Module 7: Evaluation Plan

Manda Cawthon
Joshua Davis
Steven Meyers

FRIT 7237: Evaluation of Educational Needs and Programs

Dr. Lucas Jensen
Spring 2016

Implementation Evaluation

P1: Were the initial experience and follow up activities implemented as planned?
*See P4
P2: What is the quality of the initial program activities?
*See P4
P3: Who are the program participants and how were they recruited?
16 participants will take part in the project of the 153 teachers that responded to the initial survey
about teachers familiarity with NSSM. The selection process will be random, to keep the
evaluation results verifiable. The only parameter is that the teacher must teach math.
P4: What is the quality of follow up and support activities?
The quality of the implementation of the NSSM curriculum will be evaluated throughout the
course of the school year following the initial program activities and teacher development
course. Attached is a walkthrough evaluation form that each teacher enrolled in the project will
be assessed with three times during the course of the school year. It is important that the
observations be conducted within certain time periods, as to observe strengths/weaknesses, give
feedback, and allow teachers to show growth. The walkthroughs will be done by the schools
administration team and will be 30-40 minutes in duration each time. At the completion of each
observation the administrator will share their observation sheet with the teacher, pointing out
strengths/weaknesses and developing a plan of action to improve on any weaknesses.

QUALITY Scale: Walkthrough evaluation

Teacher Observed:
Grade Level:
School:
Circle which walkthrough is being conducted:

#1- August

#2- December

#3- April

Observed Item

Scale
Poor

1. Teacher

starts each topic by reviewing students

related knowledge
2. Teacher gives students the procedures to follow
3. Teacher goes through a variety of methods when
solving problems
4. Teacher uses different teaching approaches when
teaching
5. Teacher uses the implemented curriculum
recommended teaching methods
6. Teacher draw links between topics and move back
and forth between topics
7. Students compare different methods of solving a
question
8. Teacher encourages students to work in small
groups
9. Students are given opportunities to develop their own
methods of solving problems
10. Teacher incorporates technology into lessons

Good

Excellent

1
1

2
2

3
3

4
4

5
5

Reflection:
What did the teacher do well during the observation:
____________________________________________________________________________
____________________________________________________________________________
______________________________________________________________________
What are some grows for the teacher:
____________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________

Summative Evaluation
Outcome evaluation questions:

O1: To what extent were teachers able to develop PBL modules that were connected to local
business and industries, aligned with NSSM, and incorporated appropriate uses of technology?
(Objectives 1, 2, and 3)
O2: To what extent were teachers able to implement and evaluate those modules? (Objective 4)
Objective

Indicator

Data Source

1.
Create PBL Modules
based on local businesses
and industries

Modules draw on content and processes

from local businesses and industries

survey

2.
Create PBL Modules
addressing NSSM

Module content, tasks, and assessments

are aligned with appropriate NSSM

observations

3.
Integrate technology
into PBL experiences

PBL modules contain activities that

effectively use technology

survey

4.
Implement and
evaluate PBL Modules

Record of implementation
Record of self-evaluation

interviews

The summative evaluation will be conducted after January 2016 using mixed-methods
approach. Using both qualitative and quantitative data will provide a thorough analysis of the
success of the program. Objective 1, create Problem-Based Learning Modules based on local
businesses and industries, and objective 3, integrate technology into PBL experiences, will both
be assessed using a survey, providing quantitative data. The survey will address the teachers
knowledge of local business and industry connections to mathematics and implementation of
appropriate instructional technologies and will be completed online.
Objective 2, create problem-based learning modules based on New State Standards for
Mathematics, will be assessed using classroom observations. Administrators at each school will
observe teachers using problem-based learning with appropriate tasks. Administrators will also
observe whether teachers are using effective assessments aligned with NSSM.

Objective 4, implement and evaluate PBL models, will be assessed using interviews with
teacher representatives from each grade level at each school involved in the project. Interview
questions will assess teacher perception of how well PBL has been implemented, how it aligns to
NSSM, and effectiveness of PBL and NSSM on student learning.
Data Collection Plan
Evaluators who are deemed appropriate by the Braxton County Board of Education will
carry out the Data Collection process. The evaluators listed are, but are not limited to, teachers of
record (both general education and special education), award-winning teachers (i.e. Teacher of
the Year), curriculum coordinators, administrators, representatives from the district's department
of Teaching and Learning, etc. The questions evaluated stem from the objectives put forth by
the proposal made in partnership between Great Southern Universitys College of Education,
College of Science and Technology, and Braxton County Schools. The dates will be tiered as to
get a pre-evaluation, middle (formative) evaluation, and a summative evaluation. It is apparent
that growth, implementation, and knowledge of PDL and NSSM will progress as the educators
move through the PD.
Evaluation Questions

Data Collection Methods

Person(s) Responsible

Due Date (Due to scheduling,

dates TBA)

Did the PBL Modules pose

-Survey

-Teachers

After 1st Day of PD,

examples from local

-Interviews

-Curriculum Coordinators

After 3rd Day of PD

-Observations

-School Administrators

After 5th Day of PD

Did the PBL Modules created

-Survey

-Teachers

After 1st Day of PD,

address NSSM?

-Interviews

-Curriculum Coordinators

After 5th Day of PD

-Observations

-School Administrators

Two weeks after completion

-Representatives from BOE

of PD

Curriculum Coordinators

After 1st Day of PD,

businesses and industries?

Did the PD integrate

-Survey

available instructional
Technology into creating

-Interviews
-Observations

PBL modules?

-School Administrators

After 5th Day of PD

-Representatives from BOE

Nine weeks after completion

(Technology Department)

of PD

Did the educators attending

-Survey

Teachers

After 5th Day of PD,

the PD implement and

-Interviews

-Curriculum Coordinators

Two weeks after completion

-School Administrators

of PD

Representatives from BOE

Nine weeks after completion

(Technology Department)

of PD

evaluate the learning

-Observations

modules created?