# data[].attributes.body
1. Frequency and Timing 3
2.     Initial posting | 2
3.     Follow up postings | 2
4.     Content contribution || 2
5.     References and support |1
6.     Clarity and mechanics | | 1
7.     Netiquette  | 1
TOTAL | 12

Grading Explanation:  I think I could have spread out my posts more and used more references.

Ethics and evaluations isn't something I think about together. Obviously, there are ethics involved, especially if you feel something may be morally wrong. I think that it's correct to think things through and understand if you would be the correct evaluator for the project.

It's also fairly difficult, especially for data gathering, to try and word things and do things that don't show prejudice. I can see this as being a problem at points, because, if you're not from a different culture, you may not see the problem. Of course, this might be avoided by getting to know the people you're working for. However, even so, it may be difficult to be ethically correct on all fronts.

I think the best we can hope to do is try to be ethical in all we do and understand that we all have our shortcomings and prejudices. Of course, we'll have to try and not let those things get in the way of the evaluation, but part of that is acknowledging that everyone is human.

# data[].attributes.body
1. Frequency and Timing 3
2.     Initial posting | 2
3.     Follow up postings | 3
4.     Content contribution || 2
5.     References and support |1
6.     Clarity and mechanics | | 1
7.     Netiquette  | 1
TOTAL | 13

Grading Explanation:  I think I could have found some better references for my initial post. However, I did try to engage in discussion with my peers.

You can't plan for everything. This week made that perfectly clear. It seems, as last week, relationships and communication with stakeholders are the "secret" to success.

As I stated in my post, I'm one of those planner types. Everything HAS to go to plan, or else I start freaking out. This discussion, at least in regards to evaluations, that nothing WILL ever go to plan. All you can do is try your best and come up with a solution when it comes. Perhaps these problems will be people not speaking the language, not enough evaluators, not enough data, or even maybe the timeline was shifted up. Anything can happen, and communicating with stakeholders and your team, you can at least make these problems transparent and hopefully, if a problem causes monetary loss, be able to work through it as a team.

# data[].attributes.body
1. Frequency and Timing 3
2.     Initial posting | 3
3.     Follow up postings | 3
4.     Content contribution || 2
5.     References and support |2
6.     Clarity and mechanics | | 1
7.     Netiquette  | 1
TOTAL | 15

Grading Explanation:  I really focused on trying to carry a discussion and to use references from the readings.

This week we looked at communication between evaluators and stakeholders. As I noted, I always thought these two entities were kept separate. However, it does make sense that they should communicate. This communication is very valuable because they can see the results and verbalize any concerns while the evaluations is happening. I think, just in general, more frequent communication could really help any form of business or school.

Of course, there has to be a balance. In my group, we figured that bi-weekly communications were enough, and that they should happen either face-to-face or via computer communication (like Skype, Zoom, etc). Although this wasn't noted, I don't imagine the meetings being any longer than about 30 minutes. This short amount of time and it being bi-weekly doesn't make the meetings so consistant that they're annoying. Only consistant enough for each party to feel that they know what's going on, and they have enough information to move forward.

I never thought evaluations took so much effort and that communication was so important. I'm going to attempt to utilize this knowledge in my workplace and see how it goes. I'm hoping I can help out some of the projects.

# data[].attributes.body
1. Frequency and Timing 2
2.     Initial posting | 2
3.     Follow up postings | 2
4.     Content contribution || 1
5.     References and support |2
6.     Clarity and mechanics | | 1
7.     Netiquette  | 1
TOTAL | 11

Grading Explanation: I didn't feel that I had a lot of time to post as often as I would like, also I think my initial post suffered a touch due to lack of time because of outside classroom concerns.

This week we looked at analyzing data. I can say with confidence I am still not very good at looking at an analyzing data. However, it was comforting to know that data can come in two forms: qualitative and quantitative. I actually have a hard time grasping numbers, as in I'm not generally interested in seeing numbers because they're not descriptive.

I can't look at a table and see that the turnover rate is high because a lot of people retired. And, this could just be me, I feel like looking at a data table should just magically give me all the answers. However, I really should learn to read the descriptions of the tables and actually understand the information.

I feel that qualitative data is more interesting, but I can't solely rely on that either. I feel like you get more information about the analysis (for instance how people think and feel), but it is not a one-size fit all data collection tool.

Basically, I learned that I can't only use one form of data over the other, and I really have to try and use both to get a bigger picture.

# data[].attributes.body
We didn't have a discussion this week, so I'm not sure how to use the grading elements. However, I will add a reflection:

In regards to your question in Week 5 on how can we communicate the importance of culture in corporate contexts, I think it's very difficult.

There are some things that look at the culture of the work place, such as the Great Places to Work survey. This survey asks employees about their feelings about their corporation for instance, do you feel safe? Do you feel there's gender equality? Do you feel that proper accommodations are given for those differently impaired?

This survey gives the benefit of a headline in a magazine and advertises the workplace as forward thinking. This means the company wants to do well so they can procure new talent.

This is good for the higher-ups, but it doesn't really do much for lower level management or those below lower level. I see this in my own workplace where the culture doesn't match the survey results. The only way I have ever been able to communicate the importance of cultural competence and sensitivity is to bring it up as: you will never retain the candidates you want if your group continues to be culturally biased.

Although this wording is a bit strong and it results in managers becoming defensive. It's generally understood that if you're not culturally sensitive that you'll "get in trouble". However, I don't think this is a good way to breach the subject either. I feel cultural competency should be taught as simply being respectful of others' differences. Yet, despite my efforts, many of the groups will scoff and believe that culture isn't necessary.

