Presentation on theme: "Program Evaluation Alternative Approaches and Practical Guidelines"— Presentation transcript:
1Program Evaluation Alternative Approaches and Practical Guidelines Chapter 1Program EvaluationAlternative Approaches and Practical Guidelines
2Question 1What is Evaluation? “to determine or fix the value of: to examine and judge” Authors’ definition: “the identification, clarification, and application of defensible criteria to determine an evaluation object’s value (worth or merit) in relation to those criteria” (p. 7)
3Question 2 What are the characteristics of a “program”? A set of planned systematic activitiesUsing managed resourcesTo achieve specified goalsRelated to specific needsParticipants are specific individuals or groupsResults in documentable outcomes and impactsInvestigable costs and benefits
4Question 3What is the definition of a program? Authors’ definition: An ongoing, planned intervention that seeks to achieve some particular outcome(s), in response to some perceived educational, social, or commercial problem”. (p. 8)
5Question 4How does Evaluation differ from research?Research: primary purpose is to add to knowledge in a field, to contribute to the growth of theory (p. 9)Evaluation: primary purpose is to provide useful information to those who hold a stake in whatever is being evaluated (stakeholders), often helping them to make a judgment or decision. (p. 9)
6Research vs. Evaluation FactorResearchEvaluationPurposeAdd to knowledge in a field, develop laws and theoriesMake judgments, provide information for decision makingWho sets the agenda or focus?ResearchersStakeholders and evaluator jointlyGeneralizability of resultsImportant to add to theoryLess important, focus is on particulars of program or policy and contextIntended use of resultsNot importantAn important standardCriteria to judge adequacyInternal and external validityAccuracy, utility, feasibility, propriety, evaluation accountabilityPreparation of those who work in areaDepth in subject matter, fewer methodological tools and approachesInterdisciplinary, many methodological tools, interpersonal skills
7StakeholdersWho is considered upstream, who is midstream, and who is downstream in regard to Talmage’s (1982) model of evaluation? Upstream: make decision on whether to continue, initiate, or change funding for programs Midstream: program managers (principals), program staff (teachers, counselors, nurse, etc.) Downstream: parents, students, community members
8Key TermsFormative vs. Summative (p. 22) How do they differ? Formative: focus on program improvement Summative: more concerned with providing information to make decisions about program adoption, continuation, or expansion
9Formative vs. Summative (Upstream, Midstream & Downstream) If you were conducting a formative evaluation, which of the “streams” do you think would be your audience? Construct support for your answer. If you were conducting a summative evaluation, which of the “streams” do you think would be your audience? Construct support for your answer.
10Page 36 Question #1 Consider a program in your organization. If it were to be evaluated, what might be the purpose of the evaluation at this point in time?Consider the stage of the program and the information needs of different stakeholder groups.What might be the role of the evaluators in conducting the evaluation? (i.e. facilitator, collaborator, management consultant, social change agent, program planning, etc.)(pp )
11Page 35 #2What kind of evaluation do you think is most useful – formative or summative?What kind of evaluation would be most useful to you in your work?What kind of evaluation would be most useful to your school or school board?