SlideShare a Scribd company logo
1 of 5
Evaluation Plan for:
New State Standards for Mathematics and Problem-based Learning
A Grant Funded Project
FRIT 7237
Addy Baker
Meagan Harrelson
Victorie Penn
Implementation Evaluation
This implementation evaluation is intended to evaluate the implementation project
between Great Southern University and Braxton County Schools. The project intends to prepare
teachers from Braxton County Schools to implement the New State Standards for Mathematics
(NSSM). In order to properly evaluate the project the following questions must be answered: P1:
Were the initial experience and follow up activities implemented as planned? P2: What is the
quality of the initial program activities? P3: Who are the program participants and how were they
recruited? P4: What is the quality of follow up and support activities? These questions will be
answered using a variety of means including focus groups, surveys, interview, observations, and
questionnaires. Using a comprehensive approach will ensure the ability to form a complete idea
of the strengths and weaknesses of the project and highlight areas for improvement.
Implementation
Questions
Data
Collection
Methods
And Sources
Procedures Schedule
P1: Were the initial
experience and
follow up activities
implemented as
planned?
*Focus Group
*Survey
*Observation
with lesson
plan collection
*A focus group will be formed
of randomly chosen participants
to collect their personal
experiences with the
implementation of activities.
*All participants will complete
a survey asking questions on
their implementation
experience.
*Teacher lesson plans will be
collected and evaluated based
on the qualities of PBL and
adherence to the NSSM. These
lessons will be observed by a
trained evaluator.
*Mid project-
October 2015
*End of Project-
January 2016
P2: What is the
quality of the initial
program activities?
*Survey
*Observation
*Participants and project
administrators will receive an
exit survey on their view of the
*During and
immediately
following initial
quality workshop and additional
activities.
*An evaluator will be present to
observe and evaluate the initial
program workshop.
program activities
P3: Who are the
program
participants and
how were they
recruited?
*Interviews
*Questionnaire
*Upon finalization
of selections Ms. Carla Lawton
and the Project Director will be
interviewed in person about the
procedure with which they
chose participants.
*A questionnaire will be
distributed by email to all
eligible teachers and
administrators.
*Within the first 2
weeks of selection
finalization
P4: What is the
quality of follow up
and support
activities?
*Survey
*Focus Group
*A focus group will be formed
of randomly chosen participants
to collect their personal
experiences of follow up and
support activities.
*All participants will complete
a survey asking questions about
follow up and support activities.
*Mid project-
October 2015
*End of Project-
January 2016
Summative Evaluation
The summative evaluation report is represented by 4 objectives within 2 different
questions. The first question, “To what extent were teachers able to develop PBL modules that
were connected to local business and industries, aligned with NSSM, and incorporated
appropriate uses of technology,” is associated with objectives 1,2,3 and the second question, “To
what extent were teachers able to implement and evaluate those modules,” is associated with
objective #4.
The project will begin on the date of June 25th. At this point, the introduction of new
standards to the Great Southern faculty and Braxton County teaching staff will be presented and
this will lead to the two staffs working through a PBL refinement period which will be the dates
of July 2nd through July 20th. During the refinement period, the faculty of Great Southern
University will help the teacher staff from Braxton County to refine their PBL modules using
electronic communication. The data that will be observed will come from post and pre project
surveys, student work samples, basic observation rubrics, alignment of standards checklists, and
module rubrics.
During the fall term of the school year, the Braxton County teachers will implement their
modules and meet with the Great Southern faculty for a mid-year implementation meeting. Once
the mid-year meeting is completed the Braxton County teachers will have a self-evaluation
period.
Evaluation Questions Objective Indicator Data Source
To what extent were
teachers able to develop
PBL modules that were
connected to local business
and industries, aligned with
NSSM, and incorporated
appropriate uses of
technology?
Using local business
numerical data create a
PBL module that would
use the given data.
Modules refined
and uses
information from
local businesses.
*Module Rubric
*Pre-Project
Survey
To what extent were
teachers able to develop
PBL modules that were
connected to local business
and industries, aligned with
NSSM, and incorporated
appropriate uses of
technology
Using NSSM Standards
to align PBL modules.
Task and
assessment
refined and
aligned to NSSM
standards.
*Standards
Alignment
Checklist
To what extent were
teachers able to develop
PBL modules that were
connected to local business
and industries, aligned with
NSSM, and incorporated
appropriate uses of
technology
Create PBL Modules
that align with NSSM
standards and integrate
these modules into the
technology of local
businesses
Local business
aid in using
technology
effectively
during PBL
module.
*Observation
Rubric
*Activity Portfolio
*Teacher
Walkthroughs
To what extent were
teachers able to implement
and evaluate those
modules?
Self-evaluation of
modules implemented
during course.
Post survey data
and
walkthroughs to
determine the
overall use of
technology
*Post-Project
Surveys
*Student Work
Samples
Data Collection Schedule and Summary
Data Set Date of Collection
Instrument
Already
Developed?
Data Collected By
Pre and Post Surveys June 25, 2015 and
January 2016
No Great Southern
Faculty
Observation of Workshop June 29, 2015 No Outside Evaluator
Teacher Observation and
Self-Evaluation
January 2016 Yes Great Southern
Faculty and Teachers
Focus Group October 2015 No Great Southern
Faculty
Interviews with Ms. Lawton
and Project Director
Following selection
of participants
No Great Southern
Faculty
Student Work Samples January 2015 Yes Teachers

