Lessons Learned at Spring Brook Farm An Evaluation of the Farms For City Kids Program



Download 411.01 Kb.
Page1/10
Date conversion14.06.2018
Size411.01 Kb.
  1   2   3   4   5   6   7   8   9   10


Lessons Learned at Spring Brook Farm


An Evaluation of the Farms For City Kids Program








Presented to:

The Farms for City Kids Board and Staff




Prepared by:

Andrew A. Powers &

Amy L. Powers
PEER Associates, Inc.
August 2006


Acknowledgements



The evaluation team would like to thank the Farms for City Kids staff and board for their participation in planning the evaluation process. Special thanks to Jennifer Thygesen for her skilled, cheerful, and attentive assistance throughout all phases of the evaluation. Thanks also to all of the teachers and students who completed surveys and provided the data and insight essential to this work. Special acknowledgement goes to the teachers and students of PS 233 Brooklyn for taking time out of their farm visit to share the experience with the evaluation team.
If you have questions or comments about this evaluation report, please contact PEER Associates, Inc.:

Andrew Powers: Andrew@PEERassociates.net

Amy Powers: Amy@PEERassociates.net

Michael Duffin: Michael@PEERassociates.net

Table of Contents


Introduction 4

The Farms for City Kids Program 4

Evaluation of Farms for City Kids 4

The Evaluation Portfolio 5



Section One: 6

Farms for City Kids Evaluation Portfolio Executive Summary 6

Introduction 7

Evaluation Process and Methods 7

Conclusions 15

Selected recommendations 16

Section Two: 19

A Week at the Farm with PS 233 19

A Case Study 19

Prelude 20

Introduction to the Case Study Process 20

Discussion of Findings 21

Case study summary 29

Section Three: 32

Pre-Existing Data 32

Section Four: 43

Student and 43

Teacher Surveys 43

Teacher and Student Survey Process 44

Analysis and Discussion of Findings 44

Quantitative Summary of Teacher Surveys 69

Summary of Findings: Teacher and Student Surveys 71

Section Five: 73

Recommendations 73

Recommendations 75


Section Six: 83

Appendices 83

Appendix A – Logic Model 85

Appendix B – Evaluation Overview 87

Appendix C – Evaluation Instruments 89



Introduction

The Farms for City Kids Program


Farms for City Kids is a hands-on experiential educational program for urban students that focuses on imparting life skills and practical learning as students live and work together on an operating dairy farm in southern Vermont. The farm conducts week long residential programs for urban students and day programs for local students.
This evaluation focused on the week-long, residential program. In this program, a group of students lives and eats together for a week in an on-farm dormitory. During the week they are responsible for numerous farm chores, including cleaning barns, feeding and caring for large and small animals, working in the garden, and many other activities. The students also have opportunities to participate in physical activities such as hiking. Dynamic academic lessons are interspersed throughout the experience.
According to farm literature, the intent is “…to reward these children with such lasting values as responsibility, self-confidence and the satisfaction of facing and overcoming challenges. By educating city kids about agriculture, something that is so different from their everyday lives, we hope to make an impression that will last a lifetime.”

Evaluation of Farms for City Kids

In spring 2005, the Farms for City Kids staff approached PEER Associates, Inc. with a request to conduct a program evaluation. PEER began the evaluation process by facilitating a workshop with staff and board members to discuss the purposes of evaluation, design an overall framework for the evaluation, and begin the development of a logic model1 for the program. This process of logic modeling helped to clarify what the intended outcomes of the program were and how the staff hoped to achieve them. The logic model was later refined with ongoing input from the farm staff. Though the logic model is an evolving tool, a working draft of the Farms for City Kids logic model can be found in Appendix A.
The evaluation was designed based on the ideas organized in the logic model and ongoing conversations with board and staff (see Appendix B for the Evaluation Overview). In order to capture and present a wide variety of data, the evaluation took multiple approaches. The first approach was to analyze existing evaluation data that had been collected by the farm from 2002-2005. The second was to conduct a case study of a single week at the farm. Third, evaluators planned to conduct interviews with a range of teachers and students who had been to the farm. As the evaluation process progressed, staff, board, and evaluators decided to modify the approach, choosing to use surveys rather than interviews in order to contact greater numbers of students and teachers. The analysis of these data sources and recommendations derived from that analysis are presented in this Evaluation Portfolio.

The Evaluation Portfolio

In order to maximize the flexible utilization of the evaluation findings they are offered here in a portfolio format. Depending on the reader or intended use, sections may be used independently or as a whole. A brief description of the six distinct sections follows:




  1. Executive Summary – A summary and integrated analysis of the results of the different evaluation activities, including overall conclusions. This section is designed to stand alone from the larger report for dissemination to interested stakeholders.




  1. Case Study of PS 233 – A brief, data-driven narrative tracking the experience of one group of students during their week at the farm.




  1. Pre-Existing Data – Systematic analysis of previously collected teacher and student surveys, as well as video interviews conducted for promotional materials.




  1. Teacher And Student Survey Results – Description and analysis of data from teacher and student surveys administered during 2006.




  1. Recommendations – Recommendations for program improvements and future or ongoing evaluation efforts.




  1. AppendicesLogic model, evaluation overview, survey instruments, and interview guides.




  1   2   3   4   5   6   7   8   9   10


The database is protected by copyright ©hestories.info 2017
send message

    Main page