20151001141057Curriculum Evaluation

7/17/2019 20151001141057Curriculum Evaluation

http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/20151001141057curriculum-evaluation 1/8

1

CURRICULUM EVALUATIONCURRICULUM EVALUATION

What is evaluation? Evaluation is the process of collecting data on a programme

to determine its value or worth with the aim of deciding whether to adopt, reject, or

revise the programme. Programmes are evaluated to answer questions and concerns of

various parties. The public want to now whether the curriculum implemented hasachieved its aims and objectives! teachers want to now whether what the" are doing in

the classroom is effective! and the developer or planner wants to now how to improve

the curriculum product.

Evaluation is a disciplined inquir" to determine the worth of things. #Things$

ma" include programmes, procedures or objects. %enerall", research and evaluation are

different even though similar data collection tools ma" be used. The three dimensions

on which the" ma" differ are&

• 'irst, evaluation need not have as its objective the generation of nowledge.

Evaluation is applied while research tends to be basic.

• (econd, evaluation presumabl", produces information that is used to mae

decisions or forms the basis of polic". Evaluation "ields information that has

immediate use while research need not.

• Third, evaluation is a judgement of worth. Evaluation result in value judgements

while research need not and some would sa" should not.

)s mentioned earlier, evaluation is the process of determining the significance or worth

of programmes or procedures. (criven *1+- differentiated evaluation as formative

evaluation and summative evaluation. /owever, the" have come to mean different

things to different people, but in this chapter, (criven$s original definition will be used.

Formative evaluation:

The term formative indicates that data is gathered during the formation or

development of the curriculum so that revisions to it can be made. 'ormative evaluation

ma" include determining who needs the programme *eg. secondar" school students,

how great is the need *eg. students need to be taught 0T sills to eep pace with

e2pansion of technolog" and how to meet the need *eg. introduce a subject on 0T

compulsor" for all secondar" schools students. 0n education, the aim of formative

evaluation is usuall" to obtain information to improve a programme.0n formative evaluation, e2perts would evaluate the match between the

instructional strategies and materials used, and the learning outcomes or what it aims to

achieve. 'or e2ample, it is possible that in a curriculum plan the learning outcomes and

the learning activities do no match. 3ou want students to develop critical thining sills

but there are no learning activities which provide opportunities for students to practice

critical thining. 'ormative evaluation b" e2perts is useful before full4scale

implementation of the programme. 5eview b" e2perts of the curriculum plan ma"

provide useful information for modif"ing or revising selected strategies.

0n formative evaluation learners ma" be included to review the materials to

determine if the" can use the new materials. 'or e2ample, so the" have the relevant

prerequisites and are the" motivated to learn. 'rom these formative reviews, problemsma" be discovered. 'or e2ample, in curriculum document ma" contain spelling errors,

Formative and Summative Evaluation

1



6

confusing sequence of content, inappropriate e2amples or illustrations. The feedbac

obtained could be used to revise and improve instruction or whether or not to adopt the

programme before full implementation.

8.2.2 Summative evaluation

The term summative indicates that data is collected at the end of theimplementation of the curriculum programme. (ummative evaluation can occur just

after new course materials have been implemented in full *i.e. evaluate the effectiveness

of the programme, or several months to "ears after the materials have been

implemented in full. 0t is important to specif" what questions "ou want answered b" the

evaluation and what decisions will be made as a result of the evaluation. 3ou ma" want

to now if learners achieved the objectives or whether the programme produced the

desired outcomes. 'or e2ample, the use of a specific simulation software in the teaching

of geograph" enhanced the decision maing sills of learners. These outcomes can be

determined through formal assessment tass such as mars obtained in tests and

e2aminations. )lso of concern is whether the innovation was cost4effective. Was the

innovation efficient in terms of time to completion? Were there an" une2pectedoutcomes? 7esides, quantitative data to determine how well students met specified

objectives, data could also include qualitative interviews, direct observations, and

document anal"ses

/ow should "ou go about evaluating curriculum? (everal e2perts have

proposed different models describing how and what should be involved in evaluating a

curriculum. 8odels are useful because the" help "ou define the parameters of an

evaluation, what concepts to stud" and the procedures to be used to e2tract important

data. 9umerous evaluation models have been proposed but three models are discussedhere.

