Skip to main content
UploadLanguage (EN)Support
BusinessMobileSocial MediaMarketingTechnologyArt & PhotosCareerDesignEducationPresentations & Public SpeakingGovernment & NonprofitHealthcareInternetLawLeadership & ManagementAutomotiveEngineeringSoftwareRecruiting & HRRetailSalesServicesScienceSmall Business & EntrepreneurshipFoodEnvironmentEconomy & FinanceData & AnalyticsInvestor RelationsSportsSpiritualNews & PoliticsTravelSelf ImprovementReal EstateEntertainment & HumorHealth & MedicineDevices & HardwareLifestyle
Raj Kumar, profile picture
Uploaded byRaj Kumar
PPTX, PDF10,857 views

Curriculum constrction sem i evaluation models

The document discusses various approaches to curriculum evaluation including goal-based, goal-free, responsive, decision-making, and accreditation approaches. It then examines several models of curriculum evaluation, including Tyler's objectives-based model, Stake's responsive model focusing on antecedents, transactions, and outcomes, and Stufflebeam's CIPP model evaluating context, inputs, processes, and products. The models provide different conceptual frameworks for designing curriculum evaluations.

Education◦
Downloaded 174 times
What is evaluation? Evaluation describes how to assess the nature, impact and value of an activity through the systematic collection, analysis and interpretation of information with a view to making an informed decision. Evaluation involves 3 activities: • Outlining clear purposes • Gathering evidences • Judgment Evaluation is part of development rather than apart from it.
CURRICULUM EVALUATION  Intra-curricular evaluation  Teacher evaluation of students  Student evaluation of teachers  Materials evaluation  Verification of methods  Evaluation of tests and examinations  Checking the learning outcomes while on the field  Curriculum review/ improvement/ change/ modification  System revision
Curriculum Evaluation  Curriculum evaluation broadly conceived, is a stock- taking process.  A curriculum may be structured in so many ways. For instance, -it may be based on an assembly of courses that are deemed necessary to meet certain job requirements; - it can be formed from the basics of a particular discipline in a faculty or department; - it can be designed to meet the needs of a professional or technical programme, - or it can be developed based on a systematic
APPROACHES TO CURRICULUM EVALUATION Goal-based  Determining whether pre-stated goals of educational or training programs were met. Goal-free  Uncovering and documenting what outcomes were occurring in educational or training programs without regard to whether they were intended program goals focus. Responsive (contingency-unforeseen event)  Comparing what was intended for instruction to what actually was observed.
 These approaches are based on the classical curriculum evaluation models as presented by Stufflebeam and Shinkfield (1990) The decision-making  The collecting information about educational or training programs for the purpose of decision- making. The accreditation  It is for forming professional judgments about the processes used within education or training programs.
World views about Evaluation Melrose (1996) grouped existing models into three paradigms or world views about evaluation, these are: I. The functional model ii. The transactional model; and iii. The critical paradigms of evaluation. Need a model for curriculum evaluation: To provide a conceptual framework for designing a particular evaluation depending on the specific purpose of the
Models of Curriculum Evaluation  Concept of a model Theory: Explains a process (Why?) Model Describes a process (How?)  Model is a representation of reality presented with a degree of structure and order.
Classification of Models Models
Types of Models Conceptual Procedural Mathematical Models Describes: What is meant by the concept? Describes: How to perform a task? Describes: The relationship b/n the various elements of a situation or
Models of Curriculum Evaluation 1. Alade’s Six Models 2. Olaitan’s Four Models 3. Tyler’s Model 4. CIPP Model 5. Stake’s Model 6. Roger’s Model 7. Scriven’s Model 8. Stenhouse’s Research Model 9. Stufflebeam CIPP Model 10. Krikpatricks Model
1. ALADE’S SIX MODELS From another perspective, Lawton (1980) cited in Alade (2006) classified models of curriculum evaluation into six, viz: 1. The Classical Model, 2. Research and Development Model, 3. Illumination Model, 4. Briefing Decision-Makers Model, 5. Teacher as Research (Professional) Model,
2. OLAITAN’S FOUR MODELS In respect of vocational-technical education evaluation, Olaitan (1996)identified the following evaluation models which had been employed by a good number of researchers. They include: • the Illumination Model, • the Goal-Free Model, • the Context, (C) Input (I), Process (P), Product (P) (CIPP) Model, and • The Transactional Model. They had been found reliable as a guide for collecting evaluative data in curriculum evaluation.
3. TYLER’S MODEL (1949) Key Emphasis:  Instructional Objective Purpose:  To measure students progress towards objectives Method :  1. Specify Instructional Objectives  2. Collect performance Data  3. Compare performance data with the objectives/standards specified Limitations:  Ignores process  Not useful for diagnosis of reasons why a curriculum has failed
Tyler’s Planning Model Objectives Selecting learning experiences Organizing learning experiences Evaluation of Students Performance What educational goals should the school seek to attain? How can learning experiences be selected which are likely to be useful in attaining these objectives? How can learning experiences be organized for effective instruction? How can the effectiveness of learning experiences be evaluated?
4. CIPP MODEL (1971) The CIPP model of evaluation concentrates on: Context of the programme Input into the programme Process within the programme Product of the programme
Context Evaluation Objective:  To define the context ,  Identify population,  Assess needs,  Diagnose problem. Method: By comparing the actual and the intended inputs and outputs Relation to decision making:  For deciding upon settings to be served  For changes needed in planning  Needs of Industry, Society  Future technological developments  Mobility of the students.
