storage.googleapis.com€¦ · Web viewRMHI has conducted multiple training sessions since January 2012. Initial results show acceptance has been high. Word has spread among the

Cover Page

Name: Amanda Rae Parenti Collins

Email: [email protected]

Daytime Telephone Number: 208.409.4711

Scheduled Portfolio Date/Time: 5 August 2016, 1:30 pm (MST)

Case Titles

Case #1: Needs Assessment for Boise State University College of Health Sciences – Interpersonal Education Rollout

Case #2: Instructional Design for Ronald McDonald House of Idaho Implementing New Service Standards

OPWL Portfolio/Defense version 4.0 (rev. January 2015). This template is subject to change without notice. 1

Appendix A – OPWL Learning Goals Worksheet

Case # 1: Needs Assessment for Boise State University College of Health Sciences

Master’s degree program learning goals

Demonstrated in this case?

Explanation

1. Conduct the HPT process in a way that is systematic.

XThe team used Allison Rossett’s Rollout and Strategy Development processes as the framework for the needs assessment approach.

2. Conduct the HPT process in a way that is systemic. X

The wide reach of the Interprofessional Education (IPE) initiative required the team to collect data from multiple sources in order to identify how an IPE rollout would impact both the College and the community it serves.

3. Conduct the HPT process in a way that is consistent with established professional ethics.

X

The team followed the ISPI code of ethics. We worked collaboratively with both subject matter experts and our clients in order to add value for our clients.

4. Conduct the HPT process in a way that is consistent with established professional standards.

X

The team used professional standards set forth by both ISPI and ATD to guide our conduct and our approach to deliver quality results to our clients.

5. Align performance improvement solutions with strategic organizational goals.

X

We partnered with the Undergraduate Strategic Team (UST) to define the scope (mission and goals) of the project. We held regular check-ins with the UST to ensure our continued alignment with their goals and objectives.

6. Make recommendations that are designed to produce valued results.

X

Because we identified stakeholders in multiple departments and in multiple disciplines within the COHS, the team included all identified stakeholders in our final recommendations. In addition to our documented results, we included best practices from other organizations that had successfully implemented IPE.

7. Collaborate effectively with others, in person and virtually. X

The team provided weekly status updates to our clients. We attended their monthly meetings in order to provide updates on our progress. We also met with the clients (both in person and virtually) at their request.

8. Communicate effectively in written, verbal, and visual forms.

X

We regularly communicated with the UST through email. We attended meetings in person and provided updates (outside of those regularly scheduled) at the client’s request or as situations warranted

9. Use evidence-based practices. X

We used a variety of resources for data collection, but similar methods in order to be able to validate and triangulate data.

10. Contribute to the professional community of practice.


Appendix B – OPWL Tools/Phases WorksheetCase # 1: Needs Assessment for Boise State University College of Health Sciences

Section 2 – HPT Phase

Section 1 – OPWL Tool

Performance analysis

Cause analysis

Intervention

Selection, Des.& Dev.

Intervention Implem. &

Change

Evaluation

1. Gilbert's first, second and third leisurely theorems

2. Rummler's and Brache's performance matrix

3. Langdon's language of work (LOW)

4. Mager's and Pipe's performance analysis flowchart

X 5. Kaufman's organizational elements model (OEM) X X6. Marker's synchronized analysis model (SAM)

7. Scott’s organizational systems types

8. A logic model for evaluation based on Kellogg’s guidelines

9. Evaluation conducted with the Key Evaluation Checklist (KEC)

10. Brinkerhoff’s success case method

11. Kirkpatrick’s 4-level model of evaluation

12. Thorndike's Law of Identical Elements

13. Principles of Reinforcement from radical behaviorism

14. Cognitive Information Processing Model (computer analogy)

15. Knowles' Core Adult Learning Principles

16. Mezirow's Three Phases of Transformational Learning

17. Bloom’s taxonomy of educational objectives

18. Mager’s 3-part method for writing instructional objectives

19. Keller’s ARCS model for motivational design of instruction

20. Harless’ 13 “smart” questions

21. Procedural analysis, learning hierarchy analysis or other established task analysis method

22. Bronco ID model or another established ID model

23. Merrill’s first principles

24. Gagne’s 9 events of instruction

25. Authentic learning assessment

26. Broad & Newstrom’s strategies to promote transfer of learning

27. Business Logic Model of Silber and Kearny

28. Marker’s Six-P Framework for Evaluation

29. Five Stage Change/Implementation model (Based on Rogers and Kotter)

30. SWOT Analysis

31. Force-Field Analysis

32. Double-Loop Feedback

X

33. First Things Fast – Rollout / Strategy Development (Rossett, 2009) Practical Guide to Needs Assessment – Strategic Needs Assessment (Gupta, 2007)

