Running Head: EXTENDED DAY PROGAM

EVALUATION PLAN FOR THE

EXTENDED DAY PROGRAM AT
CHARLES SPENCER
ELEMENTARY SCHOOL

APRIL 30, 2017

MEDT 8480: GROUP 5
Allison Ballard, Ginger Harn, Betsy Roth, and Elizabeth Sorrells
EXTENDED DAY PROGRAM 1

Background of the Program and Evaluation Description of the Program Being Evaluated

Extended day or after school programs refer to the programs offered to students outside

of the normal school day hours. Afterschool programs (sometimes called OST or Out-of-School

Time) serve children and youth of all ages, and encompass a broad range of focus areas

including academic support, mentoring, youth development, arts, and sports and recreation.

High quality afterschool programs generate positive outcomes for youth including improved

academic performance, classroom behavior, and health and nutrition (Youth.gov, 2017). The

purpose of the Extended Day Program at Charles Spencer Elementary is to assist students in the

content area of math. Through the help of teachers, the overall goal is a higher success rate on

the Georgia Milestones Assessment System (GMAS) as well as performance in the classroom.

Van Roekel states, expanding access to afterschool and other extended learning programs which

engage and enrich students will provide many more of our students with firm foundations for

success. Van Roekel also states, it (extended day) will also help reduce stress on many parents

to know their children are safe and supervised (Van Roekel, 2004).

To implement the Extended Day Program at Charles Spencer Elementary, Title I money

is needed to fund personnel and materials. Title I, Part A (Title I) of the Elementary and

Secondary Education Act (ESEA), as amended provides financial assistance to local educational

agencies (LEAs) and schools with high numbers or high percentages of children from low-

income families to help ensure that all children meet challenging state academic standards

(www.2.ed.gov, 2017). Without these monies, the Extended Day Program will not be possible

for students. The Extended Day Program was offered two years prior to this school year, and it

was offered Monday-Thursday from 3:45-4:45 p.m. After seeing the improvements from the

previous years, the Extended Day Program is being be offered again during the 2016-2017
EXTENDED DAY PROGRAM 2

school year. The students will meet on Tuesdays and Wednesdays from 3:30-5:00. This will

provide three additional hours of instruction time for students. Silva states, schools which

devote many hours each week to instruction in mathematics should find the students performing

better on math exams than students who get little math instruction (Silva, 2007).

Roekel states, Policymakers and school administrators in several states are extending the

school day as a strategy to provide additional learning time to struggling learners (Roekel,

2004). Keeping this in mind, the Extended Day Program is needed to address the academic

success of the students at Charles Spencer Elementary. Due to high poverty rates, there are some

students at high risk of academic failure. Data provided by the State of Georgia, shows 95% of

the student enrollment are eligible for free/reduced lunches. After examining our GMAS scores

and comparing the scores to current achievement, we identified our lowest 25% of students in

reading and math. The Extended Day Program will provide these students with intense

instruction. Sanderson (2003) states,

In the tutoring setting, students are fully engaged in the learning process and the bond

they can form with their tutor can provide a warm, supportive relationship within which

instruction occurs best. During these tutoring sessions tutors identify the strengths and

weaknesses of each student (Sanderson, 2003).

In order for the program to work effortlessly, many steps will be taken to ensure its

success. To begin, students will need to be selected for the program using GMAS scores,

TenMarks assessment scores, and teacher recommendations. The teachers will complete a

referral form (see Appendix A) with the required criteria. Once students are chosen, a

permission letter will be sent home to parents. (see Appendix B). After the letters are returned,

the students participating will be assigned to teachers hired for the extended day program.
 EXTENDED DAY PROGRAM 3

Teachers will look at the overall snapshot of data provided on the referral forms and will create

lesson plans to best serve the needs of the students involved in the Extended Day Program.

Teachers will use internal and external resources to assist students with improving on math.

The logic model presented in Table 1 will describe short, intermediate, and long-term

outcomes expected with the operation of the Extended Day Program.

Table 1

Inputs Activities Outputs Short-Term Intermediate Long-Term Outcomes

Outcomes Outcomes

Classroom Students Number of Attitudes Student Behavioral To achieve higher scores

Survey students attending Students will Begin working on the GMAS at end of
External Resources (perceptions of their the three hours per become without teacher asking school year
Khan Academy mathematical week segments comfortable with
Ten Marks understanding ) teacher. Student dependency Earn/Achieve higher
StudyJams.com Students/Teachers Lesson plans on intervention will scores on unit tests in
Promethean Teachers and Knowledge begin to decrease math each 9 weeks
Planet students will be Assessment Students will
Flipcharts involved in whole (Pre/Post) follow routine Student attendance is Pass math class for the
group instruction strong school year
Internal Resource using flipcarts on Feedback . Teachers will learn Student Actionable
Coach Books Promethean boards. students strengths Attempts to work Student is fluent in math
Attendance Log and weaknesses math problems out facts
Laptops (Materials) Teachers will lead themselves before
small group Teachers know asking for help
Snacks for instruction using which resources or
afterschool coach books with strategy to use. Students will ask for
some students. Coach books (small additional help if
Teacher/Tutor Teachers will send group), Laptops he/she is still
progress reports to (individual), struggling
Flipcharts (whole
Students site coordinator
group)
Students use
Principal/Site Students will work Skill videos/hints on
Coordinator individually on Students will show TenMarks for
laptops or other increase in fact assistance
Para (snacks) forms of technology fluency
to complete If a student misses Students will speak up
Referral Criteria TenMarks a problem, he/she in groups
(GMAS scores from assignments and fact can find mistake
previous year) fluency activities Students are speaking
when asked.
(TenMarks Midyear and asking questions
Assessment Score) Students will take a more than in the

EXTENDED DAY PROGRAM 4

weekly assessment beginning

on the Common
Core Math Apply math in
Standards taught everyday situations
during extended day
and will receive Teacher Actionable
feedback on
Teachers will move at
problems missed.
faster pace based on
student achievement

Evaluation Purpose

The Extended Day Program will need be evaluated to ensure the students are provided with

quality staff and resources. The formative evaluation will be conducted and evaluated in regards

to selection, implementation, progression, or completion of the program. To help with the

evaluation of the program, there are three evaluation questions that will need to be answered.

1. Are the students participating in the program improving academically?

This question is important in the success of the program. The point of the program is for the

students to increase their math achievement on the GMAS and report cards. To evaluate the

growth of the participating students, SLDS, the Statewide Longitudinal Data System, will be

helpful. Math surveys given to the students at the beginning and end of the program will also

give insight on the students attitudes on math and if they have improved.

2. How appropriate are the methods used for selecting students for the program?

Methods for selecting students for the program are essential. The data given on the referral form

such as GMAS scores and current progress reports from the classroom teacher will assist in

making sure the students who need the most help are selected.

