Section 3 Evaluation, Implementing & Mang. Inst. Prog. & Projects

Stufflebeam’s CIPP Evaluation Model - is comprised of four distinct evaluation models that could each stand alone, According to Reiser & Dempsey (p 96, 2012). The four segments are:

1.                    Context – The determine the environment in which the evaluation will be given also called a needs assessment

2.                      Input – Answer such questions as what resources will be used? What people, funds and other recourses will be available?

3.                      Process – Is the ways and means of developing a program and monitoring program as they are developed and implemented?

4.                      Product Evaluation - Focusses on the fidelity of the produced product with the original evaluation plan.  Summations of results would be provided to interested parties.

Rossi’s Five-Domain Evaluation Model - according Reiser & Dempsey (p98, 2012) five domains are:

1.     Needs Assessment – Evaluating learners’ needs and attitudes through the use of anonymous questionnaires.  With the results from questionnaires and input from instructors, knowledge about the effectiveness of training could be determined.

2.                Theory Assessment – Is the program planed in a manner that will work?

3.                Implementation Assessment – Answers the question of did this model work or not.

4.                Impact Assessment – Tests for the intended impact on the target learner group.

5.                Efficiency Assessment – Tests for the cost effectiveness of the program.

Kirkpatrick’s Training Evaluation Model – There are four levels, according to Reiser & Dempsey (p99, 2012) to Kirkpatrick’s Model and they are:

1.     Reaction – Anonymous questionnaires given to participants ask questions about how they perceived their learning experience.

2.     Learning – Testing for changed attitudes, skills, and knowledge to judge the effectiveness of the program.

3.                 Behavior (Transfer of Training) – Test and/or observe the participant’s change in behavior on the job or at the task that was being taught.

4.                  Results – A measure is made of the change in the participants’ behavior or skill but does the change profit the sponsor of the training model.

Patton’s Utilization-Focused Evaluation (U-FE) – Patton’s evaluation focusses on doing evaluations with a focus on its being used (Reiser & Dempsey, p 102 2012).  The text goes on to describe the nine major steps in conducting a U-FE evaluation.   The nine steps include includes conducting a situational analysis and determining the political context and stakeholder context.   The U-FE evaluation has such a broad scope that it would be very costly and time consuming.  Unless the organization was extremely large or has vast resources it does not seem possible that such a detailed evaluation could be justified.

I agree with Kirkpatrick in that the decision makers have to be on board with the results of the evaluation, no matter what they may be.  If I did not know the decision makers and the stakeholders before the evaluation, I would not do the evaluation.  If the powers-that-be are not on board the train will not move.

 Situational Leadership

Chapters 12 & 13 focus on project management and how to manage projects when resources are scarce. You have been assigned to develop a series of professional development sessions focusing on technology use in the classroom for teachers during a time of economic decline. How will you use Situational Leadership to facilitate this project and manage scarce resources?

I would pick a team consisting of at least one decision maker and the rest would be people involved in the technology department.  Find out who knows what is needed and if they have a list with quantities and prices.  Compare the list of “wants” to an inventory of “got that’s” in order to get an idea of what is wanted/needed.  Have a brainstorming session about what is obsolete and what is just old.   Review software and ask the question “is Microsoft the only option for software?”

Continually pole the decision makers and stakeholders for their opinions about costs and feasibility.  If they are not on-board, change the plan.

References:

Reiser, Robert A. and Dempsey, John V. (2012). Trends and Issues in Instructional Design and Technology, 3td ed. Allyn & Bacon, 501 Boylston street, Boston, Ma, 02116. (pp. 96-102).