X X


Case #1 - Case NarrativeNeeds Assessment for Boise State University College of Health Sciences

Problem

The College of Health Sciences (COHS) at Boise State University was in the early stages of restructuring its academic programs within each of its four schools:

Community and Environmental Health Respiratory Care Radiologic Sciences Nursing

Its goal was to successfully adopt an Interprofessional education (IPE) model. This strategic shift involved the implementation of new curricula, new policies and procedures.

The COHS formed the Undergraduate Strategic Team (UST) to explore the process of implementing an IPE program, define what its success would look like, and examine IPE models in order to design an implementation strategy for this new framework. Of particular concern to the UST was the early identification of potential barriers to faculty buy-in of this new initiative.

Our needs assessment team worked with members of the COHS to assess potential faculty related barriers to the development of a successful IPE program.

Rationale

The stakeholders were in the early stages of developing a strategic plan for the implementation of the IPE initiative when our team first met with them. Based on this, we selected (as an initial platform) Gupta, Sleezer, and Russ-Eft’s Strategic Needs Assessment, which is effective “when an organization is undertaking long-term performance improvement organizational change initiatives (2007, p. 159).

The successful implementation of an IPE initiative requires full faculty participation in a structured process to develop both communities of practice and collaborative education opportunities for students across all programs of study within a college. A strategic needs assessment provided the framework for assessing the COHS’ existing involvement in interprofessional education efforts. It also allowed the team to make recommendations regarding steps that the college should take in order to proceed with a successful IPE rollout.


Our goal was to identify faculty related barriers to an IPE rollout by using a needs assessment. This aligned well with Allison Rossett’s strategies for rollout and strategy development as explained in First Things Fast (2009). According to Rossett:

In a rollout, your emphasis is on figuring out what “it” is that the executive is attempting to bring forward and on anticipating what will drive success. You are looking for the beginning outlines of the vision, the optimals of how performance and perspectives will shift if the rollout is successful. Top priority, then is to seek the essence of optimals from sources, to compare those views of optimals and to press leadership toward something resembling the beginnings of consensus on “empowerment” or teaming…The next priority during performance analysis for a rollout is to identify drivers, to anticipate what might get in the way. (p. 76).

Using Rossett’s rollout framework, the needs assessment team defined optimals for the IPE initiative to maximize faculty support and identify potential barriers to the program’s success.

In addition to the impact to the immediate academic community, this initiative implementation would also affect the greater Treasure Valley area and other communities served by the students of the COHS. We needed a framework to examine implications both within and outside of the organization as the implementation progressed. Roger Kauffman’s Organization Elements Model (OEM) provides that framework.

Application

We used various methods of data collection to move toward our goal of identifying faculty barriers to a successful implementation of an IPE initiative (Table 1).

Table 1 – Data Collection Methods

Data Collection Method Description

UST Meetings Observe discussions and interactions during monthly UST meetings.

UST Member Interviews

Introductory interviews to obtain the perspective from each UST member. Data collected during these interviews was used to guide the direction of the needs assessment, literature review and creation of subject matter interviews.

Review of CABIII Program

Review Collaborating Across Borders III conference program for presentation topics, which closely mirror the focus of the needs assessment. Identified possible subject matter experts from selected presentations to participate in a semi-structured interview.

Subject Matter Expert Interviews

Conduct a semi-structured interview to determine what faculty-related barriers were encountered prior to or during their IPE rollout. Identify successful approaches to removing or working around barriers.

Faculty SurveyUsing data collected from internal interviews and external subject matter experts, design a survey to be distributed to College of Health Science's full time faculty.


By using Kauffman’s OEM, the team was able to organize our collection methods based on elements of the IPE initiative. Table 2 demonstrates how we applied each data resource to the OEM, as well as the intended outputs for our client. Unfortunately, the scope of our project did not allow us to address outcomes.