3. Are students progress monitored effectively throughout the program?

EXTENDED DAY PROGRAM 5

Of course, the students must be progress monitored throughout the program. This progress

monitoring will ensure the teacher is planning to meet the needs of their students. The tools used

to monitor progress will be benchmark/assessments related to the standard being taught, as well

as reports from TenMarks , which is an external resource. Smith states, assessments allow for

teachers to reflect on their practice while making adjustments in learning environments (Smith,

2005).

Description of Evaluators

Four different evaluators will be evaluating the Extended Day Program.

Allison Ballard is one of the evaluators of the program. Currently, she holds a Masters

Degree in Educational Leadership with an emphasis in Charter School Leadership. She is

completing her Ed.S. in Instructional Technology from the University of West Georgia. At the

present time, Allison serves as the Advanced Via Individual Determination (AVID) Site

Coordinator at her school.

Ginger Harn is one of the evaluators of the program. She holds a Masters Degree in

Curriculum and Instruction, and is completing her Ed.S. in School Library Media at the

University of West Georgia. Along with her degrees, she holds both Gifted and ESOL

endorsements. She has been in the classroom or school setting for over 16 years, and is currently

teaching 4th grade math in a Title 1 elementary school.

Betsy Roth holds a Masters Degree in School Library Media. Betsy is working to

complete an Ed.S. in School Library Media from the University of West Georgia. Betsy worked

as a middle grades teacher for ten years prior to becoming a media specialist in 2011.

Elizabeth Sorrells holds a Masters Degree in Reading Instruction, and is completing her

Ed.S. in Instructional Technology from the University of West Georgia. In addition to her
EXTENDED DAY PROGRAM 6

degrees, she is obtaining a Gifted endorsement. Elizabeth has been in the classroom for three

years, and she is working as a seventh grade science teacher in a Title 1 middle school.

Methodology

Research Questions Instrument/Existing Participants Timing

Data Source

RQ1: Are students Student achievement data 71 4th/5th grade SLDS

involved in the (GMAS scores) students from
program improving Charles Spencer
academically? Elementary

Student grading reports 71 4th/5th grade August-

(progress reports) students December
report cards (a
total of two
nine weeks)

Student Perception Survey 71 4th/5th grade Inception

students (January
2017)

Teacher Perception survey 7 teachers April 30, 2017

RQ2: How Student performance on Principal/Asst. October 2016

appropriate are the standardized tests Principal
methods used for (GMAS scores) Academic Coaches
selecting students
for the program?

Teacher recommendations All students (4th December

(progress report grades) and 5th graders) at 2016
Charles Spencer
Elementary

RQ3: Are students Weekly 7 teachers Every

progress monitored assessment/benchmark 10 students/teacher Thursday from
effectively scores related to standard January 2017-
throughout the taught April 2017
program?
EXTENDED DAY PROGRAM 7

Reports from TenMarks 71 4th/5th grade Fridays from

students January 2017-
April 2017

Data

We will consider multiple sources of data when evaluating the Extended Day Program at

Charles Spencer Elementary. We will involve the stakeholders for this program when collecting

this data. Stakeholders include students, teachers, and administrators from Charles Spencer

Elementary.

With the help of our stakeholders, we have identified areas within the program to

evaluate. The data we collect through our evaluation will answer questions regarding the

students academic improvement, the student selection process, and the progress monitoring

techniques. We will use a mixed-method approach to evaluate this program. We will collect

quantitative as well as qualitative data to analyze the Extended Day program at Charles Spencer

Elementary School.

Our evaluation questions rely heavily on quantitative data. We will collect data regarding

student achievement using the students GMAS scores, and will use this data to analyze the

selection techniques that were used when choosing students for the program. We will use this

data to analyze the selection techniques that were used when choosing students for the program.

Students progress reports will be utilized to measure their academic progress throughout their

involvement in the program. Weekly assessments scores, such as benchmark results and reports

from TenMarks, will be employed to evaluate how students are being monitored within the

program.
EXTENDED DAY PROGRAM 8

We will use surveys to collect data regarding the students perceptions of the programs

effectiveness. This qualitative data will help identify aspects of the program that cannot be

measured numerically. Using a survey both at the beginning and then again at the end of the

school year will allow students to reflect on their growth throughout the program. Teacher

perceptions of the Extended Day Program will be evaluated using surveys. Surveys will also be

utilized to evaluate teacher perceptions of the Extended Day program. These surveys will

incorporate open-ended questions that would provide an opportunity for more subjective

responses from participants.

Sampling

We will use purposeful data sampling methods when evaluating the Extended Day

Program at Charles Spencer Elementary School. Because we want to know, specifically, how

the students in this program are performing, we will collect data regarding these students and

their teachers. For quantitative data, the population of the Extended Day Program, seventy-one

fourth and fifth grader students, will be gathered using student test scores and classroom grades.

However, for the qualitative data (student and teacher surveys) we will want to try to maximize

the number of responses by making the survey simple and easy to access.

Analysis

In order to obtain an accurate answer for our evaluation questions, we are going to be

using a mixed methods approach. Our questions require data to be collected in a variety of ways,

In order to determine the effectiveness of the Extended Day Program and the resources being

used, we will collect data that can be evaluated using both qualitative methods and quantitative

methods.
EXTENDED DAY PROGRAM 9

Our evaluation will focus on more quantitative data and methods than qualitative, but it is

important for us to use both to test the effectiveness of this program. However, due to the

instruments being used and the data being collected, our methods are quantitative dominant,

which allows us to better understand student achievement in regard to the extended day program.

Student achievement is crucial in understanding the how effective the program and resources are,

and this can only be measured in a quantitative way.

Although most of our data is quantitative, it is important for us to use instruments that

measure attitudes as well. The surveys will provide qualitative data, and they will allow us to

gain an understanding of how the students and teachers feel in regards to the extended day

program. Measuring the attitudes help to show how the resources and lessons are helping the

students obtain a better understanding in math skills. Also, since some of our focus is on how

the students are selected for the Extended Day Program, it is important to understand the teacher

recommendations. The teacher recommendations would count partially as qualitative data,

because they show the attitudes of the teachers. It is important to understand how students are

selected, because it gives us knowledge on what type of students need to be involved in the

extended day program.

For the Extended Day Program, quantitative data is crucial, because we want to measure

the success of the program. We would be unable to tell if the students are achieving growth if

we did not use quantitative data. Most of our data comes in the form of test scores and grades,

which is highly quantitative. The test scores, weekly assessments, grading reports, and external

resource reports help measure achievement of the students involved in the extended day

program. Many of our research questions focus on achievement, which can be more accurately

measured using the quantitative data mentioned.

EXTENDED DAY PROGRAM 10

Standards/Benchmarks

Our evaluation questions focus mostly on student achievement, but also answer how the

student/teacher attitudes impact the learning in the Extended Day Program. Our instruments and

data will allow us to obtain an understanding of the effectiveness of the extended day program.

