluation Association and provides a Tip-a-Day by and for evaluators.

No tags

We are LaWanda Cook and David Filiberto, research faculty at the Yang-Tan Institute (YTI) on Employment and Disability. One of the YTI’s Healthy Living initiatives, “Fits In: An Inclusive Fitness and Wellness Technical Assistance and Evaluation Program” is being undertaken to ascertain the effectiveness of enhanced training of fitness professionals to improve the inclusion of persons with disabilities in community settings alongside of peers without disabilities. Our goal is to identify strategies that will enable fitness professionals and individuals with disabilities to sustain these efforts.

Lessons Learned:

Project managers, community partners, people with disabilities, and their family members need a mutual understanding of the definition of “inclusive” versus “adaptive” programming, prior to finalizing the program design.

Individuals with disabilities can benefit from education about and exposure to fitness/wellness options, with opportunities to try these activities in different settings. We recognize that for some individuals, movement toward inclusion may happen in stages from first being introduced to a fitness program with peers with disabilities to ultimately participating in a “typical” community-based program. Some individuals may prefer and choose to participate in more, or less, inclusive settings. The key is to provide choices.

Fitness professionals would benefit from an understanding of common types of disabilities/functional limitations, hands-on experience working with people with disabilities, and guidance on how to talk with individuals with disabilities to mutually decide if they should work together.

Hot Tips:

  1. Effective programming requires program staff to consider the needs of all stakeholders. They must be skilled not only in serving individuals with disabilities, but in educating subject matter experts and the general public about disability and inclusion. Mutually beneficial community partnerships, and thoughtfully designed opportunities such as Pop Up events, and adaptive classes or workshops can be impactful first steps to more inclusive community-based opportunities.
  2. When assisting in the creation of sustainable inclusive programs for individuals with disabilities, it is important to remember that program personnel and participants may not be well versed, or even familiar with, the methods and purpose of quality evaluation. Even after creating an evaluation that is simple and straightforward, provide the necessary technical assistance and fidelity monitoring to assist in the thorough and accurate collection of data.

Rad Resources:

  1. For tips on designing and evaluating physically, programmatically, and attitudinally inclusive recreation programs, see the National Center on Health, Physical Activity and Disability (NCHPAD) website at http://www.nchpad.org/
  1. As we help create avenues for individuals with disabilities to participate in inclusive, community-based fitness/wellness activities we encourage you to learn more and follow our project here: http://bit.ly/29DvcyH

The American Evaluation Association is celebrating the Disabilities and Other Vulnerable Populations TIG (DOVP) Week. The contributions all week come from DOVP members. Do you have questions, concerns, kudos, or content to extend this aea365 contribution? Please add them in the comments section for this post on the aea365 webpage so that we may enrich our community of practice. Would you like to submit an aea365 Tip? Please send a note of interest to aea365@eval.org . aea365 is sponsored by the American Evaluation Association and provides a Tip-a-Day by and for evaluators.

No tags

Hi, I’m Amelia Maynard, Ph.D., District Analyst for the Anoka-Hennepin School District in Minnesota and an independent evaluator with Maynard Evaluations. I have worked to conduct inclusive evaluations with programs that target both individuals with disabilities and the general public.

Individuals with disabilities are often excluded from evaluations because we are uncertain of how to be inclusive or aren’t aware of these individuals’ presence in the program. As this population, including individuals with cognitive disabilities such as Autism and dementia, continues to grow, the evaluation community needs to ensure these individuals’ views aren’t ignored. Including individuals of all abilities in evaluations helps increase equity and validity by ensuring more stakeholder voices are included. To increase participation of individuals with disabilities in evaluations, the process needs to be accessible from the beginning. By creating accessible recruitment and consent processes, we can ensure that individuals who want to be heard have the opportunity to participate.

Hot Tips:

  1. Know your stakeholders – Consider if individuals with disabilities are a stakeholder group in your evaluation. Work with program staff to determine if and how you can include these individuals in the evaluation process. Staff may have ideas of how to reach out to these stakeholders, such as placing notices in accessible areas or communicating with care-takers.
  2. Use more examples and visuals – To increase the participation of individuals with disabilities, be adaptive and creative in how you introduce your evaluation and obtain consent. For many individuals, it is helpful if evaluators use more visual modes of communication. For example, evaluators can show videos that describe and demonstrate the evaluation process, use pictures in pamphlets or on the consent forms, and use large fonts and easy-to-read, non-technical language. These sorts of accommodations can benefit individuals with a wide range of disabilities, from those with low vision to those with learning or cognitive disabilities.

Lesson Learned:

Many of the accommodations evaluators can make to be inclusive of individuals with disabilities benefit everyone. Data collection processes and consent forms can be confusing for those who are unfamiliar with such work or for those who are not native English speakers. Many of us appreciate clear language and visuals when dealing with complex topics!

Rad Resource:

To help create accommodations that benefit everyone, use the principles of Universal Design. Check out the Universal Design for Evaluation Checklist, developed by Jennifer Sullivan-Sulewski and June Gothberg.

The American Evaluation Association is celebrating the Disabilities and Other Vulnerable Populations TIG (DOVP) Week. The contributions all week come from DOVP members. Do you have questions, concerns, kudos, or content to extend this aea365 contribution? Please add them in the comments section for this post on the aea365 webpage so that we may enrich our community of practice. Would you like to submit an aea365 Tip? Please send a note of interest to aea365@eval.org . aea365 is sponsored by the American Evaluation Association and provides a Tip-a-Day by and for evaluators.

Older posts >>

Archives

To top