Table 2– Organizational Elements Model

Inte

rnal

(Org

aniz

atio

nal)

Org

aniz

atio

nal E

ffort

s

Inputs

1. Undergraduate Strategic Team (UST): participation in UST meetings, interviews with UST members2. Project Sponsor: interview3. External Subject Matter Experts: Conference (CABIII) documentation, interviews4. Faculty Members: survey

Processes

1. Meeting with Sponsor (open-ended interview) 2. UST participation a. Introductions b. Observation and open-ended questions3. Interviews with individual UST members

Org

aniz

atio

nal

Res

ults

Products1. Internal Interview Data2. External Interview Data3. Survey results/analysis

Outputs

1. Identification of Faculty Barriers to a successful implementation of an IPE Program/curriculum at Boise State University2. Recommendations for addressing faculty barriers as the College moves forward with implementation.

Exte

rnal

(S

ocie

tal)

Soci

etal

R

esul

ts/

Impa

ct

Outcomes Due to scope of project, outcomes cannot be determined.


Results:

Based on the data collected, the team concluded that, in general, the faculty was supportive of the COHS intention to roll out an IPE model. We did, however, identify four critical areas of focus:

Area of Focus Recommendations

Faculty Development

A faculty development plan should be included with the goal of educating all faculty and administration in the meaning of IPE.

Include faculty early on in the IPE development process in as many ways as possible (i.e. Town Halls, lunches, IPE games, curriculum development, faculty development sessions with guest speakers).

Provide each faculty member with a copy of the Core Competencies for Interprofessional Collaborative Practice: Report of an Expert Panel (2011). Extend an invitation to the authors to speak at a COHS faculty development session.

Invite other experts who have launched successful programs to speak at faculty development sessions, such as the subject matter experts interviewed for this report.

Investigate the use of TeamSTEPPS from the Agency for Health and Research Quality. This program has been used to help train faculty to facilitate their IPE classes so they do not have to be an expert in all professions.

Support for Initiative

Openly communicate to faculty how this program will be supported. Be transparent with what resources the university has, and does not have, for this program.

The Dean’s office should host meetings in order to communicate to faculty why this program is important to the COHS, as well as individual faculty members. Share stories of reducing medical errors and improving patient care to show the relevance of IPE.

Consider other forms of compensation, such as promotion and tenure. Consider adding faculty awards for commitment and innovation in teaching IPE.

Identify exactly what resources faculty need and believe will not be provided. Address these concerns as soon as possible.

Provide funding for faculty to attend and/or present at future conferences. Set annual goals for a desired number of faculty to participate in external programs.

Set funding aside for research grants in the area of IPE to encourage faculty to write and present research or case studies. This will give the COHS visibility in the greater IPE community and continue to educate the faculty, administration and students.

Curriculum

Create a volunteer curriculum development team (CDT) Provide resources for CDT to understand options (i.e. Individual IPE credit courses, add-on work to

courses without additional credit, inserting an IPE component into current curriculum). Ask CDT to present recommendations, with reasoning for each recommendation.

Workload

Form a joint task force with members from each school to: Gather and process faculty concerns regarding workload Work with the CDT to bring attention to workload imbalance Provide faculty members a direct path to communicate concerns without having to go to a

supervisor Communicate concerns to Dean’s office or individual with authority to assist if imbalance

issues cannot be resolved

All UST members received a copy of our final report. We reviewed the results with the members of the UST at their first available meeting time. We also met with the Project Manager


to discuss our findings and implications for the UST going forward. The report provided a discussion point for the UST and the COHS Administration to determine how to proceed with the IPE initiative. We also provided numerous recommendations for best practices as the college proceeded with the program rollout.


Appendix A – OPWL Learning Goals Worksheet Case # 2: Instructional Design for Ronald McDonald House of Idaho

Master’s degree program learning goals

Demonstrated in this case?

Explanation

1. Conduct the HPT process in a way that is systematic.

XThe team used the Bronco ID model as the roadmap for our iterative analysis and design process.

2. Conduct the HPT process in a way that is systemic.

X

We used multiple tools in order to take into account the many facets of this instructional design. Multilayered complexities included varied backgrounds of the clientele, ages and House history of management, ages, backgrounds, and House history of volunteers, interactions between volunteers and employees, and corporate and local policies and procedures.