More Related Content

Similar to FRIT 7237 - Program Evaluation Plan

Cipp model for curriculum evaluation
Cipp model for curriculum evaluationCipp model for curriculum evaluation
Cipp model for curriculum evaluationHennaAnsari
 
Cobb Technology Action Plan
Cobb Technology Action PlanCobb Technology Action Plan
Cobb Technology Action Plancobbyt62
 
Ldm 2 practicum portfolio for lac leaders -abiera, lorlie a.
Ldm 2 practicum portfolio for lac leaders -abiera, lorlie a.Ldm 2 practicum portfolio for lac leaders -abiera, lorlie a.
Ldm 2 practicum portfolio for lac leaders -abiera, lorlie a.LorlieAbiera1
 
2010 bush foundation inputs, process indicators, and intermediate outcomes
2010 bush foundation inputs, process indicators, and intermediate outcomes2010 bush foundation inputs, process indicators, and intermediate outcomes
2010 bush foundation inputs, process indicators, and intermediate outcomesChristopher Thorn
 
logic mode is used for project analsysis
logic mode is used for project analsysislogic mode is used for project analsysis
logic mode is used for project analsysisAschalew37
 
logit model for program and service delivery works
logit model for program and service delivery workslogit model for program and service delivery works
logit model for program and service delivery worksAschalew37
 
Using Theories of Change to evaluate Information Literacy initiatives ECIL 20...
Using Theories of Change to evaluate Information Literacy initiatives ECIL 20...Using Theories of Change to evaluate Information Literacy initiatives ECIL 20...
Using Theories of Change to evaluate Information Literacy initiatives ECIL 20...Pamela McKinney
 
Presentation chapters 1 and 2
Presentation chapters 1 and 2Presentation chapters 1 and 2
Presentation chapters 1 and 2mcawthon98
 
Using theories of change to evaluate information literacy initiatives
Using theories of change to evaluate information literacy initiatives Using theories of change to evaluate information literacy initiatives
Using theories of change to evaluate information literacy initiatives Sheila Webber
 
Project Based Learning detai description
Project Based Learning detai descriptionProject Based Learning detai description
Project Based Learning detai descriptionDevikaManiTVSAHosur
 
Summer 2012 presentation team evaluation
Summer 2012  presentation team evaluationSummer 2012  presentation team evaluation
Summer 2012 presentation team evaluationtcaconference
 
Running Head DESIGN THE EVALUATION 1DESIGN THE EVALUATION .docx
Running Head DESIGN THE EVALUATION 1DESIGN THE EVALUATION .docxRunning Head DESIGN THE EVALUATION 1DESIGN THE EVALUATION .docx
Running Head DESIGN THE EVALUATION 1DESIGN THE EVALUATION .docxhealdkathaleen
 
