Evaluation is to determine the value or worth of something, and worth is expressed in relation to some type of criterion. Evaluation may be quantitative or numerical and qualitative or verbal. A paradigm for systematizing comparative evaluation proposed by Popham in 1968 consists of the following.
Evaluation is to determine the value or worth of something, and worth is expressed in relation to some type of criterion. Evaluation may be quantitative or numerical and qualitative or verbal. A paradigm for systematizing comparative evaluation proposed by Popham in 1968 consists of the following.
Evaluation is to determine the value or worth of something, and worth is expressed in relation to some type of criterion. Evaluation may be quantitative or numerical and qualitative or verbal. A paradigm for systematizing comparative evaluation proposed by Popham in 1968 consists of the following.
something, and worth is expressed in relation to some type of criterion. Types of Criteria: 1. Aims and objective as criteria 2. Achievement standards as criteria 3. Comprehensive, externally developed criteria 4. Locally developed criteria Steps in evaluating the curriculum 1. Identification of the instructional objective or the exact learning result desired 2. If necessary, operational statement of these objectives, that is, specification of the process and content elements in case instructional objectives are not precisely stated 3. Selection of instruments for measuring or description of learning result expected 4. Administration of the instruments and analysis of the outcomes to determine the extent to which the expected learning results have been attained Evaluation may be quantitative or numerical and qualitative or verbal. Evaluation thus proceeds from 1. Data collection activities 2. Data analysis 3. Interpretation
Techniques of evaluation 1. Measurement of inputs or antecedent variables 2. Outcomes or results 3. Transactions or processes
Types of evaluation 1. Formative evaluation - Is done when pupil achievement or written tests are administered during preliminary tryouts of an educational program in order to improve a proposed curriculum. Inference is considered here as the process intervening between the objective data seen or heard and the coding of those data on an observational instrument. 2. Summative evaluation - Is terminal evaluation and it involves judgment of a finished product such as a teaching machine or a curriculum on the market, and assessing whether it is better than another or the best among other of its kind.
A paradigm for systematizing comparative evaluation proposed by Popham in 1968 consists of the following.
1. Identification of the specific instructional objectives. 2. Grouping the objectives according to (a) those common to both programs being compared, (b) those unique to one program, and (c) those unique to the other program. 3. Development of test items for each category of objectives. 4. Putting together the three sets of test items in a three- pat examination. 5. Assignment of values to the three sets of objectives. 6. Assignment of a random sample of students to each of the two programs being compared. 7. Selection of the appropriate program on the basis of the performance of the learners on each section of the examination and the values assigned to each part.
Payoff evaluation is the examination of the effects of the instrument or curriculum on student learning by comparing the results of pre- and post-tests or determining the relationship between the scores of the experimental group and those of control group on specified criteria.
Another evaluation technique is Intrinsic Evaluation which refers to the assessment of the educational program or the curriculum itself. In order to realize such an examination, we must procure information (1) about the pupil, including his mental capacity, socio-economic background, and past performance, (2) about the training and efficiency of the professional staff, and (3) about societys values, culture, and problems. Other sources of data are school records, interview, and questionnaires.
Another technique is the Cost-Benefit Study of an educational program which is mainly the figuring out of the opportunity cost, that is, the cost of foregoing the next best alternative.
Marks of a Good Curriculum
Here are some marks of a good curriculum which may be sued as criteria for evaluation purposes.
