Stoner,
Meadan, Angell and Daczewitz (2012)
Evaluation of the Parent-implemented
Communication Strategies (PiCS) project using the Multiattribute Utility (MAU)
approach
The Multiattribute
Utility (MAU) approach was used to evaluate a project federally funded by the
Institute of Education Sciences. The purpose of the evaluation was a formative
one, measuring the extent to which the first two (of 3) goals of the project
were being met and was completed after the 2nd year of the project.
The project goals were:
(a) develop a home-based naturalistic
and visual strategies intervention program that parents can personalize and
implement to improve the social-pragmatic communication skills of their young
children with disabilities;
(b) evaluate the feasibility,
effectiveness, and social validity of the program; and
(c) disseminate a multimedia
instructional program, including prototypes of all materials and methods that
diverse parents can implement in their home settings.
MAU was chosen as an approach because it was participant
oriented, allowing the parents representatives to have a voice in the
evaluation. There are 7 steps for a MAU evaluation and each is discussed in the
paper.
1. Identify
the purpose of the project
2. Identify
relevant stakeholders (these individuals will help make decisions about the
goals and attributes and their importance)
3. Identify
appropriate criteria to measure each goal and attribute
4. Assign
importance weights to the goals and attributes
5. Assign
utility-weighted values to the measurement scales of each attribute
6. Collect
measurable data on each attribute being measured
7. Perform
the technical analysis
An important item to note under item 3 was that it is
important to identify essential attributes within each goal area, not to
identify a set number of attributes. For this project, 28 attributes were
defined by the stakeholders and 25 were actually found to be met through the
evaluation.
For this project the MAU approach was found to be in keeping
with one of the core values of the project, that of stakeholder involvement.
Four primary benefits of using this approach were identified and one concern.
The MAU
(a) was based on the core values of the
PiCS project;
(b) engaged all stakeholders, including
parents, in developing the evaluation framework;
(c) provided a certain degree of
objectivity and transparency; and
(d) was comprehensive.
The primary concern was the length of
time and labour required to conduct the evaluation. For this reason the authors
believe it may not be applicable for evaluating smaller projects.
No comments:
Post a Comment
Thank you for your comments!