2. Evaluation design of the cofimvaba ict4 red initiative - Bridge 2014 version
2. Evaluation design of the cofimvaba ict4 red initiative - Bridge 2014 version2. Evaluation design of the cofimvaba ict4 red initiative - Bridge 2014 version
2. Evaluation design of the cofimvaba ict4 red initiative - Bridge 2014 versionBenita Williams
 
Nurtures evaluation report 2013
Nurtures evaluation report 2013Nurtures evaluation report 2013
Nurtures evaluation report 2013Louise Smyth
 
Math 1 curr docs mar17, 2010@
Math 1  curr docs mar17, 2010@Math 1  curr docs mar17, 2010@
Math 1 curr docs mar17, 2010@Virgilio Paragele
 
YouthREX Webinar: Finding and Selecting Tools for Your Outcome Evaluation
YouthREX Webinar: Finding and Selecting Tools for Your Outcome EvaluationYouthREX Webinar: Finding and Selecting Tools for Your Outcome Evaluation
YouthREX Webinar: Finding and Selecting Tools for Your Outcome EvaluationLaura Mulrine
 

Similar to FRIT 7237 - Program Evaluation Plan (20)

unit-3.pptx
unit-3.pptxunit-3.pptx
unit-3.pptx
 
School Monitoring and Evaluation Framework
School Monitoring and Evaluation Framework School Monitoring and Evaluation Framework
School Monitoring and Evaluation Framework
 
Cipp model for curriculum evaluation
Cipp model for curriculum evaluationCipp model for curriculum evaluation
Cipp model for curriculum evaluation
 
Cobb Technology Action Plan
Cobb Technology Action PlanCobb Technology Action Plan
Cobb Technology Action Plan
 
Ldm 2 practicum portfolio for lac leaders -abiera, lorlie a.
Ldm 2 practicum portfolio for lac leaders -abiera, lorlie a.Ldm 2 practicum portfolio for lac leaders -abiera, lorlie a.
Ldm 2 practicum portfolio for lac leaders -abiera, lorlie a.
 
2010 bush foundation inputs, process indicators, and intermediate outcomes
2010 bush foundation inputs, process indicators, and intermediate outcomes2010 bush foundation inputs, process indicators, and intermediate outcomes
2010 bush foundation inputs, process indicators, and intermediate outcomes
 
logic mode is used for project analsysis
logic mode is used for project analsysislogic mode is used for project analsysis
logic mode is used for project analsysis
 
logit model for program and service delivery works
logit model for program and service delivery workslogit model for program and service delivery works
logit model for program and service delivery works
 
Using Theories of Change to evaluate Information Literacy initiatives ECIL 20...
Using Theories of Change to evaluate Information Literacy initiatives ECIL 20...Using Theories of Change to evaluate Information Literacy initiatives ECIL 20...
Using Theories of Change to evaluate Information Literacy initiatives ECIL 20...
 
Presentation chapters 1 and 2
Presentation chapters 1 and 2Presentation chapters 1 and 2
Presentation chapters 1 and 2
 
Using theories of change to evaluate information literacy initiatives
Using theories of change to evaluate information literacy initiatives Using theories of change to evaluate information literacy initiatives
Using theories of change to evaluate information literacy initiatives
 
Project Based Learning detai description
Project Based Learning detai descriptionProject Based Learning detai description
Project Based Learning detai description
 
Summer 2012 presentation team evaluation
Summer 2012  presentation team evaluationSummer 2012  presentation team evaluation
Summer 2012 presentation team evaluation
 
Running Head DESIGN THE EVALUATION 1DESIGN THE EVALUATION .docx
Running Head DESIGN THE EVALUATION 1DESIGN THE EVALUATION .docxRunning Head DESIGN THE EVALUATION 1DESIGN THE EVALUATION .docx
Running Head DESIGN THE EVALUATION 1DESIGN THE EVALUATION .docx
 
2. Evaluation design of the cofimvaba ict4 red initiative - Bridge 2014 version
2. Evaluation design of the cofimvaba ict4 red initiative - Bridge 2014 version2. Evaluation design of the cofimvaba ict4 red initiative - Bridge 2014 version
2. Evaluation design of the cofimvaba ict4 red initiative - Bridge 2014 version
 
Nurtures evaluation report 2013
Nurtures evaluation report 2013Nurtures evaluation report 2013
Nurtures evaluation report 2013
 