3. Conduct the HPT process in a way that is consistent with established professional ethics.

X

We followed ISPI's Code of Ethics throughout the project. Examples include:1. Uphold Confidentiality

a. Anonymous surveysb. Aliases used for observations and interviewsc. Interview subjects informed of their rightsd. Recordings destroyed after analysis

2. Integritya. Client fully informed that this was a project

conducted by students3. Added ValueFull report provided to the client including our findings and recommendations to help them reach their objectives

4. Conduct the HPT process in a way that is consistent with established professional standards.

X

We completed this project in adherence with the ISPI standards. Examples include:Standard 1

Partnered with client to achieve mutual agreement on expected results

Standard 2 Examined several aspects of the House environment

such as procedures, expectations, history, and evaluation processes to understand the system and identify alignment issues with the House mission

Standard 4 Worked to keep project on track and aligned with

expected outcomes and organizational goals.5. Align performance

improvement solutions with strategic organizational goals. X

Our project aligned well with the organizational goals of the client. Corporate RMH had a goal for each House to implement its own standards. RMHI goals included providing excellent customer service. Our training was for implementing the RMHI-developed Service Standards for what excellent customer service looked like.

6. Make recommendations that are designed to produce valued results.

X We designed the training to be modular and expandable to allow RMHI to: 1) Use the parts they needed when they needed them and adjust the training to the time available; and 2) Add to the scenarios and modules as new training needs surfaced. We provided RMHI with the templates and guidelines for doing this. We also provided several


procedural and environmental recommendations to assist the client with full implementation of the Service Standards

7. Collaborate effectively with others, in person and virtually.

XOur team leveraged the strengths of each team member to successfully complete the project. We met regularly and often with each other and with our client.

8. Communicate effectively in written, verbal, and visual forms. X

Our team depended on good communication skills to complete the project. We used clear emails on a weekly basis with the client to keep them informed and build support. We used version control to assist with editing our deliverables

9. Use evidence-based practices.

X

We followed the Bronco ID model in conjunction with the Critical Incident Technique for the Task Analysis. We triangulated our initial survey data with extant organizational data, interviews (SMEs, management, volunteers, outside SMEs), and observations. This triangulation allowed us to present thorough and valid conclusions. The CIT enabled us to identify what exemplary performance looked like.

10. Contribute to the professional community of practice.

XWe wrote an article for the Tales from the Field section of Performance Xpress. It was published in August 2012.


Appendix B – OPWL Tools/Phases WorksheetCase#: Title:

Directions for students: Place an X in the left-hand column next to each tool that is used in this case study. Then for each marked tool, place an X in the columns indicating the phase(s) of the HPT model that tool was applied to. Be prepared to discuss and defend each tool you select.

Section 2 – HPT Phase

Section 1 – OPWL Tool

Performance analysis

Cause analysis

Intervention

Selection, Des.& Dev.

Intervention Implem. &

Change

Evaluation

1. Gilbert's first, second and third leisurely theorems

2. Rummler's and Brache's performance matrix

3. Langdon's language of work (LOW)

4. Mager's and Pipe's performance analysis flowchart

5. Kaufman's organizational elements model (OEM)

6. Marker's synchronized analysis model (SAM)

7. Scott’s organizational systems types

8. A logic model for evaluation based on Kellogg’s guidelines

9. Evaluation conducted with the Key Evaluation Checklist (KEC)

10. Brinkerhoff’s success case method

X 11. Kirkpatrick’s 4-level model of evaluation X12. Thorndike's Law of Identical Elements

13. Principles of Reinforcement from radical behaviorism

14. Cognitive Information Processing Model (computer analogy)

15. Knowles' Core Adult Learning Principles

16. Mezirow's Three Phases of Transformational Learning

17. Bloom’s taxonomy of educational objectives

X 18. Mager’s 3-part method for writing instructional objectives X19. Keller’s ARCS model for motivational design of instruction

20. Harless’ 13 “smart” questions

21. Procedural analysis, learning hierarchy analysis or other established task analysis method

X 22. Bronco ID model or another established ID model X X X X XX 23. Merrill’s first principles X X

24. Gagne’s 9 events of instruction

25. Authentic learning assessment

26. Broad & Newstrom’s strategies to promote transfer of learning

27. Business Logic Model of Silber and Kearny

28. Marker’s Six-P Framework for Evaluation

29. Five Stage Change/Implementation model (Based on Rogers and Kotter)

30. SWOT Analysis

31. Force-Field Analysis

32. Double-Loop Feedback

X33. Other - – Flanagan's Critical Incident Technique (CIT)

(Militello and Crandall, 1999 X X


Case #2 - Case NarrativeTitle: Instructional Design for Ronald McDonald House of Idaho

Problem

In 2010, the Ronald McDonald House Charity (RMHC) global office introduced a world-wide initiative to improve standards of conduct and service across the organization and all of its facilities. All facilities, or houses, were to ensure that their staff and volunteers engage in appropriate conduct while on site. RMHC also wanted to see a significant increase, overall, in the level of service provided to the clients it serves. In 2011, Ronald McDonald House of Idaho (RMHI), in collaboration with their volunteers and paid staff, created a set of service standards that describe appropriate conduct when dealing with both clients and staff members (both paid and unpaid).