For question one, the students will be assessed using the GMAS test Georgia Milestones

Tests and student grading reports for the quantitative data. The standards being addressed in this

question are the Georgia Performance Standards and Georgia Standards of Excellence. The

Georgia Milestones Assessments will help to show if the students are improving academically at

the end of the year. However, this question also addresses the attitude of the students. The

attitudes are being evaluated using a pre-survey, and follow-up survey. These surveys are

considered benchmarks, since they help determine a change in attitudes of the students.

Question two focuses on how students are selected for the extended day tutoring

program. GMAS scores from the previous year are used and the scores are analyzed to

determine if the student would benefit from being included in the program, so the test is used as

a benchmark assessment. In addition to using previous Georgia Milestone Scores, the teachers

provide recommendations for students who should be involved in the program. This step allows

for teachers to assess the attitudes and levels of the students, based on classroom performance.

The standards would be the Georgia Performance Standards and Georgia Standards of

Excellence, because these are being used daily in the classroom. The teacher recommendations

also focus on grades from progress reports/report cards, which can help act as a benchmark for

the students.

Question three is crucial to understanding the effectiveness of the program itself. In

order to evaluate it correctly, weekly benchmark assessments will be used. The assessments will
EXTENDED DAY PROGRAM 11

be related to the standards taught in the program, which are the Georgia Performance Standards

and Georgia Standards of Excellence for Math. Also, since there are external resources being

used, these will allow us to effectively understand student progress throughout the program.

Findings

After a thorough evaluation of the extended day program, we are confident that all major

concerns and questions have been addressed. With regards to student improvement, our team of

evaluators found sufficient evidence to suggest that the tutoring program did indeed positively

affect student mathematics standardized test scores as well as their math class averages. When

comparing last years Georgia Milestone Assessment with the current year, there is significant

growth present. The chart below shows that 86% of students involved in the program increased

their performance on the current years Georgia Milestones Assessment. Only 14% of the

students had scores that decreased and those declines were minimal.
EXTENDED DAY PROGRAM 12

The bar graph below shows the change in the student classification from 2016 to 2017 in

regard to their GMAS Math scores. This table clearly indicates a shift from beginner and

developing students to more proficient and distinguished learners.

The graph below shows the change in student Math averages from the beginning of the

school year to the end, following a one-year completion of the extended day program. Using the

data collected, it can be determined that the program had a positive impact on student math

averages. This data proves that students enrolled in the program consistently improved their

performance in their Math classes. Therefore, this data helps to support the need and relevance

of this program.
EXTENDED DAY PROGRAM 13

When reviewing the student selection process, we found that the school did an adequate

job choosing students that would benefit from the tutoring program. Teachers indicated that

they were given input in the selection process. Many of the teachers interviewed said that they

were pleased with the follow-through of the program. Many of the teachers said that they

liked how the program leader would contact the parents of students to try to get them involved

in the program. School Administrators also used test score data to target at-risk students. They

used data provided by the countys system intervention specialist to compile a list of students

who had the lowest growth in their Mathematics test scores.

When evaluating the techniques used by the program staff to progress monitor the

students, we found several areas of weakness. While there were specific forms developed for

progress monitoring, we found that staff were not using the forms consistently. For example,

while documentation showed that the staff started off recording students progress report grades

and Ten Marks results, there was an obvious decline in record keeping after the first semester of

the programs implementation. Upon review of the program records, we also noticed that
EXTENDED DAY PROGRAM 14

student attendance for the program was not recorded regularly. Student attendance in the

program would directly affect the outcome and is therefore essential when evaluating the

programs overall effectiveness.

Student surveys were given to 71 4th and 5th grade students to get their overall attitudes

towards math and math instruction. The student feedback was utilized when determining the

student perception of math before the Extended Day Program at Charles Spencer Elementary

School began. When analyzed, the student attitudes towards math were mixed. For each of the

questions, the responses were rated as always, sometimes, and never. For question one, in

regards to whether the students felt more successful working individually or in small

groups, 71.8% of students answered sometimes, 25.3% always , and 2.9% never. In question

two pertaining to the teacher being able to give extra help in math, 76% answered always and

24% sometimes. Question three referred to the use of online resources in math. 56.4% answered

sometimes, 38% always, and 5.6% never. Question four asked if students felt they were able to

complete their work in the amount of time allotted in class. 70.4% answered sometimes, 25.3%

always, and 4.3% never. Question five asked students if they struggled to complete

homework. 48% answered sometimes, 5.6 % always, and 46.4 % never. The final question, the

use of math outside of the classroom, the students answered 23.9% sometimes, 64.7% always,

and 11.4% never. The survey results gave a good insight on how students felt about math before

beginning the program.

EXTENDED DAY PROGRAM 15

In addition to student surveys, teachers were provided with the opportunity to express

their feedback on the effectiveness of the extended day program. There were seven teachers

involved in the program, and these seven teachers completed a survey about the program and the

instruction they provided. The survey was a mixture of selected-response questions and one

open-ended question. In addition to providing feedback on instruction, the teachers were asked

to rate their own satisfaction with the program. Overall, many of the teachers expressed

satisfaction with the extended day program. The chart below provides the answers provided by

the teachers who completed the survey. Many of the answers were similar with the teachers, but

they expressed differences in the external and internal resources they were using for

instruction. The open-ended question allowed them to express their views on the benefits of the

extended day program, but they also were asked to provide feedback on any improvements that

could be made. These answers were different for each teacher, but they did provide

improvements that could be used in future years to tailor the extended day program. The
EXTENDED DAY PROGRAM 16

teachers are an integral part to the success of the extended day program, so the feedback

provided by them was important in our evaluation, because it showed a different side.

Teacher Questionnaire- Selection Questions

Teacher 1 Teacher 2 Teacher 3 Teacher 4 Teacher 5 Teacher 6 Teacher 7

Q1 Khan Khan Khan Promethean Khan TenMarks, TenMarks,

Academy Academy, Academy, Planet Academy, Laptops Laptops,
Laptops Laptops Flipcharts, Coach Coach
Laptops books Books

Q2 Daily Bi Weekly Bi Weekly Daily Daily Daily Bi Weekly

Q3 9 8 6 8 8 7 8

Q4 Individual Small Individual Small Group Individual Individual Small Group

Group

Q5 Neutral Satisfied Satisfied Satisfied Satisfied Very Satisfied

Satisfied

Teacher Questionnaire- Open Ended Question

Q6: improvements and benefits of Extended Day Program

Teacher Extended Day Programs have the potential to provide struggling students and to help
1 students move from regular classes to Honors and Gifted classes. I would target students
who are potential candidates for gifted and honors.

Teacher Benefits for individual learning improvements and specific needs of the students based on
2 data

Teacher Benefits: students get more one on one time, students arent as afraid to ask questions
3 because its a smaller group of students who all struggle
Improvements: Always provide snacks, since kids are staying after school

Teacher Benefits: more individualized work for students, extra time for students to practice
4 Improvements: multiple teachers to make groups even smaller

Teacher Students have opportunity for individual attention and on particular tasks that meet their
5 needs

Teacher Students benefit from the program, because they are getting more individual instruction that
6 is tailored to fit their needs. More resources would be beneficial for the teachers to help the
students

Teacher Struggling students are getting that extra push to learn the material, and they are being given
7 more one-on-one instruction to fit their needs. Having multiple teachers to have small
EXTENDED DAY PROGRAM 17

groups (4-5 students) would be beneficial and could provide students with even more
individualized help.

