Discuss the nature and importance of evaluation. Also critically examine the types of evaluation.
Course: Educational Leadership and Management
Level: B.Ed Solved Assignment
ANSWER
Need and Importance of Evaluation in Management
Evaluation is often overlooked in
the day-to-day affairs of the school system. In reality, the ongoing evaluation
of programmers, personnel and activities may be one of the more important
aspects of the quality of effort being extended by the organization, Programmers
are mandated by a variety of mechanisms: by state law, by the state board of
education rules, by local policy, by graduation requirements, by federal law,
and by the need of the students. As programmers are developed for a particular
clientele, they must be delivered to that clientele and then evaluated to see
if they (the programs) accomplished what the planners intended. All too often,
educators initiate a programme and it's left to divine judgment to determine its, effectiveness.
In this day of accountability, the wise use of scarce resources, and increasing competition for the local
and state tax dollar, it is important that evaluation efforts should be
initiated and maintained to justify programmes and budgets. Especially
as one considers the implications of
site-based management (SBM) and all that it entails, the need for a well-ground
evaluation process is essential. Programmes are planned, and the evaluation process should begin. The following questions
should be examined as a result of the evaluation process:
1. Is the target population being served?
2. Is the programme producing the desired
results?
3. Is the programme cost-effective?
4. Is the programme compatible with other
programmes?
5. Does the programme support the mission of the
school?
The integrity and viability of
the planning process are dependent on the capacity of the evaluation design and
process to stand alone as an independent
function of the organization. Ideally, evaluation, while closely aligned and
supportive of the planning mechanism, is independent of any other function of the school system. This independence
not only allows greater objectivity of the process but also guarantees that the
evaluation of any programme or activity will be accomplished on its own merits
and based on its own performance.
The evaluation function is best
performed when it is located under the superintendent and not involved in any other function of the school
organization. Ideally, the evaluation process gathers data and presents it in
such a way that the decision maker (principal, director, superintendent, board
etc.) can interpret the data and decide the subsequent actions required of
him/her.
Evaluation is a process of
delineating, obtaining and providing useful information for judging decision
alternatives (Stufflebeam et A. 197
l, xxv). In other words, evaluation is a mechanism for
generating data on which decisions can be made. If performed at its most objective level, alternative situations
and data can be examined, and the most
appealing and productive decision is possible for the person charged with the decision.
a)
Context Evaluation
Although four types of programme
evaluation are significant in the management
of information related to educational programmes and services, an understanding
of context evaluation is most important
to a practising school administrator. In general, its importance focuses on three factors, which oftentimes affect the success or
failure of decisions related to school programmes.
First, context evaluation serves short and long-range planning decisions.
Planning in many school districts
becomes an academic exercise of exchanging ideas between colleagues, which leads towards re-enforcement
like the key decision maker’s
position on any one of many issues. For reasons of time,
lack of know-how (possibly too many staff theoreticians), and commitment (key
decision makers threatened), accommodation of the planning process may be
brushed aside as an administrative frill, taking organizational
energy away from the operational practice of a school district. Secondly, context evaluation is ongoing or
continues throughout the life of an educational programme or service.
Educational programmes are dynamic
in nature and therefore vulnerable to change even after extensive systematic
planning. If educational programmes were planned, developed and administered in
a vacuum void of people, possibly the importance of the ongoing nature of
context evaluation would be minimized. Thirdly,
context evaluation continues to provide a reference point or baseline
of information designed to examine initial programme goals and objectives. It allows for a close
relationship between decisions based on planned goals and
objectives and the final programme outcome. School administrators have the
flexibility to examine initial programme goals and objectives at any time throughout a programme’s life overlay them on what is
presently happening in the programmes
and make a decision to continue, stop or redirect the programme and its resources. The result is
avoidance or minimizing
“after-the-fact” or “post-mortem” evaluations of educational
programmes services following their completion.
b) Input
Evaluation
As one moves from context
evaluation, the focus shifts from
planning decisions to the allocation of resources to meet the programme. Such
careful evaluation will provide important data on what is in terms of existing programmes
and activities. It also provides a good analysis of the efficacy of dying existing programmes. If,
for example, a school's input analysis shows a great emphasis on high academic, advanced instructional programmes while the context evaluation identifies a great need
for basic skill emphasis, there obviously exists a great discrepancy between what is and what the needs are. This type of input
evaluation will permit the building principal to locus his/her resources on the
areas of greatest need and reduce inefficient use and waste of scarce
resources.
As a result of input evaluation, an adjustment in both the type and amount of resources, as well as a shifting of resources, is indicated.
c)
Process Evaluation
Once a course of action has been
approved and implementation has begun, process evaluation is necessary to
provide periodic feedback to persons responsible
for implementing plans and procedures. The process evaluation has three main objectives: the first is to detect or predict defects in
the procedural design or its implementation stage,
the second is to provide information for programmed decisions, and the third is
to maintain a record of the procedure as it occurs (Stufflebeam et al.
1971.229).
Among the strategies to be followed in process evaluation is the continuous monitoring of the potential sources of the failure in the project
including interpersonal relationships, communications
channels, and adequacy of resources. Another strategy involves the projecting and servicing of programmed
decisions to be made by the project manager during the implementation of the project
including the choice of specific schools for particular participation in the
project. Still, another strategy involves noting the main features of the
project design, such as the concept he taught and the amount of discussion to be held using this data to describe
what actually takes place. From this comes a determination of whether or not objectives were achieved. Sometimes the lack of meeting an objective is not the fault of
the design or the procedure.
It’s important to recognize that the process evaluator(s) rely on both formal and informal data
collection procedures. This
includes interaction analysis, opened, end-of-the-day
reaction sheets, interviews, rating
scales, diaries and semantic differential instrument records of staff meetings, programme Evaluation and review technique (PERT) networks, and
other devices.
It’s also important to recognize
that the process evaluation is a
function of how well the context and input evaluations have been performed. The
more adequate the context and input evaluation, the less critical the need for process evaluation,
and, conversely, the more poorly developed the context and input evaluations are the more demanding and
critical the need for an adequate and thorough process evaluation. Process evaluation
means the delineation, obtaining and reporting of information as often as
project personnel require such information-especially during the early stages
of a project.
d)
Product Evaluation
The fourth type of evaluation is
product evaluation. Its purpose is to measure and interpret attainments not
only at the end of a programme cycle but as often as necessary during the
project term. While product evaluation gives an understanding of what is policy setters often use product expectations
to establish goals and objectives for particular projects and programmes. The
establishment of a product objective or expectation by a board
of trustees or board of education certainly adds a dimension to the reality of context,
input, and process evaluation.
Traditionally, evaluation meant
product evaluation only and context input and process evaluations are variables
which must be added to enable an
evaluation process that recognizes as many of the disparate components of the
total evaluation contents as possible. Stated another way, product expectation is a legitimate policy
matter while context, input and process are the tools to be utilized, changed,
and adjusted to meet product expectations.
Product evaluation must consider
a variety of realities as it is conducted. While the results of product
evaluation are relatively precise and straightforward, the context input and
process evaluations can reveal important
decision data if the policy setters have established the product expectation at
a realistic level. Product evaluations can change as a result of adjustments in
input or changes in the process used To summarize, the CIPP model for decision-making provides the best utilization of the data and
the most flexible parameters for adjustments while maintaining the integrity of
the evaluation process. CIPP also allows for decision alternatives to be
explored and for the decision-maker to project the cost-effectiveness of a
particular project. The use of the CIPP model can simplify the planning process while strengthening the result.