Math 1 curr docs mar17, 2010@
Math 1  curr docs mar17, 2010@Math 1  curr docs mar17, 2010@
Math 1 curr docs mar17, 2010@
 
RPMS 2020 2021.pptx
RPMS 2020 2021.pptxRPMS 2020 2021.pptx
RPMS 2020 2021.pptx
 
Technology plan
Technology planTechnology plan
Technology plan
 
YouthREX Webinar: Finding and Selecting Tools for Your Outcome Evaluation
YouthREX Webinar: Finding and Selecting Tools for Your Outcome EvaluationYouthREX Webinar: Finding and Selecting Tools for Your Outcome Evaluation
YouthREX Webinar: Finding and Selecting Tools for Your Outcome Evaluation
 

More from Meagan Harrelson

FRIT 7739 - Technology Program Administrator (2)
FRIT 7739 - Technology Program Administrator (2)FRIT 7739 - Technology Program Administrator (2)
FRIT 7739 - Technology Program Administrator (2)Meagan Harrelson
 
FRIT 7739 - Technology Program Administrator
FRIT 7739 - Technology Program AdministratorFRIT 7739 - Technology Program Administrator
FRIT 7739 - Technology Program AdministratorMeagan Harrelson
 
FRIT 7232 - Technology Evaluation Plan
FRIT 7232 - Technology Evaluation PlanFRIT 7232 - Technology Evaluation Plan
FRIT 7232 - Technology Evaluation PlanMeagan Harrelson
 
FRIT 7739 - Collaborative Unit on Digital Citizenship
FRIT 7739 - Collaborative Unit on Digital CitizenshipFRIT 7739 - Collaborative Unit on Digital Citizenship
FRIT 7739 - Collaborative Unit on Digital CitizenshipMeagan Harrelson
 
FRER 7130 - AB Group Project
FRER 7130 - AB Group ProjectFRER 7130 - AB Group Project
FRER 7130 - AB Group ProjectMeagan Harrelson
 
FRIT 7233 - Task Analysis and Script
FRIT 7233 - Task Analysis and ScriptFRIT 7233 - Task Analysis and Script
FRIT 7233 - Task Analysis and ScriptMeagan Harrelson
 
FRIT 7235 – Technology Integration
FRIT 7235 – Technology IntegrationFRIT 7235 – Technology Integration
FRIT 7235 – Technology IntegrationMeagan Harrelson
 
FRIT 7235 - Student-Centered Learning
FRIT 7235 - Student-Centered Learning FRIT 7235 - Student-Centered Learning
FRIT 7235 - Student-Centered Learning Meagan Harrelson
 
Curation of OER on The Holocaust
Curation of OER on The HolocaustCuration of OER on The Holocaust
Curation of OER on The HolocaustMeagan Harrelson
 
Grant Proposal For Professional Development
Grant Proposal For Professional DevelopmentGrant Proposal For Professional Development
Grant Proposal For Professional DevelopmentMeagan Harrelson
 
Web 2.0 presentation features 3
Web 2.0 presentation features 3Web 2.0 presentation features 3
Web 2.0 presentation features 3Meagan Harrelson
 
Technology Evaluation Plan
Technology Evaluation PlanTechnology Evaluation Plan
Technology Evaluation PlanMeagan Harrelson
 

More from Meagan Harrelson (17)

FRIT 7739 - Technology Program Administrator (2)
FRIT 7739 - Technology Program Administrator (2)FRIT 7739 - Technology Program Administrator (2)
FRIT 7739 - Technology Program Administrator (2)
 
FRIT 7739 - Technology Program Administrator
FRIT 7739 - Technology Program AdministratorFRIT 7739 - Technology Program Administrator
FRIT 7739 - Technology Program Administrator
 
FRIT 7232 - Technology Evaluation Plan
FRIT 7232 - Technology Evaluation PlanFRIT 7232 - Technology Evaluation Plan
FRIT 7232 - Technology Evaluation Plan
 
FRIT 7739 - Collaborative Unit on Digital Citizenship
FRIT 7739 - Collaborative Unit on Digital CitizenshipFRIT 7739 - Collaborative Unit on Digital Citizenship
FRIT 7739 - Collaborative Unit on Digital Citizenship
 