Conclusions

Throughout the evaluation, we focused on different standards and benchmarks in order to

determine how effective the extended day program was. The major standards used to measure

effectiveness were the Georgia Performance Standards and the Mathematics Georgia Standards

of Excellence. Each of our evaluation questions were supported with the use of these different

standards. Based off our evaluation questions, we concluded that the program was effective in

regards to these specific standards. The data showed the external resources and extended day

instruction supported the use of these standards. Each of our three evaluation questions were tied

to the Georgia Performance Standards and the Mathematics Georgia Standards of Excellence, so

it was crucial to determine if the program was effective in regards to these standards.

To measure the standards and evaluation questions, we focused on specific benchmarks

that could show academic growth of the students involved in the extended day program. The

benchmarks used to determine effectiveness were the Georgia Milestone Assessments and math

academic grades. These benchmarks proved effective, because they showed growth for the

students who were obtaining help in the extended day program.

Overall, based on the standards and benchmarks used to measure effectiveness, the

program was successful. The students involved in the program showed growth in regards to the

standards our evaluation questions focused on and on the benchmarks they had to take.

Recommendations

Based on our evaluation of the Extended Day Program at Charles Spencer Elementary

School, we found several areas for improvement.

EXTENDED DAY PROGRAM 18

1. Progress Monitoring: Progress monitoring of students should be more consistent. While

the appropriate forms are in place, staff must be accountable for making sure all data is entered

in a timely manner. This includes data from progress reports and the Ten Marks program.

2. Attendance: Attendance should be recorded regularly and an attendance policy should be

developed. A school will not be able to monitor progress effectively from students who have

truancy issues. An attendance contract for students and parents should be developed to

communicate consequences for poor attendance in the program.

3. Add additional teachers: The extended day program consists of 71 students and 7 teachers,

so the instructional groups are around 10 students per teacher. On the student surveys, 71.8% of

the students said small group or individual instruction would help them be more

successful. Also, on the teacher surveys, more than one teacher stated adding more teachers as

an improvement on the open-ended question. By adding a few additional teachers, the

instructional groups would become even smaller, and the students would be able to have more

one-on-one time with the teachers.

EXTENDED DAY PROGRAM 19

References

Afterschool Programs | Youth.gov. (2017). Youth.gov. Retrieved from

http://youth.gov/youth-topics/afterschool-programs

Sanderson, D. R. (2003). Setting up a successful after school tutorial program: One

district's journey. Reading Improvement, 40(1), 13-20.

Silva, E. (2007). On the clock: Rethinking the way schools use time. Washington,
D.C.: Education Sector.
Smith, B., Roderick M., & Degener, S.C. (2005). Extended learning time and student
accountability: Assessing outcomes and options for elementary and middle
schools. Educational Administration Quarterly,41(2), 195-236.
Title I, Part A Program. (2017). www2.ed.gov. Retrieved from
https://www2.ed.gov/programs/titleiparta/index.html?exp=0
Van Roekel, Dennis (2004). Closing the Gap through Extended Learning Opportunities.
An NEA Policy Brief.
EXTENDED DAY PROGRAM 20

Appendix A

Teacher Recommendation Form

2017
Extended Day Program Student Referral

Childs Name:__________________________________________________________

Grade:____________ Sex: M___ F__

Homeroom Teacher:_____________________________________________________

Home
Address:______________________________________________________________________
______________________________________________________________________________
_______________________________________________________

Phone________________Cell Phone_________________ Work_________________

GMAS Math Score:__________

TenMarks Assessment Score:________

Current Report Card Average:________

EXTENDED DAY PROGRAM 21

Appendix B

Notification of Recommendation
Dear Parent/Guardian of __________________________:

Your child has been recommended to attend the Extended Day Program. Extended Day Program will begin Tuesday, January
17, 2017 and will end on Thursday, April 13, 2017. Students will attend class Monday and Tuesday from 3:30p.m. 5:00 p.m.
Participants will receive instruction in math. We are only serving 4th and 5th grade students who meet the qualifications outlined
by the program.
Bus transportation will NOT be provided; therefore, we need you to help us by ensuring that your child is picked up at 5:00p.m.
each instructional day. Provide phone numbers so that we can reach you in case of an emergency.

Students will receive a snack just before class begins.

Please complete the section below and return to your childs homeroom teacher by Thursday, January 12, 2017.

Sincerely,

_______________________________, Principal

Extended Day Program

Childs Name: ______________________________HR Teacher: ___________________

_____ I want my child to participate in the Extended Day Program.

_____ I do not wish to have my child participate in the Extended Day Program.

My child is a walker and will NOT require bus transportation.

Name of person(s) authorized to pick up your child:

Name: _____________________________________Home Phone: _________________

Name: ____________________________________ Home Phone: _________________

Address: _______________________________________________________________

Phone numbers: ______________/_____________/_____________/_______________

Home Work Cell # Cell #
EXTENDED DAY PROGRAM 22

Appendix C: Student Survey

Always Never Sometimes

I feel more
successful in a
class working
individually or
with few
students.

My teacher is
able to help me
when I need
extra help in
math.

Using online
resources
helps me better
understand
math.

I can complete
my work in the
amount of time
my teacher
gives me in
class.

I struggle to
complete
homework.

I am
comfortable
using math
outside of the
classroom.
EXTENDED DAY PROGRAM 23

Appendix D: Teacher Questionnaire

1. Circle the internal and external resources you felt helped you most while teaching
the students.

Ten Marks Khan Academy Promethean Planet Flipcharts StudyJams

Laptops Coach Books

2. How often did you use technology in your extended day classroom?

____ Daily ____ Bi Weekly ____ Rarely _____Never

3. On a scale of 1-10 how do you think the students are progressing through the
program?

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10

4. Which delivery method do you think helped the students the most?
_____ Whole Group _____ Small Group _____ Individual

5. Rate your overall satisfaction or dissatisfaction with the Extended Day Program.

1-Very Satisfied 4-Very Dissatisfied

2-Satisfied 5-Dissatisfied
3-Neutral

6. What are the benefits of the Extended Day Program and what improvements can be made?
____________________________________________________________________________
____________________________________________________________________________
____________________________________________________________________________
____________________________________________________________________________
EXTENDED DAY PROGRAM 24

Appendix E: Qualitative Metaevaluation Form

MEDT 8480
Evaluator: Ballard, Harn, Roth, Sorrells Group
5
Metaevaluato Lynn Addison, Heather Harris, 4/4/17
r Amanda Hollomon, Thomas
Stinson
NAME DATE

Overall Comments:
Good writing, explanations, well-organized, and planned. The reader can understand the evaluators intentions
for the program review.

