A large-scale, geographical approach to using group concept mapping for planning: The Teen Opinions Count (TOC) project

Scott R. Rosas, Corey Smith, Avery Eenigenburg, Chelsea BaileyShea, Kathleen Jerome and Maureen Millane

Evaluation and Program Planning, 2022, vol. 92, issue C

Abstract: The use of group concept mapping (GCM) for large-scale, multi-site planning has been limited. The Teens Opinions Count (TOC) project utilized the group concept mapping methodology to develop a framework for after school time program development for teens in 16 counties in the Southeast Michigan and Western New York regions. This extensive planning effort demonstrated a large-scale, geographical approach to the implementation of GCM, where multiple sites (in this case counties) simultaneously engaged in independent processes on the same topic, with the purpose of producing separate locale-specific conceptualizations. TOC was the largest GCM project ever conducted in terms of the number of participants and volume of data submitted. This report details GCM recruitment, data collection, data compilation, and analysis of ideas from over 20,000 teens and 2,000 adults. Although implementation was conducted at the county level, many of the separate county-level GCM processes were larger than what is typically encountered in the literature. Operationalizing GCM at such a scale required significant planning, design, communication, and data management solutions. The extensive data collection effort required the need for creative and innovative procedures to engage teens and process the sheer volume of data. The lessons learned are discussed and suggestions for future applications offered.

Keywords: Group Concept Mapping; Planning; After school; Large-scale (search for similar items in EconPapers)
Date: 2022
References: View references in EconPapers View complete reference list from CitEc
Citations:

Downloads: (external link)
http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0149718922000519
Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only

Related works:
This item may be available elsewhere in EconPapers: Search for items with the same title.

Export reference: BibTeX RIS (EndNote, ProCite, RefMan) HTML/Text

Persistent link: https://EconPapers.repec.org/RePEc:eee:epplan:v:92:y:2022:i:c:s0149718922000519

DOI: 10.1016/j.evalprogplan.2022.102097

Access Statistics for this article

Evaluation and Program Planning is currently edited by Jonathan A. Morell

More articles in Evaluation and Program Planning from Elsevier
Bibliographic data for series maintained by Catherine Liu ().