EVALUATION OF

DETERMINING INSTRUCTIONAL PURPOSES (DIP)

Evaluation proposal document presented to
Far West
Laboratory for Educational and Research Development
by
Crystal Clear Connections

1

Introduction

Crystal Clear Connections (C
3
) of Hobson, Montana, submits this document in response
to a request for proposal (RFP) distributed by Far West Laboratory (FWL). This RFP
addresses the FWL Determining Instructional Purposes (DIP) training program.

Description of Program Being Evaluated

Far West Laboratory for Educational Research and Development (FWL) is a federally
funded program intent on bridging the gap between research and practice (Far West
Laboratory for Educational Research and Development, 2013). Since 1966, FWL has
designed and published minicourses for educators that model educational strategies
and behaviors, given participants opportunities to practice using these strategies, and
provided feedback on participation.

Recently, FWL developed the training program, Determining Instructional Purposes
(DIP), comprised of three units: 1.) Setting Goals, 2.) Analyzing Problems, and 3.)
Deriving Objectives, and one coordinators handbook. Each unit contains four-to-six
modules and can be used independently of the others or together. Individual or group
activities based on included reading materials allow participants to practice the
presented skills and receive feedback. The intent of the training program units is to help
school administrators and graduate students develop effective skills for planning school
programs. Currently, individual units of the DIP are available for purchase from FWL;
however, they are considering the marketability of selling them together as a 3-unit
package as well.

Evaluation Method

Crystal Clear Connections (C
3
) intends for Far West Laboratory for Educational and
Research Development (FWL) to have accurate data regarding the marketability for
sale and distribution of their Determining Instructional Purposes (DIP) training program.
The overall goal for this evaluation is to determine whether or not FWL should commit
resources to market the DIP training program package. Our primary purpose in this
evaluation is to provide information and recommendations for use in making decisions
regarding the marketing and sale of the [DIP individual] units or as a 3-unit package.
We will also provide data to educational facilities from FWL that helps these facilities
make informed decisions when purchasing and using these units.

C
3
will work with the program developers and marketing specialists from FWL. After
collection and analysis from surveys, interviews, and scales, and a state of the art
presentation, we believe FWL will have a thorough understanding of the plausibility of
the DIP training program and its value to educational consumers.

C
3
will collect information from three sources: participating students, participating
coordinators, and select school administrators who have expressed interest in
2

purchasing or who have purchased units in the DIP training program. C
3
will collect and
analyze data taken from exit interviews, two surveys, and Likert Scales.

Interviews
C
3
will interview participants immediately following the training courses using both
qualitative and quantitative measures. The interviews will address immediate results
such as personal satisfaction with training units; ease of use; organization and allocated
time; activities and interactions; sufficiency and authenticity of skills practiced, and how
participants plan to use their new knowledge. Open-ended questions and Likert Scales
allow participants to rate and expound upon their experiences.

Surveys
School administrators who have purchased individual units or have shown interest in
the DIP training program will receive the first survey. Questions will focus on the
efficiency (cost and time) of the program, the effectiveness of the units (short-term), and
the impact they had on participating staff (long-term effects). For those schools that
have not purchased the training program feedback C
3
will seek information regarding
their decision not to invest in the program.

C
3
will send a second survey three weeks after program completion to field test
participants. These surveys will judge the impact of the DIP training program on field
test participants. For student participants, questions soliciting information regarding how
they have benefited from the training program and what changes they have made in the
effectiveness of school programs.

Scales
C
3
will use Likert Scales for quantitative analysis in both surveys and to a lesser extent
in the exit surveys. The scale will address the efficiency of the program, the
effectiveness of the workshops, and the impact the program had on schools, school
administrators, field test coordinators, and field test participants.

