Report of KASA
Introduction
Environmental changes could be
seen as the interaction and outcome of the reflection of nature referring to
the human behavior. Lehman and Geller
(2004) stated that the serious damage of the environment and the future
threatening of species are caused by human behavior. This assumption of the
potential problem, which human behavior acts on environment, attracted the
scientists offered analysis and applications in 1970s.
Claude Bennett is one of the scientists
who researched the human behaviors in early 1970s. The most famous achievement
was his ‘Bennett’s Hierarchy’. His structure of hierarchy levels has become an
effective and classic methodology in the program planning field and its
evaluation.
The origin of KASA.
In 1975, Claude Bennett published
the journal named ‘Up
the hierarchy’ to claim his research result. In his research, he developed a
unique hierarchy of evidence for evaluation of program impacts. The hierarchy
in his journal is as below,
‘A Hierarchy of Evidence for Program
Evaluation’
Bennett,
C. 1975.
This figure above shows
seven-link ‘chain of events’. The seven steps of Bennett’s hierarchy are
organized in a particular order which is like a staircase. It is more like a
draft rather than well-designed model. Bennett gave out the definitions of
terms and functions for each level.
Inputs (Level 1) represents the resources which will be
release into the process by extension program. With the inputs, it may bring
concrete activates (Level 2), including meeting and workshop building.
Activates must generate the involvement of individuals (Level 3) with their
reactions (Level 4). Different individual behaviors will effect different kinds
of KASA change
(Level 5). This will influence the practice change (Level 6) which occurs the
effected end results (Level 7) (Workman
& Scheer, 2012).
The relationship of the whole
procedure is like a chain with a single-directed effective path.
Hence the hierarchy became consummated as it shows below,
‘Analyzing Impacts of Extension
Programs. Washington, DC, U.S.D.A’
Bennett, C. 1979,
KASA term can describe two things, including the individual behavior
and the individual ability of changing behavior. But the KASA only provided a
general view of basic human characters with four aspects (knowledge,
aspiration, skill and attitude). It still remains as a qualitative indicator.
The development
of KASA.
KASA is one term in the process of the hierarchy. Hence its
development followed the Bennett’s hierarchy’s development.
It is known that Claude Bennett was once working for the
Education and Extension Service of USDA. His experience had contributed to him
for understanding the human behavior. To the entire Bennett’s hierarchy, KASA
seems like a term rather than a model. The first appearance of KASA as
an independent term was
in 1975. It was separated from the KASAB (knowledge,
aspiration, skill, attitude and behavior) model by Bennett. The existence of the KASAB
model was applied in the education field. Professional developers can use KASAB
model analyze how teachers action mode of completing a quantified purpose. (Borthwick & Pierson, 2009).
Up to now, Bennett's hierarchy has been applied for over 40
years. Bennett and Rockwell modified the Bennett’s hierarchy in both 1995 and
2000 (Radhakrishna & Bowen, 2010). The modification could be recognized
as a significant development for Bennett’s hierarchy.
The developed hierarchy was the TOP model which is as below.
‘A hierarchy for targeting
outcomes and evaluating their achievement’
Rockwell & Bennett, 2004
TOP model is the development result of the
Bennett’s hierarchy (Rockwell & Bennett, 2004). Compared with the Bennett’s
hierarchy, the TOP model owns a new structure. The new structure can help
tracking the process. With the good view of the entire process, it is possible
to manipulate the model to achieve the planning achievement.
KASA in this TOP model remains the same function. But as
methodology progressed in the past four decades, KASA term became more
functional with the help of other scientists’ research achievement. Measurement
became more standardized with designed worksheets for the KASA change process.
Rockwell & Bennett, 2004
Rockwell & Bennett, 2004
Case study of
KASA.
As KASA is not a model, the case study of KASA is based on
the application of Bennett’s hierarchy or TOP model.