There is no need for changes in objectives and timelines since it appears that the set objectives shall be met in
the timeline set. We propose that the program should be carried out annually. This will ensure that the
program is feasible and sustainable in the two-day a week format.

Additional Feedback:
Suggestions for formatting, editing, APA:
- remain consistent with program name - some areas have Extended Day Program; others, extended day
(lower case).
- APA - check parentheses, page numbers, and period marks - in-text citations are needed for every
statement paraphrased or quoted.
- APA - you have a specific quotation that requires a particular formatting

STANDARDS STANDARD STATEMENTS RELEVANCE TO QUALITATIVE FEEDBACK/COMMENTS

THE
EVALUATION
(CHECK ONE)
H F C H
A A L I
R I E G
D R A H
L L R L
Y Y L Y
Y
UTILITY
EXTENDED DAY PROGRAM 25

U1 Evaluator Evaluations should be conducted - The evaluators qualifications have been stated.
Credibility by qualified people who establish - Each evaluator has the qualifications to contribute their
and maintain credibility in the professional and experiential expertise to the evaluation
process.
evaluation context.
- The evaluators are active members in educational settings.
- The evaluators have matched methods to the questions
proposed in the evaluation plan.
U2 Attention to Evaluations should devote - The evaluators have demonstrated the processes supporting
Stakeholders attention to the full range of the determination of the evaluation help identify stakeholders.
individuals and groups invested in - The stakeholders and groups, who may be affected by the
evaluation findings, have been identified.
the program and affected by its
- The conditions for stakeholder engagement have been stated
evaluation. that are safe, comfortable, and contributory to authentic
participation.

U3 Negotiated Evaluation purposes should be - The evaluators have noted/addressed the three principal
Purposes identified and continually reasons why the evaluation purposes should align with
negotiated based on the needs of stakeholders needs.
- The evaluators have stated the purpose of the evaluation as
stakeholders.
based on student achievement; needs are differentiated.
- The nature of evaluation work tools expressed: assessment,
program descriptions, logic model, question matrix.

U4 Explicit Values Evaluations should clarify and
specify the individual and cultural
values underpinning purposes,
processes, and judgments.
U5 Relevant Evaluation information should
Information serve the identified and emergent
needs of stakeholders.
- The evaluators have created survey and questionnaire tools
to query stakeholders (teachers and students involved in the
program).
- Through the use of the tools mentioned, the evaluators will
demonstrate respect for the stakeholders contributions.
- The student survey tool incorporates language that may be
difficult for some students to understand; consider rewording
statements such as I feel more successful and I am more
comfortable to or Do you use? etc.
- At this stage of the evaluation plan, it is difficult to know if the
evaluators have an idea of how strong the program
participants values converge or conflict.
- The evaluators state the purpose of the evaluation and the
purpose of employing a mixed method approach to gathering
information multiple time.
- The information is well tied to the evaluation questions.
- The evaluators appear to be open to pertinent sources of
information.
- The evaluators have planned for the greatest need for relative
information - quantitative data.

U6 Meaningful Evaluations should construct - The evaluators know the stakeholders for the evaluation;
Processes and activities, descriptions, and students, teachers, and administrators who will need to have
Products judgments in ways that encourage the evaluation findings for furthering the programs funding,
etc.
participants to rediscover,
- The implemented processes noted are worth the investment
reinterpret, or revise their of time and resources.
understandings and behaviors. - The essential processes and products appear to address
diverse stakeholders needs; they do not appear to
compromise the primary purpose of the evaluation.
- The question matrix demonstrates dates/timeline when
evaluation needs of stakeholders will be collected/reviewed.
U7 Timely and Evaluations should attend to the - The timeliness and appropriateness of the communicating
Appropriate continuing information needs of and reporting is not noted in the evaluation plan.
Communicatin their multiple audiences. - The evaluation time frame is shown on a chart - to be
completed by April 2017.
g and
Reporting
U8 Concern for Evaluations should promote - It is not clear when the formal and informal assessments will
Consequences responsible and adaptive use be conducted.
and Influence while guarding against unintended - The evaluators have not demonstrated clear mechanisms of
communication that connect stakeholders.
negative consequences and
- No specific plan noted for addressing stakeholders who
misuse. counter, or sabotage, evaluation processes.
EXTENDED DAY PROGRAM 26

STANDARDS STANDARD STATEMENTS RELEVANCE TO QUALITATIVE FEEDBACK/COMMENTS

THE
EVALUATION
(CHECK ONE)
H F C H
A A L I
R I E G
D R A H
L L R L
Y Y L Y
Y
FEASIBILITY
F1 Project Evaluations should use effective - The project goals and expectations were clearly set
Management project management strategies. - correct team involving teachers and other stakeholders was
selected to steer it.
- Clear communication channels were defined and used to
realize defined milestones.
- Project risks defined a forehand and mitigated.

F2 Practical Evaluation procedures should be - The teachers employed the use of internal and external
Procedures practical and responsive to the way materials to improve student performance.
the program operates. - The correct strategies will be put in place to realize the
expected goals and objectives.
F3 Contextual Evaluations should recognize, - There were no political interests noted in the report.
Viability monitor, and balance the cultural - By targeting low income families, the project would bridge the
and political interests and needs of socio-economic gap in the society.
individuals and groups.

F4 Resource Use Evaluations should use resources - The project appears to be economically feasible.
effectively and efficiently. - The funding sources were clearly defined and a budget
appended to request.

STANDARDS STANDARD STATEMENTS RELEVANCE TO QUALITATIVE FEEDBACK/COMMENTS

THE
EVALUATION
(CHECK ONE)
H F C H
A A L I
R I E G
D R A H
L L R L
Y Y L Y
Y
PROPRIETY
P1 Responsive Evaluations should be responsive - Evaluation is clearly targeted towards the students as
and Inclusive to stakeholders and their stakeholders.
Orientation communities. - Title I community is identified.
- Are all stakeholders identified? Do they all play a role?

P2 Formal Evaluation agreements should be - Formal agreement has made between participants and
Agreements negotiated to make obligations evaluators.
explicit and take into account the - Evaluators are highly qualified to serve as such.
needs, expectations, and cultural - Expectations are clearly stated.
contexts of clients and other
stakeholders.
P3 Human Rights Evaluations should be designed - The collections of data from the Georgia Milestones test
and Respect and conducted to protect human protects students rights.
EXTENDED DAY PROGRAM 27

and legal rights and maintain the - The collection of qualitative data from teachers and students
dignity of participants and other maintains the dignity.
stakeholders.
P4 Clarity and Evaluations should be - Evaluation and data collection is fair because it includes all
Fairness understandable and fair in students instead of a chosen few.
addressing stakeholder needs and
purposes.
P5 Transparency Evaluations should provide - Will Georgia Milestones provide a complete description to
and complete descriptions of findings, show teachers, parents, the score, etc., or a vague number
Disclosure limitations, and conclusions to all broken into sections?
stakeholders, unless doing so - A lot of the data would not be able to be shared with all
would violate legal and propriety stakeholders.
obligations.
P6 Conflicts of Evaluations should openly and - There was nothing noted on conflicts of interest.
Interest honestly identify and address real
or perceived conflicts of interest
that may compromise the
evaluation.