3

Task Schedule
Tasks Responsible Party Deadline Date
1. Initial meeting with FWL Miss Cristl
Program developers
Marketing specialists
July 1, 2014
2. Video Conference with FWL for first
review of tools
C
3
team
Program developers
Marketing specialists
August 1, 2014
3. Video conference with FWL to finalize
tools
C
3
team
Program developers
Marketing specialists
August 15, 2014

Workshops Schedule:


4. Send school administrator surveys Mrs. LaVista August 29, 2014
5. One workshop of 3-unit package given
10 participants with 1 coordinator.
(Coordinator should be from FWL)
Mr. Valdez,
FWL coordinator
September 1,
2014
6. Follow up surveys for 3-unit package
workshops
Exit interviews
Mr. Valdez September 15,
2014
7. One workshop for each unit with 10
participants and 1 coordinator each.
(3 coordinators chosen from original
workshop participants)
Mr. Valdez,
3 coordinators
October 13,
2014
8. Follow up surveys for individual
workshops
Exit interviews
Mr. Valdez October 27,
2014

Synthesis of data


9. School administrator survey return
Mrs. LaVista
October 31,
2014
10. Video conference with FWL for
preliminary review of data
C
3
team
Program developers
Marketing specialists
December 9,
2014
11. Final presentation of data to FWL. Miss Cristl
Program developers
Marketing specialists
December 12,
2014
4

Project Personnel
Vidria Cristl President and chief evaluator for C
3

Miss Cristl holds a MS in Educational Psychology from George Mason
University with a concentration in assessment, evaluation, and testing. She will
direct the overall evaluation. Her primary responsibilities will be planning,
coordinating, and directing the evaluation. She will be the primary contact for
communications between C
3
and FWL throughout the evaluation process of the
Determining Instructional Purposes training program.

Clara Cristl LaVista Vice-president and for C
3

Mrs. LaVista holds an Education Specialist (Ed. S.) in Curriculum and Instruction,
with an Emphasis in Measurement and Evaluation (SME) from the University of
Southern Florida. She specializes in writing and analysis of data. She will design
the surveys, supervise their distribution and collection, and analyze data received
from all sources and instruments.

Lando Cristl Valdez Graduate assistant, Boise State University, C
3
Intern
Mr. Valdez has a BA in Communications with an emphasis in Relational and
Organizational Studies. He will receive his MS in Educational Technology from
Boise State University in December of 2014 with honors. He will be responsible
for facilitating the field test of the Determining Instructional Purposes training
program for both package and individual workshops. He will write interview
questions in conjunction with Mrs. LaVista, conduct the exit interviews, and
analyze the interview data.

Payment Schedule

Payment Due Amount
1. Initial payment July 1, 2014
$11,700
2. 2
nd
installment September 1, 2014
$11,750
3. 3
rd
installment November 1, 2014
$11.750
4. Final payment December 12, 2014
$11,800
Total $47,000

5

Budget
Personnel Total $31,300
Salaries Total $23,500
Vidria Cristl - 40 days @ $225 $9,000
Clara LaVista - 40 days @ $175 $7,000
Lando Valdez - 25 days @ $160 4,000
Project Secretary - 40 - days @$87.50 3,500

Test Groups Total $7,800
Meeting room (individual units field test) 3 days @
$100
$300
Meeting room (3-unit field test) 5 days @ $100 $500
Participant stipend (40 participants @ $150) $6000
Participating coordinators (5 @ $200) $1000

Travel and per Diem Total $3,200
Four 4-day round trip tickets @ $200 $800
Great Falls, Montana to Phoenix, Arizona
June 30 July 4, September 1-5, October 13-17,
December 8-12

Site visits and per diem - 16 days @ $150 $2,400

Communications Total $1,050
Telephone
(Estimated average) $100 per month for 6 months
$600
Postage $150
Internet
(video conferencing) $50 per month for 6 months
$300

Resources and Printing - Total $1040.50
Resources $545.50
5 Coordinators Handbooks @ $4.50
$22.50

10 3-unit packages @ $24.95
$249.50

30 individual unit (10 of each unit) @$8.95
$268.50

Printing and supplies $500

Budget Total $36,590
6

References
Far West Laboratory for Educational Research and Development. (2013, August 5). In
Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia. Retrieved from
http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Far_West_Laboratory_for_Educational_
Research_and_Development&oldid=497829498