Evaluation Plan - FRIT 7237 Dr. Hodges for Visionary Leadership Standard

1. Problem-based Learning and New Standards for Mathematics:
Evaluation Plan
Ashley Castellana, Rebecca Erwin, Tiffany Robbins, and Kameron Williams
Georgia Southern University
Project Evaluation Plan
This project is the result of a collaboration between Great Southern University and Braxton County Schools. An evaluation
plan has been executed to ensure that the goal of this project has been met. The implementation evaluation report for this project will
focus on the following four questions: Were the initial experience and follow up activities implemented as planned? What is the
quality of the initial program activities? Who are the program participants and how were they recruited? What is the quality of follow
up and support activities? Information collection methods will focus on surveys, interviews, and document analysis. Surveys will
provide more thorough information regarding program participants and their perceived needs related to the content of the workshop.
Surveys will further aid in planning support and follow-up activities. Interviews and focus groups will provide data related to the

2. quality of the workshop and support received during follow-up activities. Finally, an analysis of program documents will provide
insight into the schedule of activities that took place during and following the workshop and if they aligned with the program plan.
The summative evaluation report will help answer the following questions: 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?
And, To what extent were teachers able to implement and evaluate those modules? The first question is based on the first 3 objectives
and the second question is based on the 4th objective. The data sources that will be used for the outcome evaluation will be the
Module Evaluation Rubric, NSSM Standards and participation surveys. Great Southern faculty will use the results from the evaluation
report to help teachers continue to refine their PBL modules after the workshop. The timeframe for refinement of the PBL modules
will be July 2, 2015 through July 20, 2015. Communication between the Great Southern faculty and teacher participants will be
electronic. Once modules have been finalized, teachers will implement them and conduct a self-evaluation of the implementation. In
the fall of 2015, Great Southern faculty members will meet with teacher participants for a mid-implementation meeting to discuss
questions and concerns related to the PBL modules. In the fall of 2015, a final meeting between the project staff and teacher
participants will be scheduled to discuss teacher self-evaluations, implementation and to identify best practices.
Implementation Evaluation
Evaluation
Questions
Information Needed Sources of
Information
Method of
Collection
Collection
Procedures
Schedule Analysis Procedure
P1: Were the
initial
Schedule of planned
professional
Workshop
documents;
Surveys;
Interviews;
Participant survey;
Post-project Q&A’s
Surveys
conducted after
Survey responses,
interview responses,

3. experiences and
follow up
activities
implemented as
planned?
development topics
and activities; Post-
program perceptions
from project leaders
and participants
Interviews with
project leaders
and participants
Document
Analysis
organized around
teacher planning;
benchmark scores
and formative
assessments
the first nine
weeks grading
period and
prior to the
final meeting in
fall of 2015.
and testing scores
will all be analyzed
for needed
information.
P2: What is the
quality of the
initial program
activities?
Participants’ ratings
and reflections of the
workshop
Pre and post-
workshop surveys
Survey Participant survey Surveys
conducted prior
to and
following the
conclusion of
initial program
activities
Survey responses
will be analyzed for
needed information.
P3: Who are
the program
participants and
how were they
recruited?
Number of
participants enrolled
in the program;
Number of
mathematics teachers
vs. administrators
enrolled in the
program; Grade level
taught by
participating
teachers; Information
on how the
participants learned
about the program.
Program records;
Surveys
Survey;
Document
Analysis
Records of email
and paper mailings
used to advertise
the project;
Participant
registration forms;
Questionnaires
10/11: Survey
assessing
teacher
perceived need
and interest;
7/15: Pre-
workshop
survey
Records,
questionnaires, and
participant
registration forms
will be analyzed for
needed information.
P4: What is the
quality of
follow up and
support
Participants’
reflections of follow
up and support
activities
Results of
interviews with
participants;
Review of
Interviews;
Focus
Group
Focus group with
participants;
Electronic
communication via
Focus groups
will be formed
during summer
of 2015.
Responses regarding
focus group related
questions will be
analyzed for needed

4. activities? electronic
communication
email and wikis Emails, wikis,
etc, will be
ongoing from
July 2015 until
conclusion of
project.
information;
Analysis of wiki use
by participants and
project leaders
Summative Evaluation
Evaluation Questions Objective Indicator Data Source
O1: 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
based on local
businesses and
industries
Modules draw on content and
processes from local
businesses and industries
Module
Evaluation Rubric
O1: 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
addressing NSSM
Module content, tasks, and
assessments are aligned with
appropriate NSSM
Module
Evaluation Rubric;
NSSM Standards
O1: 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?
Integrate technology
into PBL experiences
PBL modules contain
activities that effectively use
technology
Module
Evaluation Rubric
O2: To what extent were teachers able to implement
and evaluate those modules?
Implement and
evaluate PBL Modules
Record of implementation
Record of self-evaluation
Focus group
Participant surveys
Data Collection Schedule
Data set Date of collection Instruments already developed? Data collected by:
Pre- and Post-workshop surveys July 2015 Yes Great Southern faculty

5. Interviews with project leaders and participants July 2015 Yes Great Southern faculty
Document analysis of teacher-made lesson plans Fall 2015 Yes Evaluation team
Focus group Fall 2015 Yes Evaluation team