End of Program Survey. Exit Interviews. Reflections.

Debbie Oesch-Minor, July 2021

 

Advanced Grassroots Maternal Child Health Leadership Training

 

PILOT PROGRAM/ EXIT SURVEY and EXIT INTERVIEW RESPONSES:

With comments on connections between the post-survey responses and exit interviews

___________________________________________________________________________

 

Participants in the 2020-2021 Advanced Grassroots Maternal Child Health Leadership Training [AGMCHL] pilot program completed an exit survey and exit interview. The following document comments briefly on the methodology, makes connections between survey responses and interview comments as well as what these mean for future AGMCHL training, then provides copies of the complete survey and interview responses.

 

METODOLOGY: Exit Survey and Exit Interviews

 

EXIT SURVEY

In an effort to assess strengths and areas for improvement in the AGMCHL pilot program, the grassroots participants shaped questions and built the exit-survey. AGMCHL participants used Survey Monkey to build the survey. The survey building experience was designed to support Session 13 which explored ways grassroots leaders can assess local needs and resources. The survey building experience exposed the leaders to the survey design process using a free, public facing survey tool. [Scroll down to page 5, the Survey Response section, to review questions and responses.]

 

The curricular decision to ask for input from participants models Community Tool Box guidelines. The guidelines suggest that grassroots initiatives should include community voices and engage stakeholders at every stage of a grassroots initiative. Sessions 12 and 13 of the Advanced GMCHL curriculum laid the groundwork for participants to help build the exit survey with the instructor during the Session 13 Zoom. Participants immediately made the connection that they were experiencing a best-practice for community-based participatory research because they, themselves stakeholders, helped build the survey they would later complete. The choice to weave readings, discussions, scaffolded activities, and public-facing artifacts into the curriculum is part of Project-Based Learning [PBL]. Research verifies that PBL reinforces learning retention as well as students’ ability to transfer what they learn in one environment and apply the new knowledge in innovative ways in other environments. Because grassroots leaders also benefit from opportunities to engage in PBL as part of their training, they were invited to help design and build the post-survey.

 

After the initial draft of the survey was completed, a link to the Survey Monkey was shared with Dr. Jack Turman. Suggestions were made which included updates to questions, removing duplicate questions, and expanding response options. An updated version of the survey was emailed to program participants on May 6, 2021. [To read the email sent to respondents, scroll to the last]. Two email reminders were sent later in May. Four of five participants responded to the survey.

 

• The survey consists of ten questions, which is the cap for the free version of a Survey Monkey account.

• Seven questions included response options with multiple choice variations of Likert Scales.

• The other three questions included response options with multiple choice where respondents could select more than one option.

• Every question included the possibility for participants to share comments, up to 300 characters. 

• On average, respondents took 12 minutes to complete the survey.

 

EXIT INTERVIEWS

Exit interviews were conducted by Dr. Jack Turman. Three participants were interviewed by phone, and a fourth responded through email. Materials from the interviews were compiled and shared on July 6, 2021. [Scroll down to the WORD DOCUMENT to access the Exit Interview responses.]

 

COMMENTS ON SURVEY AND INTERVIEW RESULTS

The survey results, coupled with feedback from interviews between Dr. Jack Turman and participants, provide insights into the successes of the AGMCHL training program. The responses also reveal areas for better planning/implementation while affirming that participants felt that the program provided useful materials plus personal/professional support.

 

Seven take-a-ways:

1. A pre-program survey is needed to better understand what the data means from the post-program exit survey.BUILD A PRE-PROGRAM SURVEY that aligns with this POST-SURVEY or a second post-survey which aligns with the pre-survey.

2. The pre-training application process set the stage for applicant success. Leaders began working on their Triple Focus (Kellogg’s) and Golden Circle (Sinek) from the moment they stated why they wanted to be part of the advanced training program—even though these were concepts they would not study for several months. Intuitively, the women began their journeys by articulating goals in the application essays. Their comments to Dr. Turman in the exit interviews also suggest that the application essay helped prepared them for the rigors of reading and writing in the program.

3. Exploring new technologies was beneficial and one of the most highly valued aspects of the program. The program also revealed that GMCH leaders would benefit from more support with technology and opportunities to learn new technologies.