The standards that were agreed upon fell into a series of behavioral statements that are grouped into four categories:

Category ExampleProfessional We respond to questions and/or concerns in a prompt and courteous

manner.Respectful We protect our families’ need to rest, relax and sleep at all hours of the

day.Compassionate We support and encourage guests, recognize when someone is in need of

help and assist appropriately.Helpful We are proactive and anticipate families’ needs.

While there was consensus around the need for and the creation of these service standards, there were many different interpretations of what these service standards translated to in the workplace. The Executive Director requested that our team develop training to formalize the standards and present them in a way that they could be adopted smoothly into RMHI culture. We worked with the client to determine the following performance gap:

Desired: Staff and volunteers will apply Service Standard behaviors 90% of the time while in, or around, the RMH.

Current: Staff and volunteers applied Service Standard behaviors 60% to 75% of the time while in, or around, the RMH.

We identified several issues that contributed to the disparity between the desired state and the current state and led to the gap in performance. Volunteers had an average of 12 years of experience working with RMHI. Paid employees, while they tended to have extensive backgrounds in working with charity organizations, had only an average of 2 years working with RMHI or with RMHC. Volunteers, generally felt that they had been implementing acceptable standards and did not recognize any significant room for improvement. While they did


participate in the development of the new service standards, they had a difficult time identifying their own shortfalls in service and acceptable conduct.

As an instructional design team, our task was to provide a solution that would:

Help provide visibility to performance deficits

Be easy to use as a “refresher” for staff on a regular cadence

Be a solid onboarding tool for new volunteers and staff members

Be easy to update to address newly identified issues/trends in service and conduct.

This training also needed to connect the RMHI Service Standards to the RMHI mission to "provide a 'home-away-from-home' for families so they can stay close by their hospitalized child at little or no cost."

Rationale

As a team, we recognized the complex nature of the seemingly simple task of providing training of this type. In order ensure both a systematic and systemic approach, we embraced the Bronco ID Model as our roadmap. This model provided the framework for us to build a clear picture of the entire situation including:

Identifying the issue(s) Narrowing down possible causes Identifying characteristics of our learners Getting a clear picture of the tasks that were expected to be performed

We conducted a learner analysis in order to determine the level of educational, cultural and experiential diversity among our target learners. This data supported our work to ensure the finished product met the client's expectations and produced improved performance.

Application

While the Bronco ID Model provided the structure for us to move forward in a systematic way, we identified and used many tools in order to support our efforts to provide our client with a satisfactory solution.

Analysis:In our Analysis phase we used to the following data gathering methods:

Data Tool SourceExtant Data 2010 Guest Satisfaction Survey

2010 Volunteer Satisfaction Survey RMHI Mission Statement and policies and procedures Background on developing Service Standards

Survey 2011 Employee/Volunteer Anonymous Questionnaire Paid staff and volunteers

Interviews/Observations 3 RHMI directors Sampling of staff and volunteers on client-identified days


Focus Group 3 volunteer groupsWe also used Flanagan's Critical Incident Technique (CIT) as described by Militello and Crandall (1999) for our Task Analysis (TA). The tasks often involved complex decision making in a stressful environment. There was no “employee manual” on conduct and standards. We therefore had no particular training starting point. CIT provided us with a method to identify critical elements of the jobs, skills and tasks. It also allowed us to begin to gain insight into what staff identified as acceptable, outstanding and sub-par performance.

Development:We categorized the data gathered during the CIT by theme and used Mager’s 3 Part Method of writing objectives to capture this information into detailed objectives for two training units. We adapted the anecdotes collected in the CIT exercise into new scenarios to ensure confidentiality. We then ranked them on clarity and appropriateness for the planned training activities. We used Merrill's First Principles to ensure the training would be relevant to participants.