Harrelson_KA2
Harrelson_KA2Harrelson_KA2
Harrelson_KA2
 
Harrelson_KA1
Harrelson_KA1Harrelson_KA1
Harrelson_KA1
 
PLN and Reflection
PLN and ReflectionPLN and Reflection
PLN and Reflection
 
FRER 7130 - AB Group Project
FRER 7130 - AB Group ProjectFRER 7130 - AB Group Project
FRER 7130 - AB Group Project
 
FRIT 7233 - Task Analysis and Script
FRIT 7233 - Task Analysis and ScriptFRIT 7233 - Task Analysis and Script
FRIT 7233 - Task Analysis and Script
 
FRIT 7235 – Technology Integration
FRIT 7235 – Technology IntegrationFRIT 7235 – Technology Integration
FRIT 7235 – Technology Integration
 
FRIT 7235 - Student-Centered Learning
FRIT 7235 - Student-Centered Learning FRIT 7235 - Student-Centered Learning
FRIT 7235 - Student-Centered Learning
 
Curation of OER on The Holocaust
Curation of OER on The HolocaustCuration of OER on The Holocaust
Curation of OER on The Holocaust
 
Curation Reflection
Curation ReflectionCuration Reflection
Curation Reflection
 
Grant Proposal For Professional Development
Grant Proposal For Professional DevelopmentGrant Proposal For Professional Development
Grant Proposal For Professional Development
 
Design Document
Design DocumentDesign Document
Design Document
 
Web 2.0 presentation features 3
Web 2.0 presentation features 3Web 2.0 presentation features 3
Web 2.0 presentation features 3
 
Technology Evaluation Plan
Technology Evaluation PlanTechnology Evaluation Plan
Technology Evaluation Plan
 

Recently uploaded

Introduction to ArtificiaI Intelligence in Higher Education
Introduction to ArtificiaI Intelligence in Higher EducationIntroduction to ArtificiaI Intelligence in Higher Education
Introduction to ArtificiaI Intelligence in Higher Educationpboyjonauth
 
Accessible design: Minimum effort, maximum impact
Accessible design: Minimum effort, maximum impactAccessible design: Minimum effort, maximum impact
Accessible design: Minimum effort, maximum impactdawncurless
 
Mastering the Unannounced Regulatory Inspection
Mastering the Unannounced Regulatory InspectionMastering the Unannounced Regulatory Inspection
Mastering the Unannounced Regulatory InspectionSafetyChain Software
 
Industrial Policy - 1948, 1956, 1973, 1977, 1980, 1991
Industrial Policy - 1948, 1956, 1973, 1977, 1980, 1991Industrial Policy - 1948, 1956, 1973, 1977, 1980, 1991
Industrial Policy - 1948, 1956, 1973, 1977, 1980, 1991RKavithamani
 
Advanced Views - Calendar View in Odoo 17
Advanced Views - Calendar View in Odoo 17Advanced Views - Calendar View in Odoo 17
Advanced Views - Calendar View in Odoo 17Celine George
 
The basics of sentences session 2pptx copy.pptx
The basics of sentences session 2pptx copy.pptxThe basics of sentences session 2pptx copy.pptx
The basics of sentences session 2pptx copy.pptxheathfieldcps1
 
BASLIQ CURRENT LOOKBOOK LOOKBOOK(1) (1).pdf
BASLIQ CURRENT LOOKBOOK  LOOKBOOK(1) (1).pdfBASLIQ CURRENT LOOKBOOK  LOOKBOOK(1) (1).pdf
BASLIQ CURRENT LOOKBOOK LOOKBOOK(1) (1).pdfSoniaTolstoy
 
How to Make a Pirate ship Primary Education.pptx
How to Make a Pirate ship Primary Education.pptxHow to Make a Pirate ship Primary Education.pptx
How to Make a Pirate ship Primary Education.pptxmanuelaromero2013
 
Organic Name Reactions for the students and aspirants of Chemistry12th.pptx
Organic Name Reactions  for the students and aspirants of Chemistry12th.pptxOrganic Name Reactions  for the students and aspirants of Chemistry12th.pptx
Organic Name Reactions for the students and aspirants of Chemistry12th.pptxVS Mahajan Coaching Centre
 