P7 Fiscal Evaluations should account for all - Fiscal responsibility covered by Title I funding.
Responsibility expended resources and comply
with sound fiscal procedures and
processes.

STANDARDS STANDARD STATEMENTS RELEVANCE TO QUALITATIVE FEEDBACK/COMMENTS

THE
EVALUATION
(CHECK ONE)
H F C H
A A L I
R I E G
D R A H
L L R L
Y Y L Y
Y
ACCURACY
A1 Justified Evaluation conclusions and - The purpose noted is to assist students in math through the
Conclusions decisions should be explicitly extended day program.
and Decisions justified in the cultures and contexts - The evaluation will show that the increased student
achievement justifies the use of the extended day program.
where they have consequences.
- The noted stakeholders are teachers, administration,
students, parents, and policy makers.
- The evaluation covers program implementation, progression,
completion, and selection.
A2 Valid Evaluation information should serve - The group proposes to use a mixed method approach with
Information the intended purposes and support both quantitative and qualitative data.
valid interpretations. - The quantitative data consists of Georgia Milestones scores,
benchmarks, grade reports, and other assessment results.
- Surveys will be used to gain students and teachers opinions
of the program.
A3 Reliable Evaluation procedures should yield - A logic model is present in this program evaluation.
Information sufficiently dependable and - The outcomes are the products that should be attained
consistent information for the because of the program.
- The description of the program is clearly included in the
intended uses.
literature.

A4 Explicit Evaluations should document - The inputs, activities, outputs, and outcomes are clearly
Program and programs and their contexts with presented in the logic model as well as the literature.
Context appropriate detail and scope for the
Descriptions evaluation purposes.
EXTENDED DAY PROGRAM 28

A5 Information Evaluations should employ - There is no mention of how information will be scheduled for
Management systematic information collection, collection, storage, verification, or review.
review, verification, and storage
methods.
A6 Sound Evaluations should employ - The costs of the evaluation are not mentioned.
Designs and technically adequate designs and
Analyses analyses that are appropriate for
the evaluation purposes.
A7 Explicit Evaluation reasoning leading from - The information from the evaluation will show if the purpose
Evaluation information and analyses to of the program (increased student achievement) was
Reasoning findings, interpretations, successful.
- The program mentions that the evaluators have met with the
conclusions and judgments should
stakeholders to come up with essential questions that will
be clearly and completely identify programs merit.
documented.
A8 Communicatio Evaluation communications should - Modes of communication other than the creation of evaluation
n and have adequate scope and guard questions with stakeholders are not mentioned.
Reporting against misconceptions, biases,
distortions, and errors.

STANDARDS STANDARD RELEVANCE TO QUALITATIVE FEEDBACK/COMMENTS

STATEMENTS THE EVALUATION
(CHECK ONE)
H F C H
A A L I
R I E G
D R A H
L L R L
Y Y L Y
Y
EVALUATION ACCOUNTABILITY
E1 Evaluation Evaluations should fully - Project purpose i.e. assisting students to improve their
Documentation document their negotiated performance in mathematics has been stated in the set timeline.
purposes and - Previous studies have motivated the time addition to the
program to realize better results.
implemented designs,
procedures, data, and
outcomes.

E2 Internal Evaluators should use - Evaluators have expert knowledge in the field.
Metaevaluation these and other - The choice of the evaluation design was motivated by the need
applicable standards to to identify met goals and ways to improve the results.
examine the
accountability of the
evaluation design,
procedures employed,
information collected, and
outcomes.

E3 External Program evaluation - Stakeholders interest should be met.

Metaevaluation sponsors, clients, - Improved students performance on the Georgia Milestones test
evaluators, and other will be used to determine projects importance.
stakeholders should
encourage the conduct of
external metaevaluations
using these and other
applicable standards.
EXTENDED DAY PROGRAM 29

Appendix F: Qualitative Metaevaluation Form

MEDT 8480
Evaluator: Allison Ballard, Ginger Harn, Elizabeth Sorrells, and Betsy Roth

Metaevaluator: Allison Ballard, Ginger Harn, Elizabeth Sorrells, and Betsy Roth 4/29/17

NAME DATE

Overall Comments:

The logic model was specific and detailed enough to let the evaluators form questions to
determine if the program was effective in increasing student achievement in the classroom as
well as on GMAS.

Additional Feedback:

StandardS STANDARD Relevance to the Evaluation (Check One) Qualitative

STATEMENTS Feedback/Comments
HARDLY FAIRLY CLEARLY HIGHLY

UTILITY

U1 Evaluator Evaluations X Evaluator

Credibility should be
conducted by credibility is
qualified people established and
who establish
and maintain the information
credibility in the provided about
evaluation
context. evaluators
supports it
U2 Attention to Evaluations X Stakeholders are
Stakeholders should devote
attention to the mentioned and
full range of the data
individuals and
groups invested collection tools
in the program support feedback
and affected by
its evaluation. from multiple
stakeholder
groups
U3 Negotiated Evaluation X -Evaluation
Purposes purposes
should be purpose is stated,
identified and and continually
continually
negotiated mentioned/used
based on the
EXTENDED DAY PROGRAM 30

needs of in the evaluation

stakeholders.
questions and
findings
-Assessments,
logic model,
program
descriptions
included
U4 Explicit Values Evaluations X -Student survey
should clarify
and specify the supports student
individual and understanding
cultural values
underpinning -
purposes,
processes, and
judgments.

U5 Relevant Evaluation X -Stated purpose

Information information
should serve of using a
the identified mixed-method
and emergent
needs of approach
stakeholders. -Evaluation
questions are
tied in
U6 Meaningful Evaluations X -Stakeholders
Processes and should construct
Products activities, are known
descriptions, -Revisits
and judgments
in ways that stakeholders
encourage needs with
participants to
rediscover, benchmarks and
reinterpret, or surveys
revise their
understandings
and behaviors.

U7 Timely and Evaluations X Deadline given,

Appropriate should attend to
Communicating the continuing but
and Reporting information communication
needs of their
multiple information not
audiences. specified
U8 Concern for Evaluations X -Nothing
Consequences should promote
and Influence responsible and mentioned about
adaptive use stakeholders
while guarding
against who could
unintended sabotage the
negative
consequences evaluation
and misuse.
EXTENDED DAY PROGRAM 31

StandardS STANDARD Relevance to the Evaluation (Check One) Qualitative

STATEMENTS Feedback/Comments
HARDLY FAIRLY CLEARLY HIGHLY

FEASIBILITY

F1 Project Evaluations X -Project goals

Management should use
effective project were set
management -Project risks
strategies.
were mentioned
-
F2 Practical Evaluation x -The stakeholders
Procedures procedures
should be were aware and
practical and understood the
responsive to the
way the program purpose and goal
operates. of the Extended
Day Program.
F3 Contextual Evaluations X -Political context
Viability should recognize,
monitor, and was not
balance the mentioned
cultural and
political interests
and needs of
individuals and
groups.