8.3.1 Context, Input, Process, Product Model (CIPP Model

:aniel ;. (tufflebeam *1+-1, who chaired the Phi :elta <appa 9ational (tud"

ommittee on Evaluation, introduced a widel" cited model of evaluation nown as the

0PP *conte2t, input, process and product model. The approach when applied to

education aims to determine if a particular educational effort has resulted in a positive

change in school, college, universit" or training organisation. ) major aspect of the

(tufflebeam$s model is centred on decision maing or an act of maing up one$s mind

about the programme introduced. 'or evaluations to be done correctl" and aid in the

decision maing process, curriculum evaluators have to&

• first delineate what is to be evaluated and determine what information that has

to be collected *eg. how effective has the new science programme has been in

enhancing the scientific thining sills of children in the primar" grades

• second is to obtain or collect the information using selected techniques and

methods *eg. interview teachers, collect test scores of students!

• third is to provide or mae available the information *in the form of tables,

graphs to interested parties. To decide whether to maintain, modif" or eliminate

8.3 Curriculum Evaluation Model

6



=

the new curriculum or programme, information is obtained b" conducting the

following > t"pes of evaluation& conte2t, input, process and product.

(tufflebeam$s model of evaluation relies on both formative and summative evaluation to

determine the overall effectiveness a curriculum programme *see 'igure .1.

Evaluation is required at all levels of the programme implemented.

FORMATIVE

SUMMATIVE

'igure .1 'ormative and summative evaluation in the 0PP 8odel

a Context !valuation *What needs to be done and in what conte2t?

This is the most basic ind of evaluation with the purpose of providing a

rationale for the objectives. The evaluator defines the environment in which the

curriculum is implemented which could be a classroom, school or training department.

The evaluator determines needs that were not met and reasons wh" the needs are not

being met. )lso identified are the shortcomings and problems in the organisation under

review *eg. a si@able proportion of students in secondar" schools are unable to read at

the desired level, the ratio of students to computers is large, a si@able proportion of

science teachers are not proficient to teach in English. %oals and objectives are

specified on the basis of conte2t evaluation. 0n other words, the evaluator determines the

bacground in which the innovations are being implemented.

The techniques of data collection would include observation of conditions in the

school, bacground statistics of teachers and interviews with pla"ers involve in

implementation of the curriculum.

" Input !valuation */ow should it be done?

is that evaluation the purpose of which is to provide information for determining

how to utilise resources to achieve objectives of the curriculum. The resources of the

school and various designs for carr"ing out the curriculum are considered. )t this stage

the evaluator decides on procedures to be used. Anfortunatel", methods for input

evaluation are lacing in education. The prevalent practices include committee

deliberations, appeal to the professional literature, the emplo"ment of consultants and

pilot e2perimental projects.

c Process !valuation *0s it being done? is the provision of periodic feedbac while

the curriculum is being implemented.

Context

Input

Process

B

Product

=



>

d Product !valuation *:id it succeed? or outcomes of the initiative. :ata is collected

to determine whether the curriculum managed to accomplish it set out achieve *eg. to

what e2tent students have developed a more positive attitudes towards science. Product

evaluation involves measuring the achievement of objectives, interpreting the data and

providing with information that will enable them to decide whether to continue,

terminate or modif" the new curriculum. 'or e2ample, product evaluation might revealthat students have become more interested in science and are more positive towards the

subject after introduction of the new science curriculum. 7ased on this findings the

decision ma" be made to implement the programme throughout the countr".

Case Stud#:

!valuation o$ a Pro%ramme on &ec'nolo%# Inte%ration in &eac'in% and earnin%

in Secondar# Sc'ools

The integration of information and communication technolog" *0T in

teaching and learning is growing rapidl" in man" countries. The use of the internet

and other computer software in teaching science, mathematics and social sciences ismore widespread toda". To evaluate the effectiveness of such a programme using the

0PP model would involve e2amining the following&

Context: E2amine the environment in which technolog" is used in teaching and

learning

• /ow did the real environment compare to the ideal? *eg. The programme

required five computers in each classroom, but there were onl" two computer

labs of >C units each for 1CCC students

• What problems are hampering success of technolog" integration? *eg.

technolog" breadowns, not all schools had internet access

• )bout DC of teachers do not have basic computer sills

Context Input

Product Process

)*+S P+S

*-&C*M!S +C&I*S

C*!