Activity 01 - Artificial Culture (1).pdf
Activity 01 - Artificial Culture (1).pdfActivity 01 - Artificial Culture (1).pdf
Activity 01 - Artificial Culture (1).pdfciinovamais
 
Web & Social Media Analytics Previous Year Question Paper.pdf
Web & Social Media Analytics Previous Year Question Paper.pdfWeb & Social Media Analytics Previous Year Question Paper.pdf
Web & Social Media Analytics Previous Year Question Paper.pdfJayanti Pande
 
Separation of Lanthanides/ Lanthanides and Actinides
Separation of Lanthanides/ Lanthanides and ActinidesSeparation of Lanthanides/ Lanthanides and Actinides
Separation of Lanthanides/ Lanthanides and ActinidesFatimaKhan178732
 
Measures of Central Tendency: Mean, Median and Mode
Measures of Central Tendency: Mean, Median and ModeMeasures of Central Tendency: Mean, Median and Mode
Measures of Central Tendency: Mean, Median and ModeThiyagu K
 
“Oh GOSH! Reflecting on Hackteria's Collaborative Practices in a Global Do-It...
“Oh GOSH! Reflecting on Hackteria's Collaborative Practices in a Global Do-It...“Oh GOSH! Reflecting on Hackteria's Collaborative Practices in a Global Do-It...
“Oh GOSH! Reflecting on Hackteria's Collaborative Practices in a Global Do-It...Marc Dusseiller Dusjagr
 
mini mental status format.docx
mini    mental       status     format.docxmini    mental       status     format.docx
mini mental status format.docxPoojaSen20
 
Contemporary philippine arts from the regions_PPT_Module_12 [Autosaved] (1).pptx
Contemporary philippine arts from the regions_PPT_Module_12 [Autosaved] (1).pptxContemporary philippine arts from the regions_PPT_Module_12 [Autosaved] (1).pptx
Contemporary philippine arts from the regions_PPT_Module_12 [Autosaved] (1).pptxRoyAbrique
 
A Critique of the Proposed National Education Policy Reform
A Critique of the Proposed National Education Policy ReformA Critique of the Proposed National Education Policy Reform
A Critique of the Proposed National Education Policy ReformChameera Dedduwage
 

Recently uploaded (20)

Introduction to ArtificiaI Intelligence in Higher Education
Introduction to ArtificiaI Intelligence in Higher EducationIntroduction to ArtificiaI Intelligence in Higher Education
Introduction to ArtificiaI Intelligence in Higher Education
 
Accessible design: Minimum effort, maximum impact
Accessible design: Minimum effort, maximum impactAccessible design: Minimum effort, maximum impact
Accessible design: Minimum effort, maximum impact
 
Mastering the Unannounced Regulatory Inspection
Mastering the Unannounced Regulatory InspectionMastering the Unannounced Regulatory Inspection
Mastering the Unannounced Regulatory Inspection
 
Industrial Policy - 1948, 1956, 1973, 1977, 1980, 1991
Industrial Policy - 1948, 1956, 1973, 1977, 1980, 1991Industrial Policy - 1948, 1956, 1973, 1977, 1980, 1991
Industrial Policy - 1948, 1956, 1973, 1977, 1980, 1991
 
Advanced Views - Calendar View in Odoo 17
Advanced Views - Calendar View in Odoo 17Advanced Views - Calendar View in Odoo 17
Advanced Views - Calendar View in Odoo 17
 
The basics of sentences session 2pptx copy.pptx
The basics of sentences session 2pptx copy.pptxThe basics of sentences session 2pptx copy.pptx
The basics of sentences session 2pptx copy.pptx
 
BASLIQ CURRENT LOOKBOOK LOOKBOOK(1) (1).pdf
BASLIQ CURRENT LOOKBOOK  LOOKBOOK(1) (1).pdfBASLIQ CURRENT LOOKBOOK  LOOKBOOK(1) (1).pdf
BASLIQ CURRENT LOOKBOOK LOOKBOOK(1) (1).pdf
 
