Nort hw est ern Universit ys Peer

Inclusion Educat ors Assessment

and Evaluat ion
Anthony Sis
Lorrena Johnson
Int roduct ion
The Peer Inclusion Educators Program is an initiative that is exclusively ran by the assistant
director of the Social Justice Education Department.

The Social Justice Education Department is under an umbrella of Campus Inclusion and
Community.

In the office of Campus Inclusion and Community, there are three major departments (SES,
MSA, SJE) that promote the mission of CIC, which is to to work collaboratively with the
university community to cultivate inclusive learning environments through the intentional
engagement with difference (Campus Inclusion & Community, 2016, p. 4)
W hy W e Chose t o Assess PIE
Lorrena Johnson is a graduate assistant that works directly with PIE, which means we would
have direct access to the program stakeholders, the assessment and evaluation was more
attainable to complete because we had an evaluator working directly in the office.

The OPPORTUNITY to be the first, PIE is a fairly new program that has had no formal
assessment complete as of to date.

The number of workshops and participants who attended a PIE workshop skyrocketed
between 2014-2015 and 2015-2016. According to the assistant director, there were a total of
25 workshops that reached 538 participants in 2014-2015, while in 2015-2016 there were 79
workshops that reached a total of 2,518 participants
Program Overview
There are several conceptual frameworks that guide the work of CIC, SJE, and PIE. CICs
strategic theme is to advance social justice. CIC has claimed to, work authentically and
ethically to create an inclusive and socially just learning environment for all members of the
Northwestern University community. The model of CIC is adapted from the tri-sector model
of cultural practice by Jenkins & Walton (2008). The tri-sector model is commonly used in
student affairs it provides a framework based on three components education, enrichment,
and engagement.

The Social Justice Education department creates co-curricular educational opportunities in

partnership with the student community to foster conversations across difference and
support actions that create social change on campus.
Tri-Sect or Model
Program Descript ion
The Peer Inclusion Educators (PIE) program has three different workshop topics for which student
groups such as resident assistants, peer mentors, sororities, and fraternities can request. These
workshop topics include: general inclusion facilitation, social justice 101, and inclusive language

The three workshops include:

Language Activity

Social Identity Activity

The Intersectionality Activity

Select ion of Peer Facilit at ors
Peer Facilitators are chosen through a selective application process.
The Assistant Director of SJE, Noor Ali, has created a live application on the website
http://www.northwestern.edu/socialjustice.
The questions on the website include why an applicant would like to become a peer
inclusion educator, their facilitation experience, challenges they anticipate in this position,
and how the applicant brings fun into the program.
Trainings is 2 Days from 9:00 am-5:00 pm (Incentives: Food)
Program Purpose
PIE has four learning outcomes (Social justice education: Peer inclusion educators (2016), which

include:

Educate campus peers on how to best allow for the growth of an inclusive community.

Allow for reflection on ones self ,their backgrounds, and biases.

Identify issues on campus and address them through active and passive programming.

Encourage dialogue around issues of difference and to develop competent mechanisms for

addressing these issues.

Program St akeholders
There are direct and indirect primary stakeholders in the PIE program.

They include:

The University at Large

Students

The Vice President of Student Affairs

The Director and Assistant Director of SJE

Community Partners
Logic Model
Logic Model (Cont )
Evaluat ion Approach
Primarily Outcomes Based

The evaluations we created will focus on the effectiveness of the PIE workshops.

We created an assessment that can effectively assess all three of the major workshop topics
offered by PIE facilitators.

Participants receive an initial post-survey after each workshop.

Formative Assessment

This evaluation is a processed based assessment that will analyze short-term, medium-term,
and long-term outcomes based on survey items that participants will complete.
Quant it at ive Approach/ Implement at ion
Post -Workshop Surveys

Surveys are tailored to answer specific questions about each workshop: Language Activity,
Social Identity, and Intersectionality

Several questions asked using the Likert Scale (Strongly Agree, Agree, Neutral, Disagree,
Strongly Disagree)

Collecting Unique ID Markers (Northwestern Student ID, Staff ID, etc;)

All surveys are confidential

Surveys are distributed to all participants after each workshop.