US natural resource extension programs used a large amount
of administrative interventions to induce the practitioners of the Extension to
take part in the activates following the state recommendation (Morford et al, 2006). The researchers
aimed to exam the hypotheses factors, including experience, age, attitude,
commitment, funding, position and belief. The methodology is the Bennett’s
hierarchy and common statistics. The result table is as below,
Morford and his collaborators stated that
a significant decrease in frequency happened between the level KASA and ‘re-contacting
participants after the event’. Hence, with the help of data performance
corresponding with KASA term, they were able to continue with the next step
evaluation.
Conclusion
The Bennett’s hierarchy and TOP model are effective to evaluate
the extension program. But the KASA change procedure still seems complex and
not directive.
Recommendation
As part of the KASA change could be observed and measured
with quantitative test or close-ended questionnaire (Harder, 2016). It might be calculated. Hence, the
author draws a system dynamic graph with the computer program Vensim. Although
the inner relationship between each element is still not clear, it still could
be an approach to analyze the KASA term with some advantages in the future.
Reference
Lehman, P and Geller, E. (2004). ‘Behavior analysis and
environmental protection: Accomplishments and potential for more’. Behavior and
Social Issues. pp13-32. Available at: http://journals.uic.edu/ojs/index.php/bsi/article/view/33/61 [Accessed date: March 26,
2016]
Bennett, C. (1975). ‘Up the hierarchy’. Journal of Extension
[On-line]. 13(2). Available at: http://www.joe.org/joe/1975march/1975-2-a1.pdf
[Accessed date: March 26, 2016]
Workman, J and Scheer, S. (2012). ‘Evidence of Impact:
Examination of Evaluation Studies Published in the Journal of Extension’.
Journal of Extension [On-line]. Available at: http://www.joe.org/joe/2012april/a1.php [Accessed date: March 26,
2016]
Bennett, C. (1979). ‘Analyzing impacts of extension
programs, Washington, D.C, USDA Extension Service’. Journal of Extension.
Borthwick, A and Pierson, M. (2009). ‘Introduction to
Professional Development Strategies in Educational Technology’. Professional
Development in Educational Technology. Transforming Classroom Practice
Professional Development Strategies in Educational Technology. Available at: http://www.iste.org/images/excerpts/prodev-excerpt.pdf [Accessed date: March 26,
2016]
Radhakrishna, R and Bowen, C. (2010). ‘Viewing Bennett's
Hierarchy from a Different Lens: Implications for Extension Program Evaluation’.
Journal of Extension [On-line]. Available at: http://www.joe.org/joe/2010december/tt1.php [Accessed date: March 26,
2016]
Rockwell, K and Bennett, C. (2008). Rockwell K, Bennett C. ‘A
Hierarchy for Targeting Outcomes and Evaluating Their Achievement’. Targeting
Outcomes of Programs. Available at: http://www.uaf.edu/files/ces/reporting/logicmodel/TOP.pdf [Accessed date: March 26,
2016]
S. Kay Rockwell. (2012). ‘Using Targeting Outcomes of
Programs as a Framework to Target Photographic Events in Nonformal Educational
Programs’. Faculty Publications: Agricultural Leadership, Education & Communication
Department. Available at: http://digitalcommons.unl.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1056&context=aglecfacpub [Accessed date: March 26,
2016]
Morford, S, Kozak, R, Suvedi, M and Innes, J. (2006). ‘Factors
Affecting Program Evaluation Behaviors of Natural Resource Extension
Practitioners--Motivation and Capacity Building’. Journal of Extension
[On-line]. 44(3). Available at: http://www.joe.org/joe/2006june/a7p.shtml [Accessed date: March 26,
2016]
Harder, A. (2016). ‘Using the TOP Model to Measure Program
Performance: A Pocket Reference’. IFAS extension. Available at: http://edis.ifas.ufl.edu/pdffiles/wc/wc09200.pdf [Accessed date: March 26,
2016]