How to Make a Pirate ship Primary Education.pptx
How to Make a Pirate ship Primary Education.pptxHow to Make a Pirate ship Primary Education.pptx
How to Make a Pirate ship Primary Education.pptx
 
Organic Name Reactions for the students and aspirants of Chemistry12th.pptx
Organic Name Reactions  for the students and aspirants of Chemistry12th.pptxOrganic Name Reactions  for the students and aspirants of Chemistry12th.pptx
Organic Name Reactions for the students and aspirants of Chemistry12th.pptx
 
Activity 01 - Artificial Culture (1).pdf
Activity 01 - Artificial Culture (1).pdfActivity 01 - Artificial Culture (1).pdf
Activity 01 - Artificial Culture (1).pdf
 
Web & Social Media Analytics Previous Year Question Paper.pdf
Web & Social Media Analytics Previous Year Question Paper.pdfWeb & Social Media Analytics Previous Year Question Paper.pdf
Web & Social Media Analytics Previous Year Question Paper.pdf
 
Separation of Lanthanides/ Lanthanides and Actinides
Separation of Lanthanides/ Lanthanides and ActinidesSeparation of Lanthanides/ Lanthanides and Actinides
Separation of Lanthanides/ Lanthanides and Actinides
 
TataKelola dan KamSiber Kecerdasan Buatan v022.pdf
TataKelola dan KamSiber Kecerdasan Buatan v022.pdfTataKelola dan KamSiber Kecerdasan Buatan v022.pdf
TataKelola dan KamSiber Kecerdasan Buatan v022.pdf
 
Measures of Central Tendency: Mean, Median and Mode
Measures of Central Tendency: Mean, Median and ModeMeasures of Central Tendency: Mean, Median and Mode
Measures of Central Tendency: Mean, Median and Mode
 
Código Creativo y Arte de Software | Unidad 1
Código Creativo y Arte de Software | Unidad 1Código Creativo y Arte de Software | Unidad 1
Código Creativo y Arte de Software | Unidad 1
 
“Oh GOSH! Reflecting on Hackteria's Collaborative Practices in a Global Do-It...
“Oh GOSH! Reflecting on Hackteria's Collaborative Practices in a Global Do-It...“Oh GOSH! Reflecting on Hackteria's Collaborative Practices in a Global Do-It...
“Oh GOSH! Reflecting on Hackteria's Collaborative Practices in a Global Do-It...
 
mini mental status format.docx
mini    mental       status     format.docxmini    mental       status     format.docx
mini mental status format.docx
 
Contemporary philippine arts from the regions_PPT_Module_12 [Autosaved] (1).pptx
Contemporary philippine arts from the regions_PPT_Module_12 [Autosaved] (1).pptxContemporary philippine arts from the regions_PPT_Module_12 [Autosaved] (1).pptx
Contemporary philippine arts from the regions_PPT_Module_12 [Autosaved] (1).pptx
 
A Critique of the Proposed National Education Policy Reform
A Critique of the Proposed National Education Policy ReformA Critique of the Proposed National Education Policy Reform
A Critique of the Proposed National Education Policy Reform
 
Mattingly "AI & Prompt Design: Structured Data, Assistants, & RAG"
Mattingly "AI & Prompt Design: Structured Data, Assistants, & RAG"Mattingly "AI & Prompt Design: Structured Data, Assistants, & RAG"
Mattingly "AI & Prompt Design: Structured Data, Assistants, & RAG"
 