Facilitators are expected to distribute them within the last 10 mins of each workshop.
Pilot Test ing
We will pilot test the first two student groups who request a PIE workshop during the fall
quarter. We will ask the two student groups if they could participate in a series of all three
workshops. After each workshop we will immediately collect the initial post-surveys. We will
begin to measure how effective all three of the workshops were by benchmarking and
comparing the before and after survey responses of the social justice terms reviewed in each
workshop.

All surveys will be analyzed using SPSS.

The purpose of pilot testing, is to make sure our survey items are clear, to see how long the
surveys take to complete, and to see if the flow/instructions are clear to the respondents.
Qualit at ive Approach
Focus Groups

The purpose of the focus groups is to use the findings to better explain the extent to which
student outcomes are met.

The focus group protocols provide questions and probes.

Probes provide deeper reflection, helps us identify what type of students are signing up for
workshops, and seeks to understand what information students are learning by creating
natural conversations and dialogues.
Implement at ion/ Administ rat ion
The focus groups will be implemented in late April 2018, which is approximately six months
after student/staff have participated in a PIE workshop during the fall quarter.

A pilot test will not be completed on the focus groups beforehand due to a small timeframe
and budget costs.

The graduate assistant, assistant director and director of SJE will be facilitating the focus
groups.

The focus groups will be conducted on campus for the convenience of the student/staff.

Light refreshments will be provided in each focus group as incentives.

Limit at ions
Due to the structure of CIC and SJE, all of the moderators are very familiar with the PIE
program and the learning outcomes for each workshop

Moderators can spark biases when asking participants what they have learned during the workshop

Solution: Recruit a volunteer moderator since there are only two valuators to facilitate the third focus group

The influence of power dynamics with professional staff and student in one room

Intimidation may occur

All the more important for the evaluators to be present

Inability to create an effective long-term outcomes-based assessment

Due to intentional collaborative effort on behalf of stakeholders and SJE staff

Next St eps
Capacity prior to this assessment proposal has been tight

Goal: To provide feedback on how PIE can improve by analyzing the cross
sectional surveys for the quantitative data and the responses of the focus groups
for the qualitative data

Ensure the SJE staff will receive results and feedback efficiently so the PIE program
can begin implementing changes for the 2018-2019 academic year
Inst rument s
References
About: Northwestern university. (2016). Retrieved from http://www.northwestern.edu/

Banta, T.W., &Palomba, C.A. (2015). Assessment essentials: Planning, implementing, and improving assessment in

higher education (2nd ed.). San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.

Campus Inclusion & Community. (2016). Division, Campus & Departmental Information.Unpublished internal document.

Fitzpatrick, J., Sanders, J., &Worthen, B. (2011). Program evaluation: Alternative approaches and practical guidelines

(4th ed.) New York, NY: Longman.

Jacobs, J. (Ed.). (2015, August 24). University halts reorganization of Black House.

Jenkins, T. S. (2010). Viewing cultural practice through a lens of innovation and intentionality.

Culture centers in higher education: Perspectives on identity, theory, and practice, 137-156.

Multicultural Center space.The Daily Northwestern. Retrieved from http://dailynorthwestern.com/.

References (Cont )
Schuh, J.H. & Associates (2009). Assessment methods for student affairs. San Francisco, CA:

Jossey-Bass.

Social justice education: Peer inclusion educators. (2016). Retrieved from

http://www.northwestern.edu/socialjustice/programs-and-events/peer-inclusion-educators

Tourangeau, R., Rips, L. J., &Rasinski, K. (2000). The psychology of survey response.Cambridge University Press.

W.K. Kellogg Foundation. (2004). Using logic models to bring together planning, evaluation,

and action: Logic model development guide. Battle Creek, MI: Author. (required reading:

pp. 1-48).