CURRICULUM EVALUATION

1. CURRICULUM
EVALUATION
CHAPTER 6

2. In this chapter, you should be able to;
1. Analyze different curriculum evaluation
models and;
2. Identify several factors that are considered
in evaluating curriculum in the Philippine
context.
OBJECTIVES:

3. CURRICULUM EVALUATION
Evaluation is concerned with giving values or
making judgement. Consequently, a person acts as
evaluator when he or she attributes worth or
judgment to an object, a place, a process, or a behavior.
behavior. Usually, evaluation is done using a set of
criteria. This enables the evaluation process to be
always objective rather than subjective.

4. CURRICULUM EVALUATION
DAVIS, 1980 MARSH, 2004 PRINT, 1993
BRUCE
TUCKMAN, 1985
DOLL, 1992
STUFFLEBEAM,
1972

5. DAVIS, 1980
the process of delineating,
obtaining, providing information useful
for making decision and judgments
about curricula.

6. MARSH, 2004
the process of examining the
goals, rationale, and structure of
any curriculum.

7. PRINT, 1993
the process of assessing the
merit and worth of a program of
students, a course, or field of study.

8. BRUCE TUCKMAN, 1985
the means of determining
whether the program is meeting its
goals.

9. DOLL, 1992
the broad and continuous
effort to inquire into the effects of
utilizing content and processes to
meet clearly defined goals.

10. STUFFLEBEAM, 1972
the process of delineating,
obtaining, and providing useful
information for judging decision
alternatives.

11. In the book,
Curriculum Evaluation is
defined as the process of making objective
judgment to a curriculum – its philosophy,
goals, and objectives, contents, learning
experience, and evaluation.

12. PURPOSES OF CURRICULUM EVALUATION
Print (1993) identified several important purposes and functions of
evaluation in school setting;
Essential in
providing
feedback to
learners
Helpful in
determining
how well
learners have
achieved the
objectives of
the
curriculum
To improve
curriculum

13. Example;
Evaluation
helps in
making
decisions
about
improving
teaching
and learning
processes.
It helps in
shaping
academic
policies.
it guides in
initiating
curriculum
changes and
innovations.
It ensures
quality of
any
curriculum
program.
It helps
schools
align their
curriculum
to different
curriculum
sources and
influences.
It
determines
the level of
success of
the school’s
vision and
mission.

14. CURRICULUM EVALUATION IN THE CLASSROOM
Doll (1997) asserted that the classroom in fact could be the
first site of gathering important data that will lead to curriculum
evaluation. Within the classroom, teachers and administrators can
collect data using several instruments like;
Test results
Anecdotal
records
Checklists
Interview
guides
Observation
guides
Interest
inventories
Rating
scales

15. CURRICULUM EVALUATION AT THE SCHOOL
OR SCHOOL SYSTEM LEVEL
Curriculum Evaluation is done mostly at
school or school system level. This is usually done
to evaluate how the curriculum goals are attained
in the macro level.

16. At the level, the following instruments can be to
gather data for the evaluation of the curriculum;
 Opinion polls
 Surveys
 Focus-group discussion
 Follow-up studies (Graduate tracer studies)
 Standard evaluation instruments
 Results of district or National Test
The Schools that gather and analyze data on the
implementation of the curriculum can also do research
activities.

17. MODELS OF CURRICULUM EVALUATION
Provus’
Discrepancy
Evaluation Model
Stufflebeam’s
CIPP Model
Tyler Model of
Curriculum
Evaluation
Elsner’s
Educational
Connoisseurship
Model
Stakes’
Congruency-
Contingency
Evaluation Model

18. PROVUS’ DISCREPANCY
EVALUATION MODEL
This model for curriculum evaluation
was developed by Malcolm Provus (1971) to
evaluate projects under the Elementary-
Secondary Education Act in the United States.

19. 1
• Determining program standards
2
• Determining program performance
3
• Comparing performance with standard
4
• Determining whether a discrepancy exists
between performance and standards
Figure 16. Provus’ Discrepancy Evaluation Model

20. Ronald Doll (1997) noted that the Provus
model has been called the discrepancy model
because it compares performance with standards to
determine whether there is a discrepancy between
the two. This model enables the curriculum
evaluatiors and administrators of the school to
collect or gather concreate evidence on how the
curriculum satisfies the set standards.

21. TYLER MODEL OF CURRICULUM
EVALUATION
Aligned to his model of curriculum
development, Ralph Tyler (1950) proposed seven steps
for evaluating a curriculum:

22. Comparison of findings with the stated objectives
Collection of data about pupil performance
Selection of criterion of measurement procedures
Identification of situations in which achievement of the
objectives could be shown
Definition of the objectives in behavioral terms
Classification of the objectives
Establishment of goals and objectives

23. STUFFLEBEAM’S CIPP MODEL
The Phi Delta Kappa National Study Committee
on Evaluation, chaired by Daniel L. Stufflebeam,
developed and published a curriculum evaluation model
Known as the CIPP (Context, Input, Process, Product)
model (Stufflebeam, 1971). Stufflebeam (2001) Defined
evaluation as the process of delineating, obtaining, and
providing useful information for judging decision
alternatives.

24. Context Input Process Product
Figure 17. Stufflebeam’s CIPP Evaluation Model

25. according to
Stufflebeam, it is
the most basic kind
of evaluation.
It’s purpose is to
provide a strong
rationale for
determining
curriculum
objectives.
The curriculum
context also
includes the
problems, issues,
and challenges that
the curriculum
seeks to address.
CONTEXT EVALUATION

26. INPUT EVALUATION
Aims to provide information for
determining how resources are utilized
to achieve curriculum objectives.
At this level, the resources of the school
and the different designs for
implementing the curriculum are
considered.

27. PROCESS EVALUATION
focuses on providing periodic feedback while the
curriculum is being implemented.
This phase aims to detect the problems in the
implementation of the curriculum, provide
information for programmed decisions, and
maintain a record of the procedures as it occurs.

28. PRODUCT EVALUATION
Aims to gather, interpret, and apprise
curriculum attainments not just the end of
an implementation of a curriculum.

29. STAKES’ CONGRUENCY- CONTINGENCY
EVALUATION MODEL
Robert Stake (1975) claimed that curriculum evaluation
is not complete unless three categories of data are made
available.
ANTECEDENTS TRANSACTIONS OUTCOMES

30. The data gathered will provide
necessary information for the evaluation
process. The term Congruency refers to
the degree of alignment between what was
desired and what was actually achieved.
Contingency refers to the relationship
between one variable to the others.

31. ELSNER’S EDUCATIONAL
CONNOISSEURSHIP MODEL
 Elliot Eisner (1985) provided a qualitative way of
evaluating a curriculum. This model does not have
methodical procedures compared with other evaluation
model.
 Eisner’s model calls for a deeper and wider
observation results of evaluation that are expresses in
written form.
 Using this model calls for thorough and
comprehensive observations of classroom and school
activities in relation to curriculum.

32. Overall, Curriculum evaluation is
important as it is intended to provide
meaningful information in almost every aspect
of the curriculum. These information or results
of evaluation provide strong bases for all
decisions done about the planning, design,
development, and implementation of the
curriculum.