Input Evaluation Objective:  Identify and assess system capabilities  Alternative strategies  Implementation design Method: Analyzing resources, solution strategies, procedural designs for relevance, feasibility and economy. Relation to Decision Making:  Selecting sources  Structuring activities  Basis for judging implementation
Process evaluation Objectives: To identify process defects in the procedural design or its implementation Method: monitoring, describing process, interacting, observing Relation to Decision making: For implanting and refining the programme design and procedure for effective process control.
Product evaluation  Objectives: To relate outcome information to objectives and to context input and process information  Method: Measurement Vs Standards interpreting the outcome  Relation to Decision making: For deciding to continue, terminate, modify, build or refocus a change of activity.
Limitation’s of CIIP Model 1.Over values efficiency 2.Undervalues students aims CIPP approach recommends… • Multiple observers and informants • Mining existing information • Multiple procedures for gathering data; cross- check qualitative and quantitative • Independent review by stakeholders and outside groups
5. STAKE’s MODEL (1969)  Antecedent is any condition existing prior to teaching and learning which may relate to outcome.  Transactions are the countless encounters of students with teacher, student with student, author with reader, parent with counselor  Outcome include measurements of the impact of instruction on learners and
ANTECEDENTS - Conditions Existing prior to Curriculum Evaluation  Students interests or prior learning  Learning Environment in the Institution  Traditions and Values of the Institution TRANSACTIONS Interactions that occur between: TEACHERS STUDENTS STUDENTS STUDENTS STUDENTS CURRICULAR MATERIALS STUDENTS EDUCATIONAL ENVIRONMENT TRANSACTIONS = PROCESS OF
OUTCOMES • Learning outcomes • Impact of curriculum implementation on  Students  Teachers  Administrators  Community • Immediate outcomes Vs Long range outcomes Three sets of Data 1.Antecedents-Conditions existing before implementation 2.Transactions - Activities occurring during implementation 3.Outcomes •Results after implementation •Describe the program fully
STAKE’s MODEL Key Emphasis: Description and judgment of Data Purpose: To report the ways different people see curriculum Focus is on Responsive Evaluation 1.Responds to audience needs for information 2.Orients more toward program activities than results 3. Presents all audience view points(multi perspective) Limitations:
6. KAUFMAN ROGER’S MODEL Need Assessment Where are we now? Where are we to be? …………..Discrepancy…..……… Discrepancy between current status and Desired status  Discrepancies should be identified in terms of products of actual behaviors (Ends)  Not in terms of processes (Means) Deduction:-The drawing of a particular truth from a general, antecedently known Rule – examples Induction:- Rising from particular truths to a
7. SCRIVEN’S GOAL FREE EVALUATION (1973)  Proponent : Michael Scriven  Introduced the term ‘formative’ and ‘summative’  Broaden perspective of evaluation  Evaluator should not know the educational program’s goals in order not to be influenced by them  Evaluator therefore totally independent  Evaluator free to look at processes and procedures, outcomes and unanticipated
Roles of curriculum evaluation: Scriven differentiates between two major roles of curriculum evaluation: the “formative” and the “summative”. “Formative evaluation” – during the development of the programme “Summative evaluation” – at its conclusion Methodology: The field is open to the hunter but he did have a ‘lethal’ checklist of criteria for judging any aspect of the curriculum
8. STENHOUSE’S RESEARCH MODEL (1970S)  Evaluation as part of curriculum development  Continuous cycle of formative evaluation and curriculum improvement at school level  Relationship between curriculum developer and evaluator is central  Curriculum developer offer solutions  Evaluator is the practical man who temper enthusiasm with judgment  The developer is the investigator; teacher  Autonomous professional self-development through self study
9. STUFFLEBEAM CIPP MODEL  CIPP model of curriculum development is a process of developing the curriculum.  CIPP model of curriculum evaluation is the process to see the effectiveness of the developed and implemented curriculum.  These approaches are based on the classical curriculum evaluation models as presented by Stufflebeam and Shinkfield (1990) The decision-making:- The collecting information about educational or training programs for the purpose of decision-making. The accreditation:- It is for forming professional judgments about the processes used within education or training programs.
Context Planning decisions  What needs are to be addressed  Defining objectives for the program Input Structuring decisions  What resources are available  What alternative strategies should be considered  What plan has the best potential
Process Implementing decisions  How well is the plan being implemented  What are the barriers  What revision are needed Product Recycling decisions  What result are obtained  Were need reduced  What should be done with the program
10. Kirkpatrick's Four Levels of Evaluation In Kirkpatrick's four-level model, each successive evaluation level is built on information provided by the lower level. ASSESSING TRAINING EFFECTIVENESS often entails using the four-level model developed by Donald Kirkpatrick (1994).
Level 1 - Reaction  Evaluation at this level measures how participants in a training program react to it.  This type of evaluation is often called a “smile sheet.” Level 2 - Learning  Assessing at this level moves the evaluation beyond learner satisfaction and attempts to assess the extent students have advanced in skills, knowledge, or attitude.
Level 3 Evaluation - Transfer  This level measures the transfer that has occurred in learners' behavior due to the training program.  Are the newly acquired skills, knowledge, or attitude being used in the everyday environment of the learner? Level 4 Evaluation- Results  This level measures the success of the program in terms that managers and executives can understand -increased production, improved quality, decreased
Thank You