Two models that are commonly used in Extension programming to capture change over a short period of time are the pretest-posttest model and the retrospective pretest (or post-then-pre) model. When deciding which model to use, Extension professionals should keep in mind that each participant has a knowledge base that includes both factual information and perceptions pertaining to factual information. As you read about the strengths and weaknesses of these two design models, consider how each model fits the evaluation situation to select the one that can best measure change in your program. This 4-page fact sheet was written by Jessica L. Gouldthorpe and Glenn D. Israel and published by the UF Department of Agricultural Education and Communication, January 2013.
Allen, J. M., & Nimon, K. (2007). Retrospective pretest: A practical technique for professional development evaluation. Journal of Industrial Teacher Education, 44(3), 27-42.
Ary, D., Jacobs, L. C., Razavieh, A., & Sorensen, C. (2006). Introduction to research in education (7th ed.). Belmont, CA: Thomson Wadsworth.
Gall, M. D., Gall, J. P., & Borg, W. R. (2003). Educational research: An introduction (7th ed.). New York, NY: Allyn and Bacon.
Hatry, H. P. (1999). Performance measurement: Getting results. Washington, D.C.: The Urban Institute Press.
Howard, G. S. (1980). Response-shift bias: A problem in evaluating interventions with pre/post self-reports. Evaluation Review, 4(1), 93-106. doi: 10.1177/0193841X8000400105. https://doi.org/10.1177/0193841X8000400105
Howard, G. S., Ralph, K. M., Gulanick, N. A., Maxwell, S. E., Nance, D., & Gerber, S. L. (1979). Internal invalidity in pretest-posttest self-report evaluations and the reevaluation of retrospective pretests. Applied Psychological Measurement, 3(1), 1-23. https://doi.org/10.1177/014662167900300101
Israel, G., Diehl, D., & Galindo-Gonzalez, S. (2009). Evaluation situations, stakeholders & strategies. WC090. Gainesville: University of Florida Institute of Food and Agricultural Sciences. Retrieved from http://edis.ifas.ufl. edu/wc090
Klatt, J., & Taylor-Powell. E. (2005). Using the retrospective post-then-pre design. Quick tips #27. Madison: University of Wisconsin-Extension. Retrieved from http://www.uwex. edu/ces/pdande/resources/pdf/Tipsheet27.pdf
Lynch, K. B. (2002, November). When you don't know what you don't know: Evaluating workshops and training sessions using the retrospective pretest methods. Paper presented at the meeting of the American Evaluation Association Annual Conference, Arlington, VA.
Newcomer, K. (1997). Using performance measurement to improve public and non-profit programs. New Directions for Evaluation, 75, 5-14. https://doi.org/10.1002/ev.1076
Pratt, C. C., McGuigan, W. M., & Katzev, A. R. (2000). Measuring program outcomes: Using retrospective pretest methodology. American Journal of Evaluation, 21(3), 341-349. https://doi.org/10.1177/109821400002100305
Raidl, M., Johnson, S., Gardiner, K., Denham, M., Spain, K., & Lanting, R. (2004). Use retrospective surveys to obtain complete data sets and measure impact in extension programs. Journal of Extension, 42(2). Retrieved from http://www.joe.org/joe/2004april/rb2.shtml
Rockwell, S. K., & Kohn, H. (1989). Post-then-pre evaluation: Measuring behavior change more accurately. Journal of Extension, 27(2). Retrieved from http://www.joe.org/ joe/1989summer/a5.php
Sudman, S., Bradburn, N. M., & Schwarz, N. (1996). Thinking about answers: The application of cognitive processes to survey methodology. San Fransisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.
The documents contained on this website are copyrighted by the University of Florida, Institute of Food and Agricultural Sciences (UF/IFAS) for the people of the State of Florida. UF/IFAS retains all rights under all conventions, but permits free reproduction by all agents and offices of the Cooperative Extension Service and the people of the State of Florida. Permission is granted to others to use these materials in part or in full for educational purposes, provided that full credit is given to the UF/IFAS, citing the publication, its source, and date of publication.