My PhD: Phase1 Interview reflections

E6LW

May be good to also interview the evaluator
the project leader felt the team's professional development was a large unintended outcome
it would be good to have an evaluator involved at the grant writing stage
This participant was very experienced grant writer and project leader. She now does external evaluations of other projects.
the two year time frame for a project was good for one this size but because of the large number of universities taking part it was hard to find a time to get together and it was the external evaluator who insisted on f2f meetings. It felt like 6 mths passed before anything really happened.

i1NM

this was the first internal grant applicant that I interviewed and there had been (as I expected) no real evaluation done.
interviewee cited lack of understanding of what is required in evaluation
stated that it would be good to get more support or have some to go to ask questions to regarding evaluation at the beginning and during the start of a project etc
but basically i couldn't really ask many of my questions as non of them were relevant since the answer to the first question was no.

i2JN

No evaluation had been done, they considered action research to mean that they were incorporating self reflection as they go to improve the project.
They have left summative evaluation till end of the project so it hasn't been done but as we spoke interviewee then questioned it's value other than as personal learning for their next project.
Liked what saw in the emerging technologies grants as they had a framework specified that was 'in your face' and helped with the grant application.

i3MN

Wondering about the level of experience, should I rate people on a scale of expert. Surely answers will differ depending on whether ltc person or faculty discipline specific etc.

i4MR

use of a QM approach was suggested in this interview indicating that there ought to be follow up on reports and results/products etc.
Feedback would help the project team 'learn' and this could be an area for development in the LTC.
it could also lead to more scholarship of L&T of a requirement of the projects was to produce a paper or conference presentation. Not least a presentation at L&T week should be insisted upon.

i5RH

There was some concern over workload issues. No time to do evaluation properly.
Systems and processes in the university can impact heavily on a project, unbeknown at the start of a project.
Some interest in closing the quality cycle but in reality when is this done, by whom and for what purpose.

i6TA

i7MH

PAR is similar to developmental evaluation
Very experienced with evaluation which obviously impacted on the success of this project in terms of taking it to the next level (external grants)

i8BH

Confusion over this project as it was originally applied for under one type of grant (outside scope of this study) and then granted against another type (within this study's scope) but each grant had different requirements so some answers were responded to as per the original application.
However its interesting that no feedback was given as to repurposing the application for the different grant requirements
Also, spoke of evaluation of the products ie workshops and not of the project.

i9BH

There was some confusion here over the project. Interviewee was talking about evaluation of a program (which utilized the products that came from the project) rather than the project which was only to produce online modules.

i10PK

Another interesting situation where the project evaluation seemed confused with evaluation of the product.
A request for some guidance for evaluation at the beginning was good to hear.
I think the interviewee really enjoyed talking about the project further down the line and the reflection was useful.
This could be a recommendation that projects are revisited further down the track and summative reports drafted after say 12 months?

i11PP

"It's been very interesting reflecting with you on the project, it has highlighted some deficiencies."
This interviewee was very detailed about the context and somewhat confused about what evaluation was or indeed how it was relevant to the project.
It didn't sound like any evaluation had been described in the application.

i12DJ

No evaluation, but a very thorough final report detailing the whole project.
Dissatisfaction that this was tied to KPIs and then when 'done' received no feedback. Felt that it was used negatively ie 'you won't get KPIs signed off till report done.
Had not done final report for grant committee.
Hesitant about evaluation felt that if it was enforced then wouldn't have applied for grant as that would feel like "big brother watching you".
Disgruntled at system as report sent into the void with no feedback or response other than from Ian Solomonides which caused some happiness.
the application was reviewed by a faculty member and this was very valuable
would be interested to hear what percentage of people who get grants actually deliver on what they said they would deliver

i13MD

I would rate this person as very experienced in the l&t field and yet there was no evaluation carried out which surprised me.
There seemed to be angst about who cared about the project, and how difficult it was to instigate change even though the products were 'great'.
There was no steering group or stakeholder buy-in, and no eval, but then surprise that there was no traction for this great resource at the end. Well not exactly surprise but certainly frustration.

i14NA

This interviewee seemed confused by the word evaluation, became suspicious and wary about being 'judged'. Was also very 'anti' the word generalisable as this created homogeneity and need to be specific in this discipline..
Didn't appear to understand the meaning of evaluation, many questions provoked a response about others attitudes to changes in the curriculum.
It was also apparent that the project which was the creation of an online resource was extended to include the implementation of said resources and it was that that was evaluated (to some extent). So scope creep.
Felt that no one was interested in the project - no one had time to help review it, no one to talk to about it.

My PhD