How do Theories Inform Intergenerational Program Research and Evaluation

1
How do Theories Inform Intergenerational Program
Research and Evaluation?

• Valerie S. Kuehne, Ph.D.
• University of Victoria
• Victoria, BC, Canada
• Matthew S. Kaplan, Ph.D.
• The Pennsylvania State University
• University Park, PA

2
Intergenerational Program Research and
Evaluation What do we mean?

• Research the disciplined search for
  knowledge
• Evaluation the process of making
  value judgments based on evidence about a program
• Both of these use theories to guide them

3
Intergenerational Program Research and
Evaluation Why do we need them?

• Understand what we are doing and why
• Improve what we are doing
• Ethical responsibility to participants
• Fiscal responsibility to funders
• Inform others to enhance practice
• Build a body of knowledge that permits critical
  examination over time
• Other reasons?

4
Examining Intergenerational Program Research and
Evaluation Two Approaches
Empirical
Theoretical
5
Intergenerational Program Research Theoretical
Approaches

• Help to explain why intergenerational programs
  operate differently and potentially more
  effectively than other social programs or
  community initiatives
• Many (likely about 20) theories used in
  literature thus far well look at theories from
  two general groupings
• Individuals/groups within interactive contexts
• Individual development

6
Four Theories for Research and Evaluation Do
they fit your Intergenerational Program?

• Cognitive Constructivism and a
  Sociocultural Perspective
• Dynamic Interactional Theory
• Ecological/Environmental
• Psychology
• Empowerment Theory

7
Cognitive Constructivism

• Children and youth generate knowledge themselves
  educators should create developmentally
  appropriate environments that maximize learners
  abilities to discover or construct their own
  understandings (e.g., Piaget, 1952)

Does your program encourage participants to
discover new knowledge/skills on their own? Are
participants passive or active learners?
8
Cognitive ConstructivismSome Key Questions

• How does this theory inform
• your programs design?
• your programs anticipated social and community
  impact/significance?
• research/evaluation design?

9
Sociocultural Perspective

• Interaction with others is central to learning
• Children acquire their cultures values,
  beliefs, and problem-solving strategies through
  interactions with more knowledgeable members of
  society (Vygotsky, 1978)
• Zone of Proximal Development

10
Dynamic Interactional Theory

• Individuals develop each day while in
  constant, reciprocal interaction with other
  changing people and factors in their social
  environment.
• Accounting for these factors is essential to
  understanding all relationships.
• Ballantyne Connell (1998), believe that this
  theory helps to explain how young people can play
  a direct role in changing the environmental
  beliefs and behaviors of older adults
• (not just vice versa)

11
Dynamic Interactional TheorySome Key Ideas

• Focus on development of children in the real
  world where behavioral changes and social
  interaction are reciprocal and multicausal
• The social environment comes in many forms
• Individuals are active in shaping and being
  shaped by their environment
• Social environment is a grand human experiment
  and we should improve it!(Garbarino Gaboury,
  1992)

12
Ecological/Environmental Psychology

• Focuses on settings and their interrelationship
  with individual and group behaviors.
• People exist in an environmental niche that is
  the result of a persons capabilities to act in
  certain ways (effectivities) and the
  characteristics of the physical and social
  environment that provide. possibilities for
  action (affordances)(e.g., Kulikowich Young,
  2001)
• Many environment-behavior studies explore
  constructs such as privacy and personal
  space, that transcend any specific setting.

13
Ecological PsychologyMore Key Ideas

• Behavior Settings help to analyze
  environment-behavior interactions and include
  behavior and objects involved with the behavior
  like furniture, activity materials, etc. (Barker,
  1968).
• Careful examination of behavior over time can
  also help to understand intergenerational
  relationships as they evolve.

14
Questions

• How does community lay-out affect prospects for
  developing intergenerational programs and
  promoting intergenerational relationships?
• How can environmental design principles help in
  translating various intergenerational concepts
  and values for community living (e.g.,
  inclusivenessGranville and Hatton-Yeo, 2002
  civic engagementLawrence-Jacobson, 2005
  caring communitiesEheart, Power, and Hopping,
  2003 and communities for all agesHenkin,
  2004) into applications in real world settings?

