Program Evaluation

18-EDLD-814-001

Dr. Shana GoldwynEducational Leadership Program

College of Education, Criminal Justice, and Human Services

Class Information Instructor InformationSpring Quarter, 2009 7140-D Edwards OneThursdays 7:00pm – 9:20pm E-mail: shana.goldwyn@uc.eduTeacher’s College 231 Office Phone: (513) 556-5111

COURSE DESCRIPTION AND RATIONALE

Implementation of educational and related programs are expected to not only foster academic growth in students, but meet current accountability structures, district and school missions and visions, and foster a positive cohesive school or community environment. In order to determine the success of these programs, there needs to be strong evaluative methods that include a comprehensive examination of all elements of the program. Further, evaluators need to have a solid understanding of the various types of program evaluations to determine the most productive and appropriate evaluation method to use.

This course provides an overview of basic program evaluation methods, including program evaluation standards, internal and external reviews, accreditation processes, and general small scale program reviews.

1

GOALS AND OBJECTIVES

By reading the assigned course readings, attending class sessions, participating in course activities, and completing course assignments, it is expected that the student will:

Be able to identify and describe several different types of program evaluation. Identify specific elements of an evaluation process, including those elements that

are common across different methodologies Know where to locate and how to use specific program evaluation standards. Provide a practical application of a chosen program evaluation method

COURSE ORGANIZATION The course will meet each week unless otherwise stated in the syllabus that there is an online assignment in place of a face-to-face class meeting. Each class will include one lecture/discussion, and one applied activity. Each week will have a predetermined topic as identified in the syllabus. However, these topics may vary according to the background, interests, and needs of students enrolled in the course. Students are encouraged to raise topics and/or questions for discussion at any time throughout the course.

COMMUNICATING WITH THE PROFESSOR

You may contact me via email or by phone when necessary. I will return all emails or phone calls within a 24-hour period. All electronic communication will be made through your UC email address or the blackboard system, so please check each of those frequently (suggested at least twice per week). Additionally, I will hold office hours on Tuesday afternoons from 3pm-5pm. During this time I will be in my office for you to come and talk with me if you do not have a scheduled appointment. If those hours do not work for you, you may schedule an appointment to meet with me at another time.

REQUIRED TEXTS

Fitzpatrick, J.L., Sanders, J.R., and Worten, B.R. (2004). Program evaluation: Alternative approaches and practical guidelines. Boston, MA: Pearson.

EVALUATION

Class Attendance/Participation (25 Points)Each class session will begin promptly at 7:00pm. Students are expected to attend each class session for the full class session period. If an emergency arises please contact the professor prior to the class session being missed.

Throughout the quarter, students are expected to come to class prepared by having read assigned material and thinking reflectively about assigned topics. Students are also

2

expected to share their insights with the class by actively participating in class discussions and activities.

Program Evaluation Overview (20 Points)Students will be asked to write a paper that provides an overview of each of the program evaluation methods discussed in class. Each method should include a thorough overview, strengths and weaknesses of each method, and provide an example. Papers should be 6-10 pages in length and be written in APA style.

American Psychological Association (APA) Students are expected to use the American Psychological Association (APA) style of writing for this course. Please refer to the APA manual for guidelines in preparing your papers for submission:

American Psychological Association. (2001). Publication manual of the American Psychological Association (5th ed.). Washington, DC: Author.

You can also find information on APA style of writing online at:

http://apastyle.apa.org/

Ethical Considerations Paper (15 points)Discuss the ethical considerations of program evaluation. Focus specifically on the need to have program evaluation standards, and how they address ethical issues in evaluative procedures. Comment further on the issues that you believe to be the most difficult/important when completing evaluations. Discuss how this would be different for internal and external program reviews.

“Expert” Evaluation Project (20 points)Choose an existing entity that currently evaluates programs or organizations. Discuss in depth the procedures that they use to evaluate, both formal and informal. Discuss the standards used to guide the evaluation. The written portion of this assignment should be approximately 4-8 pages in length. In addition to the written portion, create an 8-10 minute presentation the entity that you have chosen to present to the class.

Program Evaluation (20 points)Choose a program or an element of a program to do an informal program review of. You can do a practical review where you actually interact with the program, or a more hypothetical review where you focus on process. Further details of this assignment will be discussed in class and will be posted on the Blackboard system.

It is expected that assignments will be completed on time and submitted no later than the due dates listed in the syllabus. If you have a situation that warrants

3

submitting an assignment late, you must inform the instructor prior to the due date of that assignment. Your request will be considered, provided it is reasonable and is not a regular occurrence. Credit will be deducted for late assignments that were not given prior approval. Reading reflections will not be accepted late.

All work (excluding your weekly reading reflections) is to be handed in electronically through the Blackboard system prior to the start of class on the date that it is due.