My company has been trying to address this (as I stated the executives seem to be aware of the importance) by implementing classes like Speed of Trust. Speed of Trust is generally how to communicate across cultures and being respectful. Yet, a lot of my coworkers will refuse to attend because it's "pointless" and it "doesn't matter". I'm not sure exactly how cultural competencies can be pursued when there seems to be an adverse reaction to the word "culture" to begin with. Perhaps it would be better breached as labeling it as something like Managerial Skills or Group Competencies for Leadership.

In regards to creating the survey this week, it seems people feel a bit strange giving feedback on a survey. Only one of my field test observers was able to give more negative feedback, where the other person was afraid of hurting the creators' feelings. Perhaps there should be more "how to evaluate" subjects brought up in a corporate and classroom setting?

# data[].attributes.body
Grading elements for Assignment Participation and discussion
1. Frequency and Timing 2
2.     Initial posting | 2
3.     Follow up postings | 2
4.     Content contribution || 1
5.     References and support |2
6.     Clarity and mechanics | | 1
7.     Netiquette  | 1
TOTAL | 11

Grading Explanation: I felt my timing and follow up posts were off this week. I didn't really space out the timings of the posts, and I felt that I wasn't contributing as much.

I really like that culture and evaluations have been discussed this week. This is because I often feel cultural backgrounds are forgotten.

Culture defines who we are as individuals and as a group, but if you ever bring it up in a corporate setting, then be ready to get scoffed at. However, during an evaluation culture does need to be considered. Not only does individual culture need to be thought of but a group culture needs to be thought about as well.

If an individual's culture isn't being considered, then the evaluation might come back with faulty results. For instance, someone might be offended by the wording or context and the opinion on what is being evaluated might come back falsly negative. A group culture can also change an evaluation. Perhaps there's some things that really define a group's work, and if it's not asked about, perhaps the group will react negatively.

Despite what we might think, culture defines everything: what we research in science, why we value math, why some clothes are fashionable, and what is considered discriminatory. I'm glad this reading kept culture in mind.

# data[].attributes.body
Grading elements for Assignment Participation and discussion
1. Frequency and Timing 3
2.     Initial posting | 2
3.     Follow up postings | 2
4.     Content contribution || 1
5.     References and support |2
6.     Clarity and mechanics | | 1
7.     Netiquette  | 1
TOTAL | 12

Grading Explanation: I feel my responses were a bit lacking this week. Especially with my last post, I feel I could have challenged what was said a bit more.

My group and I spent a lot of time working on our questions. These questions were far more in depth than I realized.

I didn't think criteria and standards had to be so fleshed out, as this is a process I don't normally get to see in the workplace. It always seems that the questions are random with no real goal in mind.

With that said, I do wonder how many evaluations within my company are this well thought out? Which results are actually used?

I think having standards for each questions is particularly important because they act as definitions. Anyone can say: did a lot of new employees leave?

What does "a lot" mean? Do they mean 1 employee out of 100, or do they mean 50 out of 100. Giving concrete standards is something I never really considered until this class.

# data[].attributes.body
Discussion rubric

Grading elements for Assignment Participation and discussion
1. Frequency and Timing 3
2.     Initial posting | 2
3.     Follow up postings | 3
4.     Content contribution || 1
5.     References and support |2
6.     Clarity and mechanics | | 1
7.     Netiquette  | 1
TOTAL | 13

Grading Explanation: I think I did better at using references and attempting to move the discussions forward. However, I feel I could have added more in-depth content and drew more profound conclusions.

This week we spent more time on asking an evaluation was being prompted. It seems that me and my team have had many experiences where this question wasn't asked, and if it was asked, then it wasn't the right question. I always thought that pinpointing the perfect question was one of the main points of the evaluation. However, I didn't think that having a question that was too precise could hinder an evaluation. Thinking on it now, this makes sense. If I only wanted to investigate one part of a program, then I'm missing out on the rest of the program. This could result in a blind spot and missing potential worry areas. Therefore, a good evaluation is concise enough, yet gives enough breathing room for the evaluation to explore.

# data[].attributes.body
Discussion rubric

Grading elements for Assignment 1: Participation and discussion 3
2.     Initial posting | 2
3.     Follow up postings | 2
4.     Content contribution || 2
5.     References and support |1
6.     Clarity and mechanics | | 1
7.     Netiquette  | 1
TOTAL | 11

Grading Explanation: I feel I can use better references and elaborate more on my ideas. On my follow-up posts, I think I can do better at moving the discussion forward.

This will sound strange; however, I didn't realize that evaluations were all about the results they yield. This could mean that do not have a good experience with evaluations within a corporation. However, knowing this, I now understand why evaluations occur. They attempt to demystify the data and give results that will assist the program or lesson in the end. I have also learned that if you go into an evaluation with the intent to never use the results, then there is no point in conducting the evaluation at all.

Discussing evaluations with my peers makes it apparent that some companies do not utilize evaluations effectively.

I have learned there are many ways to conduct evaluations and doing pure self-assessment may not be the wisest choice, as you end up with students who will feel excluded. If there is an opportunity, multiple means of evaluation should be implemented.

# data[].attributes.body
I am very excited to learn how to do proper evaluations. I have never done program evaluations, and I am slightly concerned at my quality of assignments for this course. I will need to make sure to listen to my peers and to read the book in order to find proper examples. I am particularly worried about evaluation questions.  As  I stated in my introduction, all of my evaluations have always been: on  a scale of 1-10....

I'm hoping I will learn how to make better questions than just the scale, and I hope I will be able to create content that responds to these evaluations.