Please enable JavaScript.

Coggle requires JavaScript to display documents.

Curriculum evaluation - Coggle Diagram

- - - - school's purpose
      - teacher's competence and skills
      - teachers' standards and accountability
        
        always raised up by noneducators with no idea of curriculum
  - - - for whom
      - what criteria
      - considering students' creativity, tolerance, risk taking, social skills, poise etc.
    - - shouldn't urge STEM
      - produce educated citizens
      - schools aren't for job training
  - - - academic standards: basic, proficient, advanced
        
        everyone same level? advanced levels?
        
        proficiency suggests high standards, which don't translate into success/contribution/uniqueness
      - lack of guidance to address unique cultures within states
      - should use evaluation methods drawing on the latest thinking
      - standardized test = schools' accountability
        
        students' learning
        
        levels of achievement
        
        teachers' effectiveness
  - - - High-status subjects - high salary
      - Effective teacher > high scores > high salary
      - Foster negative competition in school
    - - performance pay systems improve performance
        
        performance quantity may not increase student's understanding
      - performance pay systems will
        heighten teacher motivation.
        
        undermine intrinsic motivation
        
        Teachers do not engage a particular instructional strategy to gain a pay raise.
        
        Results of quality teaching may not appear for decades
- - - - standardized tests to collect data
      - -determine whether students graduate from high school (eg. SPM)
      - -students may not get to further study when failed
      - -affected teachers and administrators to a certain extent ( school and teachers performance)
      - -Only essential subjects are tested (those not tested are left behind - reduced/ eliminated)
      - -limit teachers creativity/ students authority ( teacher relinquish instructional strategies to those that said could improve tests result -drilling-memorizing etc)
      - if one teacher’s students score better than the other, the perception is that the teacher is better than the other
      - causes game to the system
  - - - -students performance on a particular tests is compared to another student
      - -provide useful information such as ranking of students
      - -identifies successful students and students that needs remediation
      - -not really effective (etc compare students to other states -resources/ socioeconomics status)
      - -different standardized tests are not interchangeable
  - - - -how students perform in a task or understand a concept referring to a fixed criterion/standard
      - -on going effort and process
      - -designed to determine students learning in relation to a standard/goal
      - -very specific (thus, needs more tests to get the thorough picture of the curriculum)
  - - - -objectivity
      - (local cultures, ethnicity, language spoken etc)
      - -inequality (Socieconimic, resources differences)
- - - - Is the proposed new program better than the one it is supposed to replace?
    - - addresses ways to improve a curriculum.
    - - what is the curriculum good for, and who is its
        intended audience?
    - - deals with previous four questions evaluation process.
    - - address curriculum’s goodness and appropriateness.
- - - - Carried out during program development and implementation
        
        Allows educators to gather data, modify, reject, or accept the program as it is evolving, before it is implemented
        
        Use formative evaluation to judge the effectiveness of their pedagogical approaches
        
        Ways to gather and utilize data in order to
        make those instructional adjustments necessary for optimal student learning.
        
        Engage students in deep reflection challenge fellow students
        
        Ask effective questions - in-depth response
        
        Probe for a rich response, exposing deeper apprehension
        
        Distribute the questions among all class members.
        
        students to assess their learning tactics as well as their levels of knowledge. (students involvement - train students to become independent learners)
        
        Assessment tools that are not high tech: anecdotal records,
        checklists, rating scales, conferences, journals, even homework, observing & listening,
        
        Evaluation to optimize students learning
    - - Kirkpatrick - four levels of summative evaluation: s (4) results
        
        (2) learning - collecting data whether students have gained new knowledge, skills, and
        techniques implicit in the new program’s goals and objectives.
        
        (3) transfer - can effectively employ newly acquired skills and knowledge & changes in attitude
        
        (1) reactions - through interview or survey - does new programme meet students’ social, emotional, and intellectual needs
        
        (4) results - assess results through exit
        interviews, survey, group activities etc,
      - gathers evidence about the summed effects of a particular curriculum’s components or units.
      - Indicates that students have met the school’s or state’s educational standards & teachers have met the minimum accountability standards
      - assessing the overall quality of a produced and then
        taught curriculum.
      - formal psychometric procedures - gather reliable & valid documentation of students
    - - Stake’s Congruence-Contingency Model.
        
        3 data categories - antecedents, transaction & results
        
        3 new categories & results
        
        prerequisites (condition in teaching & learning that influence outcome
        
        curriculum- planned or potentially considered interactions among students & teachers, students & students & students & resources. Inc curriculum materials & classroom environments.
        
        acquired outcomes from programmes, inc students achievement, attitude, motor skills, impact on teachers' competence & administrators actions
        
        Collect and process more extensive data - consider people in the curriculum process, assess various people's roles, allow greater participation & take position in programmes.
        
        educational outcomes are immediate & long-range, cognitive & affective, personal and communitywide.
        
        Educators should strive to establsh formal evaluation procedures
        
        Encompasses curriculum design, development & implementation
      - Stufflebeam’s Model: Context, Input, Process, and Product.
        
        Evaluation includes
        
        1) Delineating what information mjust be collected
        2) obtaining the information
        3) providing information to interested parties
        
        Context Evaluation
        
        Studying the programme's environment (furnish information on system's operations & accomplishments
        
        Input Evalution
        
        Information regarding sources use - assess school ability to carry out evaluation
- - - - Connoisseurship
        
        private act engaged in to personally “appreciate the qualities that constitute some objects, situation, or event.
        
        has five dimensions: (1) intentional, (2) structural, (3) curricular, (4) pedagogical (5) evaluative.
        
        The data sources for connoisseurship evaluation are many.
      - Criticism
        
        share their critique of a new curriculum with the public.
        
        They interpret and explain the results of the new program.
        
        entails (1) description, (2) interpretation, (3) evaluation, and (4) thematics.
        
        seek to extrapolate general themes about learn- ing and meaningful knowledge
      - Illuminative evaluation
        
        illuminates an educational program’s specific prob- lems and unique features
        
        step 1 observation: Evaluators get an overview of the program and describe the context within which the curriculum
        
        step 2. further inquiry: Evaluators separate the significant from the trivial and seek
        
        Step 3 explanation: explanations are presented to the people affected by the program, who then make decisions.