The LA showed our target audience to be resistant to change but highly motivated to "do what is best for our guests." The average staff age was 38. The average volunteer age was 65. Both groups preferred interactive training. We therefore designed the opening activities to ensure each participant felt a personal connection with the training's purpose. We also worked to ensure the language of the scenarios was reflective of the actual language used in the House, avoiding acronyms, slang, etc. We designed demonstration and role-play activities that were in line with the identified objectives and provided diminished guidance as the activities progressed

Implementation:During the Implementation phase, we conducted a train-the-trainer sessions for the management on the completed training modules, the assessment tool, and their roles in the training process. We used their feedback to revise the materials and return completed, updated materials to them within 1 week. The week after the train-the-trainer sessions, the managers conducted a pilot session involving select members of staff and volunteers. Our instructional design team was on site but non-participatory. From this, we collected data on the training content and materials in order to conduct a final iteration on the materials before handing them off to the organization.

Evaluation:We conducted Kirkpatrick's Level 1 (reactions) evaluations. We provided the materials needed to conduct Level 2 and Level 3 evaluations. Due to time constraint, we were unable to administer those evaluations.

Results:

While the final output resulted in training materials that could be used and modified as needed, our final report included causes we identified for the performance gap using the methods mentioned in this document. Those causes included:

Cause Recommended solution Responsible person/s1. Insufficient skills in

applying the Service Standards consistently in the stressful RMHI

Training focused on skills for: Effective communication; Response to guest and team members' needs; Positive and constructive feedback.

BSU ID team


environment 2. Lack of clear

expectations for peer-to-peer feedback

Communicate reasons for expected peer-to-peer feedback.

RMH Directors

3. No formal performance evaluations for volunteers

Provide a formal annual evaluation to the volunteers to provide them with expectations, areas for improvement, and a measurement on the volunteer’s implementation of the Service Standards. This evaluation will also help to effectively measure progress toward closing the overall gap.

Director of Volunteers (with assistance from the other Directors)

4. No placement criteria for volunteers; volunteer strengths not always matched to position assigned

Develop placement criteria to ensure the right people with the right skills were placed in the right positions.

RMH Directors

5. Required processes interfered with compassionate customer service

Change RMH processes, such as how/when the House rules are explained to guests to encourage guest compliance.

RMH Directors

In the instructional materials, we provided guidance and templates for RMHI to adapt this training as needs change at the house. We built the training modularly so that RMHI could choose to do the whole training or just one module. We included all the scenarios with guidance on their use. We also showed the directors how to use the assessment tool for the learning assessments, long-term on-the-job evaluations, and collection of new scenarios for future trainings.

RMHI has conducted multiple training sessions since January 2012. Initial results show acceptance has been high. Word has spread among the volunteers that the training is very beneficial as well as enjoyable. In January 2013, RMHI asked for our help in submitting the training to RMHC at their international convention. Based on the work submitted, they received a large grant to be used at the local level.

We continued to reach out to RMHI until 2014 on a monthly basis.


References

Buring. S. M, Bhushan, A., Brazea, G., Conway, S., Hansen, L., Westberg, S. (2009). Keys to successful implementation of interprofessional education: Learning location, faculty development, and curricular themes. American Journal of Pharmaceutical Education, 73(4), 60.

Gupta, K., Sleezer, C., & Russ-Eft, D. (2007). A practical guide to needs assessment (Second ed.). San Francisco: Pfeiffer/ASTD.

Kaufman, R. (1981). Determining and diagnosing organizational needs. Group & Organization Studies (also, Group &Organization Management), 6(3), 212-222.

Kaufman, R. (September 01, 1988). Preparing useful performance indicators. Training & Development Journal, 80-83.

Mager, R. (1997). Preparing Instructional Objectives (3rd ed.). Atlanta, GA: CEP Press.

Merrill, D. (2013). First Principles of Instruction: Identifying and Designing Effective, Efficient, and Engaging Instruction. San Francisco, CA: Pfeiffer.

Rossett, A. (2009). First things fast: A handbook for performance analysis (second edition). San Francisco: Jossey-Bass/Pfeiffer.

Schensul, S., Schensul, J., & LeCompte, M. (1999). Essential ethnographic methods: Observations, interviews and questionnaires (Vol. 2). Walnut Creek, California: AltaMira Press.


Documents

storage.googleapis.com€¦ · Web viewRMHI has conducted multiple training sessions since January 2012. Initial results show acceptance has been high. Word has spread among the