FRIT 7237 - Program Evaluation Plan

  • 1. Evaluation Plan for: New State Standards for Mathematics and Problem-based Learning A Grant Funded Project FRIT 7237 Addy Baker Meagan Harrelson Victorie Penn
  • 2. Implementation Evaluation This implementation evaluation is intended to evaluate the implementation project between Great Southern University and Braxton County Schools. The project intends to prepare teachers from Braxton County Schools to implement the New State Standards for Mathematics (NSSM). In order to properly evaluate the project the following questions must be answered: P1: Were the initial experience and follow up activities implemented as planned? P2: What is the quality of the initial program activities? P3: Who are the program participants and how were they recruited? P4: What is the quality of follow up and support activities? These questions will be answered using a variety of means including focus groups, surveys, interview, observations, and questionnaires. Using a comprehensive approach will ensure the ability to form a complete idea of the strengths and weaknesses of the project and highlight areas for improvement. Implementation Questions Data Collection Methods And Sources Procedures Schedule P1: Were the initial experience and follow up activities implemented as planned? *Focus Group *Survey *Observation with lesson plan collection *A focus group will be formed of randomly chosen participants to collect their personal experiences with the implementation of activities. *All participants will complete a survey asking questions on their implementation experience. *Teacher lesson plans will be collected and evaluated based on the qualities of PBL and adherence to the NSSM. These lessons will be observed by a trained evaluator. *Mid project- October 2015 *End of Project- January 2016 P2: What is the quality of the initial program activities? *Survey *Observation *Participants and project administrators will receive an exit survey on their view of the *During and immediately following initial
  • 3. quality workshop and additional activities. *An evaluator will be present to observe and evaluate the initial program workshop. program activities P3: Who are the program participants and how were they recruited? *Interviews *Questionnaire *Upon finalization of selections Ms. Carla Lawton and the Project Director will be interviewed in person about the procedure with which they chose participants. *A questionnaire will be distributed by email to all eligible teachers and administrators. *Within the first 2 weeks of selection finalization P4: What is the quality of follow up and support activities? *Survey *Focus Group *A focus group will be formed of randomly chosen participants to collect their personal experiences of follow up and support activities. *All participants will complete a survey asking questions about follow up and support activities. *Mid project- October 2015 *End of Project- January 2016 Summative Evaluation The summative evaluation report is represented by 4 objectives within 2 different questions. The first question, “To what extent were teachers able to develop PBL modules that were connected to local business and industries, aligned with NSSM, and incorporated appropriate uses of technology,” is associated with objectives 1,2,3 and the second question, “To what extent were teachers able to implement and evaluate those modules,” is associated with objective #4. The project will begin on the date of June 25th. At this point, the introduction of new standards to the Great Southern faculty and Braxton County teaching staff will be presented and this will lead to the two staffs working through a PBL refinement period which will be the dates
  • 4. of July 2nd through July 20th. During the refinement period, the faculty of Great Southern University will help the teacher staff from Braxton County to refine their PBL modules using electronic communication. The data that will be observed will come from post and pre project surveys, student work samples, basic observation rubrics, alignment of standards checklists, and module rubrics. During the fall term of the school year, the Braxton County teachers will implement their modules and meet with the Great Southern faculty for a mid-year implementation meeting. Once the mid-year meeting is completed the Braxton County teachers will have a self-evaluation period. Evaluation Questions Objective Indicator Data Source To what extent were teachers able to develop PBL modules that were connected to local business and industries, aligned with NSSM, and incorporated appropriate uses of technology? Using local business numerical data create a PBL module that would use the given data. Modules refined and uses information from local businesses. *Module Rubric *Pre-Project Survey To what extent were teachers able to develop PBL modules that were connected to local business and industries, aligned with NSSM, and incorporated appropriate uses of technology Using NSSM Standards to align PBL modules. Task and assessment refined and aligned to NSSM standards. *Standards Alignment Checklist
  • 5. To what extent were teachers able to develop PBL modules that were connected to local business and industries, aligned with NSSM, and incorporated appropriate uses of technology Create PBL Modules that align with NSSM standards and integrate these modules into the technology of local businesses Local business aid in using technology effectively during PBL module. *Observation Rubric *Activity Portfolio *Teacher Walkthroughs To what extent were teachers able to implement and evaluate those modules? Self-evaluation of modules implemented during course. Post survey data and walkthroughs to determine the overall use of technology *Post-Project Surveys *Student Work Samples Data Collection Schedule and Summary Data Set Date of Collection Instrument Already Developed? Data Collected By Pre and Post Surveys June 25, 2015 and January 2016 No Great Southern Faculty Observation of Workshop June 29, 2015 No Outside Evaluator Teacher Observation and Self-Evaluation January 2016 Yes Great Southern Faculty and Teachers Focus Group October 2015 No Great Southern Faculty Interviews with Ms. Lawton and Project Director Following selection of participants No Great Southern Faculty Student Work Samples January 2015 Yes Teachers