I. A good curriculum is systematically planned and evaluated. 1. A definite organization is responsible for coordination planning and evaluation. 2. Steps in planning and evaluation are logically defined and taken. 3. Ways or workings utilize the contribution of all concerned. II. A good curriculum reflects adequately the aims of the school. 1. The faculty has defined comprehensive educational aims. 2. The scope of the curriculum includes areas related to all stated aims. 3. Each curriculum opportunity is planned with reference to one or more aims. 4. In planning curriculum opportunities from year to year and in each area, teachers consider the total scope of aims. III. A good curriculum maintains balance among all aims of the school. 1. The curriculum gives attention to each aim commensurate with its importance. 2. The total plan of curriculum opportunities in the basic areas, school activities, and special interests reflects careful planning with respect to all aims. 3. Guidance of each individual helps provide him with a program which is well-balanced in terms of his needs and capacities. 4. The school organization, schedule, and facilities help in giving appropriate attention to each aim. 5. Classroom activities and schedules are arranged so as to provide a balance program of varied learning activities. IV. A good curriculum promotes continuity of experience. 1. Provisions are made for the smooth transition and continuing achievement of pupils from on classroom, grade, or school to another. 2. Curriculum plans in areas which extend over several years are developed vertically. 3. Classroom practices give attention to the maturity and learning problems of each pupil. 4. Cooperative planning and teaching provide for exchanged or information about pupils learning experiences. V. A good curriculum arranges learning opportunities flexibility for adaptation to particular situations and individuals. 1. Curriculum guides encourage teachers to make their own plans for specific learning situations. 2. Cooperative teaching and planning utilize many opportunities as they arise to share learning resources and special talents. 3. Time allotments and schedules are modified as need justifies. 4. In accordance with their maturity, pupils participate in the planning of learning experiences. 5. The selection of learning experiences reflects careful attention to the demands of the learning situation. VI. A good curriculum utilizes the most effective learning experiences and resources available. 1. Learning experiences are developed so that pupils see purpose, meaning, and significances in each activity. 2. Needed available resources are utilized at the time they are relevant and helpful 3. Use of the right learning resources for each pupil is encouraged. 4. Teachers discriminate wisely between activities which pupils carry on independently and those in which teacher- pupils interaction is desirable. VII. A good curriculum makes maximum provision for the development of each learner. 1. The program provides a wide range of opportunities for individuals of varying abilities, needs, and interests. 2. Extensive arrangements are made for the educational diagnosis of individual learners. 3. Self-directed, independent study is encouraged wherever possible and advisable. 4. Self-motivation and self-evaluation are stimulated and emphasized throughout the learning opportunities of the school. 5. The curriculum promotes individual development rather than conformity to some hypothetical standard. 6. The school attempts to follow up its former students both as a service to them and for evaluative data.
New trends in Curriculum Evaluation
Glass and Worthen (1972) define curriculum evaluation as the process of obtaining information for judging the worth of an educational program, product, procedure, or educational objective, or the potential utility of alternative approaches designed to attain specified objectives. In their monograph supplement to the journal Curriculum Theory Network they affirm that evaluative activities include the following: - Determining what ought to be in a program - Setting up standards - Looking at the roles of individual involved in the change process - Becoming sensitized to political aspects of the situation Part two of the monograph presents three comprehensive frameworks for curriculum evaluation. One is a curriculum/student monitoring system for the formative evaluation of school programs. Another collects and analyzed student progress data. The third uses systems analysis techniques to aid in future decision-making, extending the earlier model devised by Daniel Stufflebeam and EgonGuba.
The third part of the monograph treats various aspects of evaluation methodology: - The distinction between evaluation and research activities - Interdisciplinary contribution to evaluation - Strategies for optimizing resources - Instruments for analyzing curricular materials - Procedure for formative and summative evaluations
Worner (1972) argues that many principals have failed to convince parents and boards of the potential of an instructional program because of vague and imprecise evaluation data. Planning-Programming-Budgeting System provide the type of date that help principals in making difficult decision on program expansion, program elimination and program maintenance.
A speech prepared by Rush and other (1972) reports a systematic attempt to train and use classroom teachers and administrators in the operation of a curriculum evaluation model. The data indicate that competent professionals can indeed be trained to play an effective role.
An expected opportunity loss model is advanced by Tanner (1970) as a decision-making technique. The model formulates alternatives for decision-making under uncertainty and weighs the probable or possible opportunity loss.