F4 Resource Evaluations X -Program is

Use should use
resources economically
effectively and feasible
efficiently.

StandardS STANDARD Relevance to the Evaluation (Check One) Qualitative

STATEMENTS Feedback/Commen
HARDL FAIRL CLEARL HIGHLY ts
Y Y Y

PROPRIETY

P Responsive Evaluations x -The

1 and should be
Inclusive responsive to stakeholders
Orientation stakeholders were identified
and their
communities. and
participated in
the decisions
by using the
surveys and
data.
EXTENDED DAY PROGRAM 32

P Formal Evaluation x -An evaluation

2 Agreements agreements
should be contract was
negotiated to attached.
make
obligations
explicit and take
into account the
needs,
expectations,
and cultural
contexts of
clients and other
stakeholders.

P Human Evaluations x -Human rights

3 Rights and should be
Respect designed and and legal rights
conducted to of participants
protect human
and legal rights were respected.
and maintain
the dignity of
participants and
other
stakeholders.

P Clarity and Evaluations x -The

4 Fairness should be
understandable evaluation
and fair in report was
addressing
stakeholder clear and
needs and concise on the
purposes.
information
being
presented to
the
stakeholders.
P Transparenc Evaluations x -A description
5 y and should provide
Disclosure complete of the findings
descriptions of from the
findings,
limitations, and surveys and
conclusions to GMAS scores
all stakeholders,
unless doing so were present.
would violate
legal and
propriety
obligations.

P Conflicts of Evaluations x -Conflict was

6 Interest should openly
and honestly interests were
identify and not present in
address real or
perceived this evaluation.
conflicts of
interest that
may
compromise the
evaluation.
EXTENDED DAY PROGRAM 33

P Fiscal Evaluations x -Funded by

7 Responsibilit should account
y for all expended Title 1 monies.
resources and
comply with
sound fiscal
procedures and
processes.

StandardS STANDARD Relevance to the Evaluation (Check One) Qualitative

STATEMENTS Feedback/Commen
HARDL FAIRLY CLEARL HIGHL ts
Y Y Y

ACCURACY

A Justified Conclusions Evaluation x -The

1 and Decisions conclusions
and decisions professional
should be background of
explicitly
justified in the the evaluators
cultures and was given, but
contexts where
they have the
consequences. responsibilities
of each
member of the
evaluation
team was not
given
directly.
A Valid Information Evaluation x -Stakeholders
2 information
should serve could
the intended understand the
purposes and
support valid key terms and
interpretations. could identify
problems in
areas of the
evaluation.
A Reliable Information Evaluation x -The logic
3 procedures
should yield model was
sufficiently specific on the
dependable
and consistent inputs and
information for outcomes that
the intended
uses. would provide
information for
intended use.
A Explicit Program and Evaluations x -Presented in
4 Context Descriptions should
document the logic
programs and model with
their contexts
EXTENDED DAY PROGRAM 34

with specific
appropriate
detail and purposes.
scope for the
evaluation
purposes.

A Information Evaluations x Sources of

5 Management should employ
systematic information
information were included
collection,
review, to provide
verification, accurate
and storage
methods. information.
A Sound Designs and Evaluations x -Chose designs
6 Analyses should employ
technically that could
adequate result in
designs and
analyses that justifiable
are appropriate conclusions.
for the
evaluation
purposes.

A Explicit Evaluation Evaluation x -Tables and

7 Reasoning reasoning
leading from charts were
information created for the
and analyses
to findings, evaluation
interpretations, questions.
conclusions
and judgments
should be
clearly and
completely
documented.

A Communication and Evaluation x -Background

8 Reporting communication
s should have and
adequate information
scope and
guard against about the
misconception evaluators was
s, biases,
distortions, and present.
errors.

StandardS STANDARD Relevance to the Evaluation (Check One) Qualitative

STATEMENTS Feedback/Comments
HARDLY FAIRLY CLEARLY HIGHLY

EVALUATION ACCOUNTABILITY

E1 Evaluation Evaluations x -Documentation

Documentation should fully
document their and charts were
negotiated present to show
purposes and
implemented implemented
designs, designs.
procedures,
EXTENDED DAY PROGRAM 35

data, and
outcomes.

E2 Internal Evaluators x -Documentation

Metaevaluation should use these
and other on how the
applicable evaluation was
standards to
examine the implemented
accountability of provided for
the evaluation
design, stakeholders.
procedures
employed,
information
collected, and
outcomes.

E3 External Program x -External

Metaevaluation evaluation
sponsors, clients, metaevaluation
evaluators, and was attached to
other
stakeholders the Evaluation
should Plan and report.
encourage the
conduct of -Reviewed
external documentation
metaevaluations
using these and and data
other applicable collection.
standards.

Appendix G: Evaluation Contract

EVALUATION CONTRACT
This is an agreement between Allison Ballard, Betsy Roth, Elizabeth Sorrells, and Ginger Harn
(hereinafter referred to as the Evaluator) and Tammy Corbin (hereinafter referred to as the
Evaluation Client).
GENERAL INFORMATION
Title of Project: Evaluation Plan for the Extended Day Program at Charles Spencer Elementary.
Scope of Work: The Evaluator will collect data and analyze this data to answer three
evaluation questions regarding implementation or the effectiveness of the Extended Day
Program as it relates to the mutually agreed upon components of the programs operation or
intended outcomes in a formative capacity.
WORK STEPS
Work steps include the following: a) develop a program logic model for the evaluation; b)
literature review as it relates to the function of the program and/or importance of the program in
the local setting; c) develop evaluation questions that are mutually agreeable between the
Evaluator and the Evaluation Client that will drive data collection and analysis; d) identify and
document data collection methods; e) define data collection resources; f) define the sample of
EXTENDED DAY PROGRAM 36

participants for which data collection and analysis will be applicable; g) have evaluation plan
peer- and self-reviewed; h) collect or gather relevant data; i) analyze the data using valid and
reliable analysis techniques (e.g., statistics) and tools; j) review initial findings with Evaluation
Client and incorporate input as necessary; k) prepare draft evaluation report and incorporate
feedback from the Evaluation Client as necessary, and l) submit a final evaluation report.
FIELD VISITS