/+-!S

>



INSTRUCTION

tudent & teacher characteristics, curriculum content, instructional materials, community context.Communication fow, time allocation, sequence o events, social, climateStudent achievement, attitudes, motor skills, eect on t

D

Input: E2amine what resources are put into technolog" integration *0dentif" the

educational strategies most liel" to achieve the desired result

• 0s the content selected for using technolog" right?

• /ave we used the right combination of media? *internet, video4clips, etc

Process: )ssess how well the implementation wors *Ancovers implementationissues

• :id technolog" integration run smoothl"?

• Were there technolog" problems?

• Were teachers able to integrate technolog" in their lessons as planned?

• What are the areas of curriculum in which most students e2perienced

difficult"?

Product: )ddresses outcomes of the learning *%ather information on the results of

the educational intervention to interpret its worth and merit

• :id the learners learn using technolog"? /ow do "ou now?• :oes technolog" integration enhance higher order thining?

8.0.3 Staes Countenance Model

The model proposed b" 5obert (tae *1+- suggests three phases of curriculum

evaluation& the antecedent phase, the transaction phase and the outcome phase. The

antecedent phase includes conditions e2isting prior to instruction that ma" relate to

outcomes. The transaction phase constitutes the process of instruction while the

outcome phase relates to the effects of the programme. (tae emphasises two

operations! descriptions and judgements. :escriptions are divided according to whether

the" refer to what was intended or what actuall" was observed. Fudgements are

separated according to whether the" refer to standards used in arriving at the judgements

or to the actual judgements.

+ntecedents &ransactions *utcomes

'igure .= (tae$s ountenance 8odel

!"ae o# Curriculum Evaluation

D



The evaluator determines what is to be evaluated which ma" be the total school s"stem, a particular district, a particular grade level or a particular subject. The objectivesof the evaluation activit" are clearl" stated.

0dentif" the information to be collected and the tools forcollecting the data which ma" involve interviews, giving ofquestionnaires, tests, collection of documents and so forth.

The evaluator also identifies the people from whom data isto be collected.

The data collected is anal"sed and presented in the form of tables and graphs. (tatistical tools are often used to comparesignificant differences and to establish correlation or

relationship between variables.

5eports are written describing the findings and interpretation

of the data. 7ased on the findings, conclusion are made onthe effectiveness of curriculum implementation efforts.5ecommendations are made to reconsider certain aspects of the curriculum.

9o matter what evaluation model is used in evaluating a curriculum, the methods of

data collection and the instruments used are more or less similar. The common

instruments used in curriculum evaluation are interviews, observations, tests, surve",

content anal"sis and portfolios *record of wor or products.

8..1 4uestionnaires and C'eclists

When "ou need to quicl" andGor easil" get lots of information from people in a

non threatening wa", questionnaire and checlist are useful data collection techniques.

Huestionnaires and checlists can complete anon"mousl" and relativel" ine2pensive toadminister. (ince data collected is quantitative, it is eas" to compare and anal"se and

can be administered to man" people. 8assive amount of data can be obtained. 0t is also

eas" to design as there are man" sample questionnaires alread" in e2istence. /owever,

the information obtained ma" not be accurate as it relies how truthfull" subjects respond

to the questions. There is also the fear that the wordings used can bias clientIs responses.

Huestionnaires are impersonal and since onl" a sample of subjects are given the

instrument, we not get the full stor".

8..2 Intervie5s

0nterviews are usuall" one4on4one situations in which an individual assquestions to which a second individual *which ma" be a teacher, principal, student,

1. +spects o$ t'e

curriculum to "e

evaluated

2. 6ata Collection

3. +nal#sis o$

In$ormation

0. eportin% o$

In$ormation

Intrumentation #or Curriculum Evaluation



-

parent responds. The person asing the questions is called the interviewer while the

person giving answers to the questions is called the interviewee. 0nterviews are used

when "ou want to full" understand someoneIs impressions or e2periences, or learn more

about their answers to questionnaires. There are two general t"pes of interviews

depending on the e2tent to which the responses required are unstructured or structured.