Letter grades will be assigned as follows:Grading Scale

A A- B+ B B- C+ C F93-100 points

90-92 points

86-89 points

83-85 points

80-82 points

77-79 points

73-76 points

72 points or below

ACADEMIC INTEGRITY

It is expected that all work completed in this class is the original work of the student. Students are expected to follow the UC Student Code of Conduct guidelines related to cheating and plagiarism. The UC Code of Conduct defines plagiarism as:

Submitting another’s published or unpublished work, in whole, in part, or in paraphrase, as one’s own without fully and properly crediting the author with footnotes, citations or bibliographical reference.

Submitting as one’s own, original work, material obtained from an individual or agency without reference to the person or agency as the source of the material.

Submitting as one’s own, original work, material that has been produced through unacknowledged collaboration with others without release in writing from collaborators.

For a complete discussion on how to avoid plagiarism, consult the following website:http://www.libraries.uc.edu/research/plagiarism.html

For more information on the student code of conduct, consult the following website: http://www.uc.edu/studentlife/conduct/conduct.html

4

STUDENTS WITH DISABILITIES

Students with disabilities needing academic accommodation should:1. Register with and provide documentation to the Disability Services Office; and2. Bring a letter to the instructor indicating the need for accommodation and what

type. This should be done during the first week of class.

This syllabus and other class materials are available in alternative format upon request.

For more information about services available to UC students with disabilities, contact the:

DISABILITY SERVICES210 University Pavilion513 556-6823513 556-3277 TTY; 513 556-1383 FAXContact via relay by dialing 711http://www.uc.edu/sas/disability

5

COURSE SCHEDULE

Date Topics Readings Due Assignment Due4/2

*online session* Introduction -- --

4/9 Uses and Trends in Program Evaluation Fitzpatrick, Sanders, & Worthen – Ch. 1, 2

--

4/16 Different Types of Program Evaluation Fitzpatrick, Sanders, & Worthen – Ch. 3,4,5

--

4/23 Different Types of Program Evaluation (cont.) Fitzpatrick, Sanders, & Worthen – Ch. 6,7,8,9

--

4/30 Accreditation TBD (On Blackboard) --5/7 Other Program Evaluation Methods Fitzpatrick, Sanders, &

Worthen – Ch. 19, 20 TBD

Program Evaluation Overview

5/14 Developing Evaluation Criteria Planning for Evaluations

Fitzpatrick, Sanders, & Worthen – Ch. 10,11,12,13

Expert Evaluation Project

5/21 Conducting the Evaluation and Collecting Data Fitzpatrick, Sanders, & Worthen – Ch. 14, 15

TBD (on Blackboard)

--

5/28 Evaluation Reports Fitzpatrick, Sanders, & Worthen – Ch. 16

TBD (on Blackboard)

--

6/4 Ethical Considerations and Program Evaluation Standards

Fitzpatrick, Sanders, & Worthen – Ch. 17,18

Program Evaluation Standards (On Blackboard)

Program Evaluation

6/11 Future Of Program Evalation Fitzpatrick, Sanders, & Worthen – Ch. 21

Ethical Considerations Paper

Copyright © Syllabus: Shana Goldwyn 2009

6

ADDITIONAL REFERENCES

American Psychological Association. (2001). Publication manual of the American Psychological Association (5th ed.). Washington, DC: Author.

Desimone, L.M., Smith, T.M., & Ueno, K. (2006), Are teachers who need sustained, content-focused professional development getting it? An administrator’s dilemma. Educational Administration Quarterly, 42(2), 179-215.

Glickman, C.D. (2002). Leadership for learning: How to help teachers succeed. Alexandria, VA: ASCD.

Hoy, A.W., & Hoy, W.K. (2009). Instructional leadership: A research based guide to learning in schools (3rd ed.). Boston, MA: Allyn & Bacon.

Leithwood, K., Louis, K. S., Anderson, S., & Wahlstrom, K. (2004). How leadership

influences student learning. Center for Applied Research and Educational

Improvement, University of Minnesota; Ontario Institute for Studies in Education,

The University of Toronto;The Wallace Foundation. Accessed from

http://www.wallacefunds.org/NR/rdonlyres/E3BCCFA5-A88B-45D3-8E27-

B973732283C9/0/ReviewofResearchLearningFromLeadership.pdf.

Marks, H. M., & Nance, J. P. (2007). Contexts of accountability under systemic reform:

Implications for principal influence on instruction and supervision. Educational

Administration Quarterly, 43(1), 3-37.

Marzano, R.J., Pickering, D.J., & Pollock, J.E. (2001). Classroom instruction that works: Research-based strategies for increasing student achievement. Alexandria, VA: ASCD

Stein, M.K., & Nelson, B.S. (2003). Leadership content knowledge. Educational Evaluation and Policy Analysis 25(4), 423-448.

United States Department of Education: Institute of Education Sciences. (2003). Identifying and implementing educational practices supported by rigorous evidence: A user friendly guide. Washington, D.C.: Author.

7

Witziers, B., Bosker, R. J., & Kruger, M. L. (2003). Educational leadership and student achievement: The elusive search for an association. Educational Administration Quarterly, 39(3), 398-425.

Zepeda, S.J., & Meyers, R.S. (2004). Supervision across the content areas. Larchmont, NY: Eye on Education.

8