Ask a question from expert

Ask now

PUB 605 : Public Program Analysis and Evaluation

11 Pages2656 Words70 Views
   

Barry University

   

Public Program Analysis and Evaluation (PUB 605)

   

Added on  2021-09-18

PUB 605 : Public Program Analysis and Evaluation

   

Barry University

   

Public Program Analysis and Evaluation (PUB 605)

   Added on 2021-09-18

BookmarkShareRelated Documents
Running head: PUBLIC PROGRAM ANALYSIS AND EVALUATION
1
Public Program Analysis and Evaluation

Name of Student
Institutional Affiliation
Name of Professor
Date
PUB 605 : Public Program Analysis and Evaluation_1
PUBLIC PROGRAM ANALYSIS AND EVALUATION
2
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Public Program Analysis and Evaluation................................................................................................2
Summary................................................................................................................................................3
Evaluation..............................................................................................................................................4
Theoretical perspective.........................................................................................................................5
Research method...................................................................................................................................6
Conclusion..............................................................................................................................................6
Evaluation concept................................................................................................................................8
References..................................................................................................................................................8
PUB 605 : Public Program Analysis and Evaluation_2
PUBLIC PROGRAM ANALYSIS AND EVALUATION
3
Public Program Analysis and Evaluation
Cho, H., Dion Hallfors, D., Iritani, B. J., & Hartman, S. (2009). The influence of No Child Left
Behind legislation on drug prevention in US schools. Evaluation Review, 33(5), 446-
463.
Summary
(Cho, Dion Hallfors, Iritani, and Hartman, 2009, pp.446-463) intend to bring out an
evaluation on the eradication of drugs use among the youth in United States schools. This is in
accordance with the efforts to reduce and prevent abuse of drugs that has been rampant for
decades in the country. In the article, the U.S. Department of education had formed the Safe and
Drug-Free Schools (SDFS) program to oversee to eliminate the use of drugs and violence among
the American youths (Little, Pokhrel, Sussman, and Rohrbach, 2015, pp.80-89). This program
targeted schools where most children could be reached out where it was enacted into the law of
anti-drug abuse. However, nearly a decade later, violence became rampant amidst the existence
of the SDFS program that was bearing fewer fruits to put the use of cocaine to a stop, which had
led to increased violence that was declared a national concern by the department of education in
the mid-1990s in the US.
Concisely, the government had reinstated the Local Educational Agencies (LEAs) to
work jointly with the SDFS to root out the use of cocaine and other drugs such as tobacco and
alcohol (Hyde and Shortell, 2012, pp.29-41). Additionally, the State Education Agencies (SEA)
were responsible for funding the program and ensuring its effectiveness in implementation across
all regions. However, the increased use of drugs spiked the scrutiny of these agencies and the
program facilitators towards the achievement of the state goals on the use of the drugs among the
PUB 605 : Public Program Analysis and Evaluation_3
PUBLIC PROGRAM ANALYSIS AND EVALUATION
4
youth. The lag in the operations led the Education Department (ED) to promulgate the principles
of effectiveness rule in July 1998 that called upon the school districts to perform intensive
evaluation and rational planning and mandated to hold back the funding to the agencies and the
facilitators who objected to comply (Mundy, Kupczynski, Ellis, and Solgado, 2012, p.1). This
opened a window for the authors to conduct an evaluation review on the legislation of drug
prevention in the United States in this journal.
Evaluation
Evaluation is an essential aspect of program competition and implementation according
to (Sanders, 2012, pp.345-379). In public administration, the authorities across the world have
been reported to be sluggish in facilitating programs and for the benefits of the citizens due to
lack of proper driving forces among the top officials. This has resulted in prolonged problems in
the society such as drug abuse, moral decay, and the social injustices reported in some regions
across the United States. Different scholars have tried to address these problems through top-
down approaches in leadership by imposing strict rules and regulation to governing the citizens.
However, (Cho et al., 2009, pp.446-463) recommends the approach of program evaluation and
reviews as a way to bring sanity and efficiency in public administration.
In the authors’ evaluation, the principle of effectiveness rule demanded that the school
districts should assess them to determine and establish the achievable goals and objectives
through the implementation of the research-based prevention programs (Hawkins and Weis,
2017, pp.3-27). The effectiveness principle rule was later modified into the law through the No
Child Left Behind Act of 2001 which intended to achieve the main goals that included,
establishing violence- and drug-free learning environment, achievement in reading and
PUB 605 : Public Program Analysis and Evaluation_4

End of preview

Want to access all the pages? Upload your documents or become a member.

Related Documents
Community Health Education Programme Assignment
|11
|3271
|34