4. MCHL Community Capacity Building for Grassroots Leaders could expand to offer more opportunities to experiment with a variety of technologies from computers and digital interfaces to Tool Box-based communication/team building technologies.

5. Reading literature was an important, integral part of the program. Leaders commented on the literary readings to emphasize the value-added nature of these manageable reading opportunities. One of the reasons the reading were so valuable was because they connected to AGMCHL topics and helped participants make connections between their lived experience and the experience of others throughout history.

6. Building four artifacts was a valuable part of learning for participants. The implementation of self-directed projects supported GMCH leaders in their personal initiatives as well as helping them engaged/practice strategies studied throughout the training program.

7. Consulting with the instructor helped reinforce grassroots leadership strategies. Participants commented that they felt supported as they met with the instructor on their four artifacts to explore ways to integrate AGMCHL training concepts into practical tools they could use to forward their initiatives beyond the training program.

 

Other Major Components of the Advanced Grassroots MCHL Training Program

Some aspects of the Advanced Grassroots MCHL Training course were not covered well in the survey nor mentioned in the written portions of the exit interviews. Two time-intensive aspects of developing the training program included providing access to curriculum through a publicly accessible website and meeting individually with participants to help them build artifacts or consult on their initiatives.

 

Advanced Grassroots MCHL Training Website

For the instructor, the most time-intensive aspect on the curricular side of the program was designing/populating an instructional website.

Link https://djoeschm5.wixsite.com/mysite-1

​

The website worked, in ways, like a learning management system [LMS] for participants. It also placed all reading materials in a conveniently accessible space. Providing digital access was critical during the pandemic, when many participants were on partial lockdown. Digital accessibility was essential to the success of the program because readings, homework assignments, and other materials lived exclusively online and integrated as vital components of each Zoom.

 

NOTE: The website is an on-going project and can serve as an early draft for a more formal curriculum for grassroots leaders. There is much room additional development. Ideally, these updates can be made in concert with new leadership training groups because the website should serve the needs of its users. The fact that the website evolved and changed as participants shared questions or raised concerns helped it function more like a LMS and less like a static website. It felt personal because it was personalized.

 

Consultations Between Participants and the Instructor

The instructor met with each participant at least two times outside of the scheduled Zooms. In these meetings, the instructor functioned more like a consultant and/or collaborator. For example, when a participant agreed to help survey families who experienced maternal loss related to child birth, she asked to practice the survey and response with the instructor. It took multiple Zooms build confidence as the leader and coach role-played through the survey, discuss strategies that could help respondents, and consider phrases or language to affirm/encourage respondents while articulating empathy and/or shared sorrow. Another participant met with the instructor to build a PowerPoint for a conference presentation to community leaders; the meeting was as much or more about content development, shaping materials, and organizing information as it was about figuring out how to use PowerPoint. Another participant met with the instructor and a student-research assistant weekly for several months to discuss trends related to her initiative/s and to discuss next steps to advance her projects. The individual meetings complimented training session Zooms and supported participants as they integrated new concepts into their grassroots initiatives.

 

For future training programs, the instructor should add a note about consultations/meetings into the syllabus as expectations for each participant.  Articulating what was implicit helps participants know they have opportunities to meet and discuss projects outside of scheduled training session times. New instructors should also be aware of the expectation to meet with participants outside of the formal training sessions. Requiring one meeting, then leaving an option to meet more often, would provide a flexible structure for individual consultations.

 

The need for routine reminder emails emerged out of comments made during individual meetings. In private discussions, some participants revealed that they were not comfortable following the syllabus/assignment schedule. Other participants had difficulties finding the Zoom link or remembering meeting dates. In response, the instructor expanded email reminders to include comments about readings and goals. The emails shared hyperlinks to the AGMCHL website and provided a hyperlink to the next training session Zoom. Using email reminders is not uncommon in the business world and, likewise, was helpful for grassroots leaders who were busy juggling work, family, and other factors.

 

Overall, the exit survey and exit interviews verify that participants acquired valuable tools to support and expand their grassroots initiatives. Participants also affirmed that the literary readings enhanced the overall experienced and created unique learning opportunities for personal and professional enrichment.

__________________________________________________________________________

​

​

    To Access SURVEY CHARTS, use the 

     Word DOCX file available to the right.

       (Click to the blue W to open the file)