A I L E E N H . B A N A G U A SP H . D . S t u d e n t

C a v i t e S t a t e U n i v e r s i t y( E M G T. 3 5 5 )

EVALUATION ModelEMGT.355

(Educational Testing Measurement and Program Evaluation)

Evaluation Models 1. 4-Level Model (Kirkpatrick) 2. Goals-Free Evaluation (Scriven) 3. System Approach (Bushnell

4. Utilization Program (Patton) 5. Management Oriented, C. I. P. P.(Daniel L.

Stufflebeam; 1969 )

6. Connoisseurship (Elliot Eisner; 1975) 7. Stake responsive ( Robert E.Stake;1967)

Stufflebeams' CIPP Model(Daniel L.Stufflebeam)

?Stufflebeam BiographyDaniel Leroy Stufflebeam, education

educator

Born in Waverly, Iowa, September 19, 1936

BA, State University Iowa, 1958

MS, Purdue University, 1962,

Ph D, 1964; University of Wisconsin

1965,

Stufflebeams' CIPP Model

describes the "context" in which an innovation occurs, the

"inputs" of the innovation, the formative "processes" occurring, and the summative "products" or

outcomes. (See A Design for Evaluation, Nova)

Stufflebeam

wrote that evaluation is the 'process of delineating, obtaining, and providing

useful information for judging decision alternatives."

SystemActivities

Evaluation3.

1.

2.

General Evaluation Model

Decisions

C.I.P.P. Model?

Context - to determine objectives

Input - to determine program design

Process - to control program operations

Product -to judge and react to program

attainments

The CIPP model suggests the following evaluations steps: 1) Focus the goals of the evaluation; 2) Outline an information collection process; 3) Analyze information; 4) Report information.

In addition, the CIPP model provides for a very detailed costing out of the administration of the evaluation.

This evaluation is a client oriented evaluation. Its intention is to help clients make decisions. Thus the structure of the evaluation is important. The literature on decision making is a relevant literature.

1. Does the client truly want a wide list of alternative choices or does the client want to stick to familiar solutions to issues and problems?

2. Does the client want to pay for the process of estimating or modeling the costs of different approaches?

The CIPP is a very useful approach for a c l ient that wants a rat ional analysis of needs. I t tends to be an expensive process because

i t is qui te quant i tat ive in nature, of ten examining the relat ive benef i ts associated

with di fferent al ternat ive choices.

-End-

Connoisseurship Model

(Elliot Eisner, 1975)

Elliot W. Eisner

He has made a significant contribution to our appreciation of the educational process. He is particularly known for his work in arts education, curriculum studies, and educational evaluation. However, much of what he has to say has a resonance for a far wider readership.  Among his most noted works are The Educational Imagination (1979, 1985, 1994) - an exploration of the design and evaluation  of curriculum programmes); 

The Art of Educational Evaluation (1985) - a collection of essays covering key aspects of his earlier work; Cognition and Curriculum (1994)  - an examination of the mind and representation); and The Enlightened Eye (1991, 1998) - the extension of his thinking to qualitative research into education). He also made an important contribution to the school reform debate in North America especially through his book.

Connoisseurship Evaluation

(Elliot Eisner)

Expert in a f ield of study estimating the worth of a new innovation. Obvious

biases and threats to validity exist. (See Program Evaluation, Venedam).

Connoisseurship Model

(Elliot Eisner, 1975)

. This evaluation approach uti l izes the concept of the connoisseur as an

evaluator who enters an organization and serves as a crit ic of the program

under review.

Elliot W. Eisner on

Connoisseurship Evaluation Model

Connoisseurship is the art of appreciation. It can be

displayed in any realm in which the character, import, or value

of objects, situations, and performances is distributed and variable, including educational

practice. (Eisner 1998: 63)

word connoisseurship comes from the

Latin cognoscere, to know (Eisner 1998: 6).

It involves the ability to see, not merely to look. To do this

we have to develop the ability to name and

appreciate the different dimensions of situations and

experiences, and the way they relate one to another.

Connoisseurship is something that needs

to be worked at. Educators need to become something

more than connoisseurs.

Responsive Evaluation model

(Robert E. Stake 1967)

R e s p o n s i v e e v a l u a t i o n

- i s a n a l t e r n a t i v e . I t i s e v a l u a t i o n b a s e d o n w h a t p e o p l e d o n a t u r a l l y t o e v a l u a t e t h i n g s : t h e y o b s e r v e a n d r e a c t .

RESPOSIVE EVALUATION

1. Orients more directly to program activities than to program intents.2. Respond to audience requirements for information.3. The different value-perspectives of the people at hand are referred to in reporting the success and failure of the program.

Responsive evaluations

-require planning and structure;

but they rely l i tt le on formal statements

and abstract representations, e.g., f low

charts, test scores. Statements of

objectives, hypotheses.

Egon Guba and Yvonna Lincoln (1989) rely on

Stake’sresponsive evaluation

Four

Generations of

Historical

Development of

Stake

Responsive model

Measurement

Description

Judgment

Negotiation

Four Generation in Histori

cal Development

in Stake

Responsive

Evaluation

In a responsiveevaluation stakeholders should

actively participate in theevaluation process; they are involved in the formulation of

questions, the selection of participants and the

interpretationof findings (Greene, 1997).

Case Example:

Traditionally music and dance are considered to be performance arts. Yet, there are those who have compared dance and music with top-sport. Hans van Maanen, a famous Dutch horeographer, even devoted a ballet to this theme (Schaik, 1997).

There is, for example, no team of (para-) medical experts to assist dancers and musicians. Due to the lack of resources and the dependency of dancers on the choreographer—he is the one who chooses the cast— dancers feel obliged to go on, evening after evening, even if they suffer from injuries. Pain is accepted as an inevitable part of dancing. Musicians also experience the pressure to perform despite health problems.

The lack of attention paid to the prevention of injuries and health related problems in the professional practice of dancers and musicians does not differ from what is going on in the schools. Until recently no systematic attention was paid to the health condition of dance or music students.

Lately and gradually this is changing (Jowitt et al., 2001). In 1990 the Dance Academy of the Higher School for the Arts in msterdam formed a special department within the school for health problems. This department developed an injury prevention program.

Program Description: Injury PreventionEvaluators identified three groups of stakeholders:students, teachers and medical experts.

Findings :

The interviews and conversations with students and teachers revealed that an injury is not only a physical problem, but that it affects the person’s whole well-being. Getting an injury is a dramatic episode in the l ives of students and evokes intense feelings and emotions. Students often start at a very young age with a disciplined and monomaniac training program to work on their career.

Their identity and future is directly connected with dance or music, and health problems are experienced as a threat to their identity and as long as possible denied. The injury evokes feelings of uncertainty, fear and powerlessness.

I t showed that injury prevention is not only a matter of a lack of medical knowledge about r isks, but related to human aspirations and fears, social interactions and exclusion and the organizational culture. Injury prevention only works if this complex context is taken into account. Responsive evaluation gives voice to persons otherwise not heard, in this case the students. Giving voice meant creating a safe space for students to talk about their experiences and concerns..

Thank you listening and for your active participation….

1. Delineating - focusing the requirements for information to be collected through specifying, defining and explicating

Back

2. Obtaining

- making information available through processes such as collecting, organizing and analyzing and through means such as statistics and measurement back

3. Providing

- fitting together into systems or sub-systems that best serve the needs or purposes of the evaluation

back