ETDs

This collection includes most of the ASU Theses and Dissertations from 2011 to present. ASU Theses and Dissertations are available in downloadable PDF format; however, a small percentage of items are under embargo. Information about the dissertations/theses includes degree information, committee members, an abstract, supporting data or media.

In addition to the electronic theses found in the ASU Digital Repository, ASU Theses and Dissertations can be found in the ASU Library Catalog.

Dissertations and Theses granted by Arizona State University are archived and made available through a joint effort of the ASU Graduate College and the ASU Libraries. For more information or questions about this collection contact or visit the Digital Repository ETD Library Guide or contact the ASU Graduate College at gradformat@asu.edu.

Displaying 1 - 2 of 2
Filtering by

Clear all filters

153753-Thumbnail Image.png

University-community partnerships: a stakeholder analysis

Description
Universities and community organizations (e.g., nonprofit organizations, schools, government, and local residents) often form partnerships to address critical social issues, such as improving service delivery, enhancing education and educational access, reducing poverty, improving sustainability, sharing of resources, research, and program evaluation. The efficacy and success of such collaborations depends on…

Universities and community organizations (e.g., nonprofit organizations, schools, government, and local residents) often form partnerships to address critical social issues, such as improving service delivery, enhancing education and educational access, reducing poverty, improving sustainability, sharing of resources, research, and program evaluation. The efficacy and success of such collaborations depends on the quality of the partnerships. This dissertation examined university-community partnership (UCP) relationships employing stakeholder theory to assess partnership attributes and identification. Four case studies that consisted of diverse UCPs, oriented toward research partnerships that were located at Arizona State University, were investigated for this study. Individual interviews were conducted with university agents and community partners to examine partnership history, partnership relationships, and partnership attributes. The results revealed several aspects of stakeholder relationships that drive partnership success. First, university and community partners are partnering for the greater social good, above all other reasons. Second, although each entity is partnering for the same reasons, partnership quality is different. University partners found their community counterparts more important than their community partners found them to be. Third, several themes such as credibility, institutional support, partner goodwill, quality interpersonal relationships have emerged and add descriptive elements to the stakeholder attributes. This study identifies aspects of UCPs that will be contextualized with literature on the subject and offer significant contributions to research on UCPs and their relational dynamics.
ContributorsSmith, Kendra Lindsay (Author) / Knopf, Richard C. (Thesis advisor) / Desouza, Kevin C (Committee member) / Larsen, Dale (Committee member) / Roscoe, Rod D. (Committee member) / Arizona State University (Publisher)
Created2015
168713-Thumbnail Image.png

Evaluator Exclusion in the Program Planning and Design Phase

Description
Program leadership’s decision to include an evaluator during the program planning and design phase is the critical first step necessary for evaluators to provide the programmatic benefits associated with the evaluation profession. Several recent developments have promoted evaluator inclusion in program planning and design activities, including federal legislation that mandates…

Program leadership’s decision to include an evaluator during the program planning and design phase is the critical first step necessary for evaluators to provide the programmatic benefits associated with the evaluation profession. Several recent developments have promoted evaluator inclusion in program planning and design activities, including federal legislation that mandates evaluator inclusion and advocacy efforts from evaluation academics. However, the evaluation literature presents a collective frustration within the evaluation field due to ongoing exclusion from program planning and design activities. Utilizing the defensive attribution hypothesis, this quantitative study gathered responses from 260 American Evaluation Association members and 61 Project Management Institute members to determine an evaluator exclusion rate, develop a taxonomy of exclusion factors, and explore the extent to which program leaders and program evaluators demonstrate defensive attributions when rating these factors’ influence on evaluator exclusion in program planning and design activities. Results indicated an approximately 70% evaluator exclusion rate in respondents’ most recent program experiences. Furthermore, the defensive attribution hypothesis was not supported in the study, as program evaluators more strongly attributed their lack of inclusion to deficiencies outside of the evaluation practice, but program leaders also more strongly attributed evaluator exclusion to deficiencies outside of the evaluation practice. Program evaluators most strongly attributed their exclusion to program leaders’ insufficient training and knowledge on the role of evaluation during the program planning and design phase. Program leaders most strongly attributed evaluator exclusion to their own staffing decisions, indicating a preference to not include evaluators in program planning and design activities due to achieving previous program success without them, assigning evaluation activities to non-evaluation staff, and a funding process that allows the practice to occur. As the first study to explore evaluator exclusion in the program planning and design phase, it sets a foundation for future research studies to corroborate and build upon its findings, identify policies that encourage evaluator inclusion, and continue efforts to establish mutually beneficial relationships in the program planning and design phase.
ContributorsGallagher, Matthew (Author) / Lecy, Jesse (Thesis advisor) / Knopf, Richard C. (Committee member) / Budruk, Megha (Committee member) / Schuster, Roseanne (Committee member) / Arizona State University (Publisher)
Created2022