15
Using an ecological perspective to inform program
design and evaluation GENERATION STATION. The
concept A Retirement Community Without Walls
We tried to pilot test a new program model and
evaluate its impact on the entire institution.
16
Part of an Intergenerational Options Mapping
process involves finding out where youth-serving
organizations are located. The different colors
represent different types of organizations i.e.,
schools, community centers, etc.
17
Provide Web Access for the Database
18
Empowerment Theory

• Empowerment theory Empowerment is viewed as a
  process the mechanism by which people,
  organizations, and communities gain mastery over
  their lives. - Rappaport, 1984
• Psychological empowerment sense of personal
  control, gaining critical awareness of ones
  environment, gaining skills and resources needed
  to affect change
• Empowering organizations provide members with
  opportunities to gain control over their lives,
  develop skills, and develop a sense of control.
• Empowered communities
• Initiate efforts to improve the community
• Respond to threats to quality of life
• Provide opportunities for citizen participation
• Create connections between community organizations

From Abbie Lawrence-Jacobson (University of
Michigan)
19
Applying an Empowerment Framework to
Community-Based Intergenerational
Programs/Practices

• Intergenerational programs are not necessarily
  empowering
• Is the program relevant to peoples lives
  (reality-based)?
• Are the participants gaining skills and resources
  needed to affect change?
• Is the program development process community
  driven?
• Are the parameters for participation cast in
  empowering terms?

20
An evaluation helps to detect change due to the
program intervention. What level (or scale) of
change are you interested in?

• Is the focus on the individual participant?
• Is it the relationship between participants?
• Is it the families of the participants?
• Is it the organization doing the
  intergenerational program?
• Is it the community?
• Is it All of the Above?

21
It can be all of the above. There are Multiple
Layers of Analysis
22
Intergenerational Programs PracticesMultiple
Layers of Analysis

• Impact on the Participants
• Indices of physical and mental health
• Attitudes toward other generations
• Sense of social connectedness
• The Interaction
• Communication tempo and flow
• Factors affecting interaction dynamic e.g.,
  differences in status, communication skills, etc.
• Patterns of relationship formation

Interaction
23
Intergenerational Programs PracticesMultiple
Layers of Analysis
Family Context
Interaction
24
Intergenerational Programs PracticesMultiple
Layers of Analysis
Family context
Program intervention
Interaction
25
Intergenerational Programs PracticesMultiple
Layers of Analysis
Community
Family context
Program intervention
Interaction
26
Your Theory and Level of AnalysisWill
Determine What you Focus on in Terms of

• Whom you speak to. For example
• Participants
• Front line staff
• Administrators
• Family members
• Student interns
• Observers
• Local politicians, etc., etc.
• What questions you ask.
• The methods you use to answer the questions.

27
Your Turn
Disadvantages?
Challenges?
Advantages?
Solutions?
In using these four theories in intergenerational
program research and evaluation?
28
References

• Ballantyne, R. Connell, S. (1998). Students as
  catalysts of environmental change A
• framework for researching intergenerational
  influence through environmental education.
  Environmental Educational Research, 4(3),
  285-299.
• Barker, R. G. (1968). Ecological psychology.
  Stanford, CA Stanford University Press.
• Eheart, B. K., Power, M. B., Hopping, D. E.
  (2003). Intergenerational programming for
  foster-adoptive families Creating community at
  Hope Meadows. Journal of Intergenerational
  Relationships, 1 (1), 17-28.
• Garbarino, J. Gaboury, M. (1992).
  Introduction. In J. Garbarino (Ed.), Children and
  families in the social environment (pp. 1-10).
  New York Aldine deGruyter.
• Granville, G. and Hatton-Yeo, A. (2002).
  Intergenerational engagement in the UK A
  framework for creating inclusive communities. In
  M. Kaplan, N. Henkin, and A. Kusano, A. (Eds.).
  Linking lifetimes A global view of
  intergenerational exchange, 193-208. Lanham, MD
  University Press of America.
• Henkin, N. (2004). Beyond Programs Moving
  toward Age-integrated Communities. Presentation
  conducted at the Second Biennial Conference of
  the International Consortium for
  Intergenerational Programmes. June 3-5, 2004.
  Victoria, British Columbia, Canada.
• Kubisch, A., Weiss, C., Schorr, L., Connell, J.
  (1995). Introduction. In J. Connell, A. Kubisch,
  L. Schorr, C. Weiss (Eds.), New approaches to
  evaluating community initiatives Concepts,
  methods, and contexts (pp. 1-21). New York The
  Aspen Institute.
• Kulikowich, J. Young, M. (2001).Locating an
  ecological psychology methodology for situated
  action. Journal of the Learning Sciences,
  10(12), 165-202.
• Lawrence-Jacobson, A. (2005). Recreating the
  Common Good Intergenerational Community Action.
  Unpublished dissertation. Doctor of Philosophy
  (Social Work and Sociology) in The University of
  Michigan.
• Piaget, J. (1952). The origins of intelligence
  in children. New York International
  Universities Press.
• Rappaport, J. (1984). Studies in empowerment
  Introduction to the issue. Prevention in Human
  Services, 3, 1-7.
• Vygotsky, L. (1978). Mind in society The
  development of higher psychological processes.
  Cambridge, MA Harvard University Press.