科学的陪伴:一种整合项目开发、证据和评估的新模式

IF 1.4 Q2 SOCIAL WORK
Patricia Lannen, L. Jones
{"title":"科学的陪伴:一种整合项目开发、证据和评估的新模式","authors":"Patricia Lannen, L. Jones","doi":"10.1108/jcs-09-2021-0037","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"\nPurpose\nCalls for the development and dissemination of evidence-based programs to support children and families have been increasing for decades, but progress has been slow. This paper aims to argue that a singular focus on evaluation has limited the ways in which science and research is incorporated into program development, and advocate instead for the use of a new concept, “scientific accompaniment,” to expand and guide program development and testing.\n\n\nDesign/methodology/approach\nA heuristic is provided to guide research–practice teams in assessing the program’s developmental stage and level of evidence.\n\n\nFindings\nIn an idealized pathway, scientific accompaniment begins early in program development, with ongoing input from both practitioners and researchers, resulting in programs that are both effective and scalable. The heuristic also provides guidance for how to “catch up” on evidence when program development and science utilization are out of sync.\n\n\nOriginality/value\nWhile implementation models provide ideas on improving the use of evidence-based practices, social service programs suffer from a significant lack of research and evaluation. Evaluation resources are typically not used by social service program developers and collaboration with researchers happens late in program development, if at all. There are few resources or models that encourage and guide the use of science and evaluation across program development.\n","PeriodicalId":45244,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Childrens Services","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":1.4000,"publicationDate":"2022-08-16","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Scientific accompaniment: a new model for integrating program development, evidence and evaluation\",\"authors\":\"Patricia Lannen, L. Jones\",\"doi\":\"10.1108/jcs-09-2021-0037\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"\\nPurpose\\nCalls for the development and dissemination of evidence-based programs to support children and families have been increasing for decades, but progress has been slow. This paper aims to argue that a singular focus on evaluation has limited the ways in which science and research is incorporated into program development, and advocate instead for the use of a new concept, “scientific accompaniment,” to expand and guide program development and testing.\\n\\n\\nDesign/methodology/approach\\nA heuristic is provided to guide research–practice teams in assessing the program’s developmental stage and level of evidence.\\n\\n\\nFindings\\nIn an idealized pathway, scientific accompaniment begins early in program development, with ongoing input from both practitioners and researchers, resulting in programs that are both effective and scalable. The heuristic also provides guidance for how to “catch up” on evidence when program development and science utilization are out of sync.\\n\\n\\nOriginality/value\\nWhile implementation models provide ideas on improving the use of evidence-based practices, social service programs suffer from a significant lack of research and evaluation. Evaluation resources are typically not used by social service program developers and collaboration with researchers happens late in program development, if at all. There are few resources or models that encourage and guide the use of science and evaluation across program development.\\n\",\"PeriodicalId\":45244,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal of Childrens Services\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.4000,\"publicationDate\":\"2022-08-16\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Journal of Childrens Services\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1108/jcs-09-2021-0037\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"SOCIAL WORK\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Childrens Services","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1108/jcs-09-2021-0037","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"SOCIAL WORK","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

几十年来,要求制定和传播以证据为基础的项目来支持儿童和家庭的呼声一直在增加,但进展缓慢。本文的目的是论证对评估的单一关注已经限制了将科学和研究纳入程序开发的方式,并主张使用一个新的概念,“科学伴奏”来扩展和指导程序开发和测试。设计/方法/方法提供了一种启发式方法来指导研究实践团队评估项目的发展阶段和证据水平。在一个理想的途径中,科学的陪伴在项目开发的早期就开始了,伴随着从业人员和研究人员不断的投入,导致项目既有效又可扩展。当程序开发和科学利用不同步时,启发式还提供了如何“赶上”证据的指导。原创性/价值虽然实施模式为改进循证实践的使用提供了思路,但社会服务项目严重缺乏研究和评估。社会服务项目的开发人员通常不会使用评估资源,与研究人员的合作发生在项目开发的后期,如果有的话。很少有资源或模型鼓励和指导跨项目开发使用科学和评估。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Scientific accompaniment: a new model for integrating program development, evidence and evaluation
Purpose Calls for the development and dissemination of evidence-based programs to support children and families have been increasing for decades, but progress has been slow. This paper aims to argue that a singular focus on evaluation has limited the ways in which science and research is incorporated into program development, and advocate instead for the use of a new concept, “scientific accompaniment,” to expand and guide program development and testing. Design/methodology/approach A heuristic is provided to guide research–practice teams in assessing the program’s developmental stage and level of evidence. Findings In an idealized pathway, scientific accompaniment begins early in program development, with ongoing input from both practitioners and researchers, resulting in programs that are both effective and scalable. The heuristic also provides guidance for how to “catch up” on evidence when program development and science utilization are out of sync. Originality/value While implementation models provide ideas on improving the use of evidence-based practices, social service programs suffer from a significant lack of research and evaluation. Evaluation resources are typically not used by social service program developers and collaboration with researchers happens late in program development, if at all. There are few resources or models that encourage and guide the use of science and evaluation across program development.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
2.90
自引率
0.00%
发文量
14
×
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