Module 2 Blog Entry

1. ● At-risk public high school in a
metropolitan area
● Goal of giving students one on
one mentoring with volunteers
from the community
● Previous evaluator collected no
data causing them to be at risk
of losing funding
● Team Leader was the only one
with evaluation experience
● Team did not think detailed plan
was needed
● Evaluation matrix was used to
help navigate data that was
being collected
● 3 year teacher training program at
local university
● Goal of increasing exposure to
tech
● Internal and external evaluators
● No surveys - did not want to risk
overwhelming mentor teachers
● E-portfolios available to use as
data
● Evaluators created a checklist to
facilitate analysis of portfolios
● Initial data was
collected by the
client
● Collaboration and
communication
between
evaluator and
clients was
essential in
outcomes at the
end of the
chapter
Case Study Venn Diagram
Chapter 5 & 6
Community-Based
Mentor Program
Teacher Candidates
integrating Technology

2. Key Takeaways
Chapter 5 gave a great example of the mixed methods approach, where there was a number of
different evaluation techniques used (Spaulding, 2014, pg. 92). One of which was the participatory
evaluation model, which is when the clients were those who collected the data and gave to the
evaluators to analyze(Spaulding, 2014, pg. 90). This led to a very interesting situation, where evaluators
were not exactly what to do with the data because it was not what they were looking for. The team leader
was already hesitant to be working with the team as they had no prior evaluatory experience and also did
not see the benefit in having a detailed plan of the evaluation. She still recognized the importance of not
dismissing the data, as this was one that the program had worked hard to collect. This decision allowed
them to form a relationship, after they presented the data and a more in-depth conversation was had.
Overall, this chapter really focuses on the importance of using an organization tool, like an
evaluation matrix, which was used in this case to collect important data that gave them a clear blueprint of
what they needed to do. In the end, doing this would “serve as a tool or set of talking points to open up a
dialogue with their client,” (Spaulding, 2014, pg. 94).
Additionally, the chapter painted a picture of the importance of creating that relationship with those
being evaluated, as this creates trust. In the end, that conversation allowed them to refine their original
plan with the perspective of the client.

3. Key Takeaways
Chapter 6 focused on an objectives-based approach, where the objectives are already predetermined and the
evaluators focuses on collecting data to determine if the program is meeting those objectives (Spaulding, 2014, pg. 44). In
this case study, both internal and external evaluators were being used by the program, where they wanted to increase the
exposure to technology in the student teaching experience. When the external evaluators asked about giving surveys to
participants, such as the mentors, the project director refused, as he did not want to overburden the mentor teachers.
Instead, it was discovered that e-portfolios had recently been implemented. Evaluators used these to develop a checklist,
which helped them analyze the data provided. In the end, this data allowed them to evaluate the program and determine
whether or not they had met their goals.
Overall, this chapter, highlights the relationships that need to be created with the clients and dives into the
importance of respecting the boundaries set in place. In this case, evaluators were a bit hesitant when hearing that no
surveys would be able to be given out, as this impeded this type of data to be collected. But after having a conversation,
they discovered the e-portfolios, which may have given them the same, if not more, quantitative data, since they “had lots of
examples and artifacts showing different ways the teacher candidate had worked to integrate technology.” (Spaulding, 2014,
pg. 106).
Additionally, it also showed the importance of flexibility when collecting data. As already mentioned, the surveys were
unlikely, per the project manager’s instructions. Therefore, evaluators were left wondering how to best support with data
collection, but “instead examined the setting and found that the teacher candidates portfolios supplied a wealth of
information to meet their evaluation objectives,” (Spaulding, 2014, pg. 108).

4. References
Spaulding, D. T. (2014). Program evaluation in practice: Core Concepts and examples for discussion and analysis (2nd
Ed.). Jossey-Bass.