Issue link: https://takingitglobal.uberflip.com/i/1542824
R. Adeboye, C. Flewelling,V. Ogbole, E. O'Sullivan 17 • Can you describe a moment when a student showed a new interest, insight, or sense of belonging because of a session? (179 responses) • In your opinion, what approaches have been most effective to engage students as part of this program delivery?" (879 Content Provider responses) Each question was coded in its own block, where each of the write-in responses occupied one row. Each PIA and Outcome was entered as a column header. Where the response expressed a positive sentiment related to the PIA/Outcome, +1 was coded for that column. Where the response expressed a negative sentiment related to that PIA/Outcome, -1 was coded for that column. Where a response was not relevant to a PIA/Outcome, the column was coded as zero for that response. An example is provided below, where the colour codes illustrate linkages to the Program Theory components: Teachers' survey response: "A big focus in my classroom is pushing the students to try hard things, find it challenging, and overcome it. The hands-on Connected North sessions allow the students this ability in a culturally relevant setting." ➔ Cultural Relevance (+1) ➔ Increased confidence and positive sense of cultural identity (+1) ➔ Interactive delivery (+1) Although the potential to inform the PIAs/Outcomes seemed likely to vary across questions, in practice there was significant overlap in the types of responses that were provided to each of the questions on the teacher survey. Consequently, the answers were combined across the four teacher survey questions (i.e., if 100 responses to question #1, 50 responses to question #2, and 25 responses to questions #3 were related to the PIA "Sessions are culturally relevant" then 175 responses were deemed relevant to that PIA across all three questions. The degree of alignment or relevance of the write-in questions with a PIA/Outcome was determined by the total number of responses that implicated that PIA/Outcome: 25-100 = a modest number denoting mild relevance (6 PIAs/Outcomes); 101-300= a moderate number denoting moderate relevance (3 PIAs/Outcomes); 301+ = a large number denoting strong relevance (7 PIAs/Outcomes). While these cutoffs are somewhat arbitrary, they were selected to align as closely as possible with the distribution of responses while also creating meaningful distinctions between mild, moderate, and stronger levels of alignment or relevance. The sentiment level was calculated based on the percentage of relevant responses that were positive (versus negative), then combined with the alignment rating to determine the overall strength of the evidence, as illustrated in Figure C below.