0n an unstructured interview, the interviewer does not follow a rigid script andthere is a great deal of fle2ibilit" in the responses. 'or e2ample! JWh" do "ou thin the

recommended te2tboo for the course is difficult for low abilit" learners? The teacher

responding to such a question will give a variet" of reasons. (ome of the reasons given

ma" be of a general nature while others ma" be specific to certain sections of the

te2tboo. This maes the tas of eeping trac of responses more difficult. The open4

endedness of the question will require that the interviewer record all responses and

mae sense of it later. The advantage of the unstructured interview is that it allows the

evaluator to gather a variet" of information, especiall" in relation to the interviewee$s

nowledge, beliefs or feelings toward a particular situation.

0n a structured interview, the questions ased usuall" require ver" specific

responses. 'or e2ample, J0s the recommended te2tboo difficult for low abilit" learners because& a there is too much content! b the language used is be"ond the

comprehension of low abilit" learners, c or there are too few e2amples and illustrations.

5egardless of which t"pe of interview is used, evaluators should ensure that each

question is relevant for its intended purpose. 0n the end, the data must be translated into

a form that can be anal"sed and this has to be dome carefull" to preserve accurac" and

to maintain the sense of the data. The advantage of interviews is that it can get a full

range and depth of information and it develops a relationship with teachers and students

and it is more fle2ible. /owever, interview can tae much time, can be hard to anal"@e

and compare, can be costl" and interviewer can bias clientIs responses.

8..3 *"servations

To gather accurate information about how a program actuall" operates,

particularl" about processes. 0n other words to view operations of a program as the"

are actuall" occurring. 'or e2ample, can the people involved adapt to events as the"

occur.

8..0 6ocuments

When we want impressions of how a programme operates without interrupting

the programme! we can review the memos, minutes, etc to get a comprehensive and

historical information about the implementation of the programme. /owever, we

should be quite clear about what looing for as there ma" be a load of documents.

Met'od *verall Purpose +dvanta%es C'allen%es

questionnaires,surve"s,checlists

when need to quicl"andGor easil" get lots ofinformation from people ina non threatening wa"

4can complete anon"mousl"4ine2pensive to administer 4eas" to compare andanal"@e4administer to man" people4can get lots of data

4man" sample questionnairesalread" e2ist

4might not get carefulfeedbac 4wording can bias clientIsresponses4are impersonal4in surve"s, ma" need

sampling e2pert4 doesnIt get full stor"

-



interviews

when want to full"understand someoneIsimpressions ore2periences, or learn more

about their answers toquestionnaires

4get full range and depth of

information

4develops relationship withclient4can be fle2ible with client

4can tae much time

4can be hard to anal"@e andcompare

4can be costl"4interviewer can bias clientIs

responses

documentationreview

when want impression ofhow program operateswithout interrupting the program! is from review of applications, finances,memos, minutes, etc.

4get comprehensive and

historical information4doesnIt interrupt program orclientIs routine in program4information alread" e2ists4few biases aboutinformation

4often taes much time

4info ma" be incomplete4need to be quite clear aboutwhat looing for 4not fle2ible means to getdata! data restricted to whatalread" e2ists

observation

to gather accurate

information about how a program actuall" operates,

particularl" about processes

4view operations of a

program as the" are actuall"occurring

4can adapt to events as the"occur

4can be difficult to interpretseen behaviors

4can be comple2 tocategori@e observations

4can influence behaviors of program participants4can be e2pensive

f ocus groups

e2plore a topic in depththrough group discussion,e.g., about reactions to ane2perience or suggestion,understanding commoncomplaints, etc.! useful in

evaluation and mareting

4quicl" and reliabl" get

common impressions4can be efficient wa" to getmuch range and depth of

information in short time4 can conve" e" informationabout programs

4can be hard to anal"@eresponses4need good facilitator forsafet" and closure4difficult to schedule 4

people together

case studies

to full" understand or

depict clientIs e2periencesin a program, and conductcomprehensivee2amination through crosscomparison of cases

4full" depicts clientIs

e2perience in program input, process and results4powerful means to portra" program to outsiders

4usuall" quite time

consuming to collect,organi@e and describe4represents depth ofinformation, rather than breadth

&a"le S'o5in% + Summar# o$ 6ata Collection Instruments

Documents

20151001141057Curriculum Evaluation