Graduate School Network > NIH Protein Biotechnology Training Program > Evaluation Capacity Project

Evaluation Capacity Project

Enhancing Evaluation Capacity

With support from an NIGMS supplement (3T32GM008336-33W2 in response to NOT-GM-21-024) our project had the specific aim of developing new evaluation tools to measure (a) student-centered, (b) formative, and (c) quantitative dimensions of evaluation, to complement existing program assessments.[/textblock][/column][/row][row layout=”halves” ][column][figure img_src=”https://s3.wp.wsu.edu/uploads/sites/3264/2023/02/Screen-Shot-2023-02-01-at-12.00.10-PM.png” img_id=”1707″ caption=”Multidimensional Evaluation” ][/column][column][textblock]

  • Our surveys, developed in collaboration with WSU’s SESRC, draw on language from the NIGMS T32 FOA (towards creating value for other T32 programs).
  • We also included experimental use of the “Net Promoter Tool” (which is of research interest due to uncertain utility in academic settings).
  • Building these tools helped us develop enduring capacity (necessary training) to independently create new tools and analyze evaluation data.

New Surveys Developed

Below are pdf copies of our developed instruments. Please email Matt Peck, our project coordinator, to attain Word copies.

Major new surveys (DESIM = diversity, equity, safety, inclusion, and mentoring)

DESIM Survey (trainee version)

DESIM Survey (faculty version)

Professional Development Student Survey

Protein Biotechnology Class Survey

Exit Interview Survey

Examples of smaller surveys that we use

Winter_Biotech_Rotation_Report

New Tools produced in this Project

Initial Outcomes and Future Plans:

  1. The capacity to create surveys has grown and principles of survey writing and data evaluation are being disseminated to our trainees and faculty in other program activities.
  2. Our diversity, equity, and inclusion survey has been shared with a partner doctoral program to inform their information gathering.
  3. The initial data have helped us evaluate a revised course and establish a baseline for monitoring mentoring climate, program inclusivity, and professional development.
  4. Despite the attractive potential of the “Net Promoter Score” to be a summative score in a single measure, feedback from our users is that it creates more confusion for users than a standard Likert scale.
  5. The long-term plan is to collect data annually to monitor longitudinal changes in trainee and trainer attitudes and has data to correlate with more traditional measures of training outcomes (job placement, time-to-degree, etc.)

Acknowledgment

We had a great collaboration experience with WSU’s Social and Economic Sciences Research Center. We acknowledge Adam McKee and Lauren Scott for their expert assistance.

SESRC