Navigating program evaluation amid health crises: Evaluator's experiences on conducting virtual focus group discussions

IF 1.5 4区 社会学 Q2 SOCIAL SCIENCES, INTERDISCIPLINARY
Lesedi Senamele Matlala
{"title":"Navigating program evaluation amid health crises: Evaluator's experiences on conducting virtual focus group discussions","authors":"Lesedi Senamele Matlala","doi":"10.1016/j.evalprogplan.2025.102568","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><div>Virtual Focus Group Discussions (FGDs) have become vital tools in program evaluations, especially during the COVID-19 pandemic, where they provide an adaptable alternative to traditional face-to-face methods. These virtual platforms, such as Google Meet, allow evaluators to engage diverse stakeholders and collect valuable insights despite geographical limitations. However, despite their increasing use, there remains a significant gap in understanding how evaluators in South Africa perceive and implement virtual methodologies in the context of program evaluations. This study aims to address this gap by reflecting on evaluators’ experiences with virtual FGDs, focusing particularly on Google Meet as the chosen platform. This research uses a reflective methodology to explore various aspects of virtual FGDs, such as participant engagement, technological proficiency, and data privacy challenges encountered during sessions. The findings reveal that while virtual FGDs provide enhanced accessibility and flexibility, they also present challenges related to participants’ digital literacy, technological infrastructure issues, and data privacy concerns. The study emphasizes the need for strategies to mitigate these challenges, including the provision of pre-session training for participants, enhancing digital infrastructure, and reinforcing data protection measures. Additionally, it recommends the implementation of hybrid models that combine virtual and in-person approaches to bridge the technological divide. This study contributes valuable insights into the experiences of evaluators conducting virtual FGDs in South Africa, offering practical recommendations for improving the effectiveness and inclusivity of virtual evaluations. Ultimately, virtual FGDs hold significant potential to enhance program evaluations in South Africa, but addressing the identified challenges is essential to maximizing their impact on the evaluation process.</div></div>","PeriodicalId":48046,"journal":{"name":"Evaluation and Program Planning","volume":"111 ","pages":"Article 102568"},"PeriodicalIF":1.5000,"publicationDate":"2025-02-26","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Evaluation and Program Planning","FirstCategoryId":"90","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0149718925000357","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"SOCIAL SCIENCES, INTERDISCIPLINARY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Virtual Focus Group Discussions (FGDs) have become vital tools in program evaluations, especially during the COVID-19 pandemic, where they provide an adaptable alternative to traditional face-to-face methods. These virtual platforms, such as Google Meet, allow evaluators to engage diverse stakeholders and collect valuable insights despite geographical limitations. However, despite their increasing use, there remains a significant gap in understanding how evaluators in South Africa perceive and implement virtual methodologies in the context of program evaluations. This study aims to address this gap by reflecting on evaluators’ experiences with virtual FGDs, focusing particularly on Google Meet as the chosen platform. This research uses a reflective methodology to explore various aspects of virtual FGDs, such as participant engagement, technological proficiency, and data privacy challenges encountered during sessions. The findings reveal that while virtual FGDs provide enhanced accessibility and flexibility, they also present challenges related to participants’ digital literacy, technological infrastructure issues, and data privacy concerns. The study emphasizes the need for strategies to mitigate these challenges, including the provision of pre-session training for participants, enhancing digital infrastructure, and reinforcing data protection measures. Additionally, it recommends the implementation of hybrid models that combine virtual and in-person approaches to bridge the technological divide. This study contributes valuable insights into the experiences of evaluators conducting virtual FGDs in South Africa, offering practical recommendations for improving the effectiveness and inclusivity of virtual evaluations. Ultimately, virtual FGDs hold significant potential to enhance program evaluations in South Africa, but addressing the identified challenges is essential to maximizing their impact on the evaluation process.
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
Evaluation and Program Planning
Evaluation and Program Planning SOCIAL SCIENCES, INTERDISCIPLINARY-
CiteScore
3.10
自引率
6.20%
发文量
112
期刊介绍: Evaluation and Program Planning is based on the principle that the techniques and methods of evaluation and planning transcend the boundaries of specific fields and that relevant contributions to these areas come from people representing many different positions, intellectual traditions, and interests. In order to further the development of evaluation and planning, we publish articles from the private and public sectors in a wide range of areas: organizational development and behavior, training, planning, human resource development, health and mental, social services, mental retardation, corrections, substance abuse, and education.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信