ADVANCE Interviews

Evaluation of ADVANCE Institutional Transformation Program
Case Study Site Visit
Interview with ADVANCE Additional Interviewee
(45 mins)
Name of interviewee:
Title of interviewee:
Institution:
Date of Interview:
Interviewer:
A. Background Information
1. How long have you worked at __________________? In what capacity?
2. What was your role in the ADVANCE project? (Probe: In which of the ADVANCE
components were you involved?)
3. How long were you involved with ADVANCE?
4. What do you see as the goals of the ADVANCE project at your institution?
5. Are you involved in any of the institutionalized ADVANCE components? How?
Note to Interviewer: Additional interviewees will have been identified as
knowledgeable about one of three areas of the ADVANCE project—its history, its
implementation, or its institutionalization. Perhaps some are knowledgeable about more
than one area. Use the bank of questions that applies to the interviewee.
An asterisk (*) signals an important probe

B. Historical Perspective
Interviewer: I’d like to talk with you about how your institution got to the point of
developing and submitting an ADVANCE proposal.
6.

Tell me how your effort got started. What led your institution to submit a proposal? :Who
was involved in the process? (Probe: Had there been earlier activities to address gender
equity in the sciences at your institution? What were they?* Did your ADVANCE program
build on previous institutional initiatives?) How did the institution’s earlier efforts in gender
equity influence the choice of strategies/approaches?
7.
Describe the proposal creation process. How did you come to define the problem/challenge
as you did? Who was involved ? (Probe: senior campus leaders, faculty, students, others.) What
role did they play? (Probe: active role, consultation, kept informed, etc.)
8.
What was the specific gender equity “problem” that you wished to address with program
funding? Please describe how your institution identified this “problem.” (Probe: What data
were used? Who was involved? What role did they play? Why was the decision made to
address that specific “problem”?)
9.
Did the definition of the “problem” or your understanding of the problem change over time?
How? What was the effect of this change on your approaches?

1

10.

What was the rationale for selecting the STEM departments (mentioned in your proposal) as
the sites for intervention?

C. Perspective on Implementation Issues
Interviewer: I’d like to talk to you about the implementation of the ADVANCE project .
11. Given the goals of the program and how you defined your problem(s), how did you decide on the
appropriate strategies for addressing these goals? (Probe: What was the process for choosing main
strategies? Who was involved? What ideas or frameworks guided your choices? Was the choice
based on a theory of change or other theory or specific assumptions?)
12. What were the strategies and approaches proposed by your institution to address ADVANCE
goals? Did your intervention focus on senior faculty or junior faculty, recruitment or

retention?
13. How did the institution’s earlier efforts (or lack of efforts) in gender equity influence the choice
of strategies/approaches? Did institutional characteristics (size, governance [public, private],
Carnegie classification, geographic location) influence the choice or implementation of
strategies/approaches?
14. On what resources did the project draw in designing intervention strategies and/or

implementing them? [Probe: Did the project adopt innovations developed by other
ADVANCE projects? Bring in consultants from other ADVANCE projects? Gender
equity or institutional transformation experts from other sources? Review the literature on
gender equity and/or institutional transformation? Draw on social scientists at your own
institution?]
15. Where did you get resistance (active and/or passive)? How did you overcome it sufficiently to
move ahead?
16. Were there other efforts or changes outside of ADVANCE that contributed to or hindered the
agenda?
17. Of the components of the program, which were the most successful? Why do you think these
components succeeded? (Probe: For reasons why these components were successfully
implemented and why they were successful in advancing project goals.)
18. Which components were the least successful? What were the reasons for their lack of success?
(Probe: Failure in implementation or were they not successful in achieving goals?) Were any of
these abandoned at some point in the five-year period ?
19. What factors contributed the most to the successful implementation of your ADVANCE
program?
20. What factors posed the greatest challenge to program success?
21. What are some conditions that you feel have to be present in order to successfully implement an
ADVANCE-type program?
22. What role do you feel institutional or departmental culture played in facilitating or deterring the
success of the project? Please describe. (Probe: Did you encounter resistance to your project
because of the institutional or departmental culture? How did you build on institutional or
departmental culture to gain support for your project?)
D. Perspective on Institutionalization
Interviewer: I’d like to talk with you about the institutionalization of ADVANCE components
after the project funding ended.

2

23.What aspects (components) of the ADVANCE program have been institutionalized at
your university?
24. Why do you think these have been institutionalized? [Probe: What are factors or
circumstances that have led to their institutionalization?] Why do you think other
components have not been institutionalized? [Probe: What factors have hindered
institutionalization?]
25. Were you involved in the institutionalization process of ADVANCE components?
How?
26.. a. What type of institutional support is currently provided to ADVANCE components
or activities? [Probe: In-kind and/or budgeted $.]
b. Is there a long-term commitment to provide that support?
27. Has the climate of the institution or the STEM departments become more gender-friendly?
(Probe: Are group interactions different? Has the language used by the institution/ departments
become more sensitive to gender issues? Do the topics that dominate campus conversations
reflect greater awareness of gender issues? Are new stakeholders participating in institutional
discourse? Have relations with key stakeholders changed to reflect more support for gender
equity?)
28. Have there been changes to or establishment of policies and practices at either the departmental
or institutional levels to support gender equity among science faculty? Was this due to
ADVANCE?
29. Have new institutional or departmental structures been created to support gender equity for S&E
faculty? Was this due to ADVANCE?
30. Have decision-making structures changed to support improved gender equity for S&E faculty?
Was this due to ADVANCE?
31. In your opinion what have been ADVANCE’s major contributions to your institution?

3