All on-site fieldwork, data collection, interviews, and/or observations shall be coordinated with
the Evaluation Client. Off-site fieldwork is not expected, but if required will be coordinated with
the Evaluation Client.
PROJECT MANAGEMENT
Background: The purpose of this evaluation is to formatively investigate the effectiveness of the
Extended Day program. Evaluation findings will be used to improve the program.
Performance Period: Evaluation planning will take place during October 2016-December 2016,
and data collection and analysis will occur between January 2017 and April 2017.
Type of Contract: Time and materials. Any costs of the evaluation will be covered by the
Evaluator.
CONTRACT AWARD MEETING
The Evaluator shall not begin work on the evaluation until the Evaluator and the Evaluation
Client have met and approved the evaluation plan that is outlined within this Evaluation
Contract/Statement of Work.
GENERAL REQUIREMENTS
1. If desired, the Evaluation Client may designate another organizational representative to
serve as the Evaluation Client to act on his or her behalf. A signature is needed by both the
Evaluation Client (who represents organizational/building level authority) and the designated
Evaluation Client.
2. The Evaluation Client will approve and provide access to student GMAS scores from the
2015-2016 school year.
3. The Evaluation Client will authorize surveys, interviews, or observations.
4. Requests for additional data or research beyond the items listed above will require written
approval by the Evaluation Client and will be attached to the Evaluation Contract as an
Addendum.
5. All written deliverables shall be phrased in acceptable terminology of the field; words
shall be defined in layperson language. If necessary, statistical and other technical terms shall be
defined in a glossary of terms and referenced for validity and usefulness.
6. Electronic copies of the draft deliverables will be submitted to the Evaluation Client via
email for review and feedback. When the Evaluator and Evaluation Client meet to review a
deliverable, a hard copy will also be provided by the Evaluator. If there is not a response from
the Evaluation Client within three business days from the data the item was delivered, it shall be
deemed approved. The Evaluator will have three business days to deliver the final deliverables
from the data of receipt of the Evaluation Clients comments. All deliverables shall be delivered
in software used by the Evaluation Client.
7. The Evaluation Report will be written to adhere to the APA Style (6 Edition).
th

8. A formal presentation of the evaluation findings will be conducted with the Evaluation
Client.
SPECIFIC MANDATORY TASKS AND ASSOCIATED DELIVERABLES
Description of Tasks and Associated Deliverables:
The Evaluator will provide the specific deliverables described below.
EXTENDED DAY PROGRAM 37

Deliverable 1: An Evaluation Plan which describes a background of the Extended Day

program, a program logic model, the agreed upon evaluation questions, a description of the
evaluator, a detailed description of the intended evaluation activities including the sample, data
collection methods, data analyses, relevant instruments including program documentation,
contract, and formative/summative metaevaluation forms.
Task 1: The Evaluator will develop the program logic model to be used to guide the program
evaluation. The program logic model will be shared with the Evaluation Client for feedback.
Task 2: The Evaluator will use the program logic model to identify evaluation questions. The
questions will be mutually agreed upon by the Evaluation and Evaluation Client.
Task 3: A literature review will be conducted to defend the purpose of the program, its function,
and the need for evaluation work, useful instruments, as well as to identify relevant standards
for drawing an evaluative conclusion.
Task 4: The Evaluator will develop or find instruments for collecting data, or identify relevant
existing datasets.
Task 5: The Evaluator will write a data collection and analysis plan.
Task 6: The Evaluator will have a draft of the evaluation plan formatively metaevaluated by
peers in the MEDT 8480 course.
Task 7: The evaluator will conduct a summative metaevaluation of the evaluation plan.
Deliverable 2: A data collection and analysis report to inform the Evaluation Client on the
Evaluators ability to successfully collect data and complete the relevant data analyses.
Task 1: The Evaluator will collect new or gather existing data.
Task 2: The Evaluator will use the methodology described in the evaluation plan to analyze the
data.
Task 3: The Evaluator will share the results of the data analysis with the Evaluation Client for
input, and update the Evaluation Client on emerging analyses that may be relevant or if certain
planned analyses are not feasible.
Deliverable 3: A draft evaluation report which contains all relevant components of the
evaluation report will be provided to the Evaluation Client for input and reaction.
Task 1: The Evaluator will write an evaluation report starting with the text of the evaluation
plan. First the evaluator will update this text to the past tense to reflect that the data collection
and analyses have been conducted. The specific methodologies, if different than what was
reported in the plan should be updated as well to reflect the realities of the evaluation
effort. The evaluation report will include a write up of the evaluation findings in response to the
evaluation questions, and include a description of any limitations associated with the effort, and
recommendations for improving the program as well as next steps for further evaluation work.
Deliverable 4: A final evaluation report in APA format.
Task 1: The Evaluator should decide which feedback from the Evaluation Client to include. In
some cases, the Evaluator will choose not to incorporate specific feedback, and will instead
justify the decision not to change the findings.
Task 2: A formal presentation with the Evaluation Client and any parties designated by the
Evaluation Client will be conducted to discuss findings and important recommendations.
SCHEDULE FOR DELIVERABLES
Deliverable Due Date
Evaluation Plan, which includes: April 30,2017
Background Information on Program to be Evaluated
Program Logic Model
Evaluation Questions (previously agreed upon)
Sampling Plan (if necessary)
Data Collection and Analysis Plan
EXTENDED DAY PROGRAM 38

Instruments
Evaluation Contract
External Metaevaluation (peer review) forms
Internal Metaevaluation (self-reflection) form
Data Collection and Analysis Report April 15, 2017
Draft Report for Evaluation Client to Review April 21, 2017
Evaluation Report April 26, 2017
Presentation to Evaluation Client and Organization April 30, 2017
The Evaluator shall provide all deliverables to the Evaluation Client as agreed upon in the
schedule established at the initial meeting, and outlined in the table above. Unless otherwise
specified, the number of draft copies and the number of final copies shall be the same. If for
any reason any deliverable cannot be delivered within the scheduled time frame, or the contents
of the deliverable changes, the Evaluator is required to explain why in writing to the Evaluation
Client, including a firm commitment of when the work shall be completed. This notice to the
Evaluation Client shall cite the reasons for the delay and the impact on the overall project. The
Evaluation Client shall then review the facts and issue a response in accordance within three
business days.
CHANGES TO STATEMENT OF WORK
Any changes to this statement of work shall be agreed upon and approved by both the
Evaluator and the Evaluation Client. A copy of each change will be documented and kept in a
project folder along with all other products of the program evaluation project. Any costs
associated with the changes will be at the Evaluators expense.
REPORTING REQUIREMENTS
The Evaluator will provide the Evaluation Client with weekly progress reports via email. The
progress reports shall cover all work completed during the preceding week and shall present the
work to be accomplished during the subsequent week. This report shall also identify any
problems that arose with a statement explaining how the problem was resolved. This report
shall also identify any problems that have arisen but have not been completely resolved with an
explanation.
TRAVEL AND SITE VISITS
No travel is required or expected Any unexpected travel must be pre-approved by the
Evaluation Client.
SCHOOL RESPONSIBILITIES
The school shall provide access to technical and procedural information regarding the Extended
Day program. The schools shall provide a copy of a confidentiality statement (if required) upon
request by the Evaluator. If required, the Evaluation Client agrees to work with the Evaluator to
adhere to any district-level data access or data use agreements.
CONTRACTOR EXPERIENCE REQUIREMENTS
The Evaluator will perform this evaluation as an authentic learning experience to fulfill
requirements in the Ed.S. program at the University of West Georgia, College of Education,
Department of Media and Instructional Technology. The professor for this course is Dr. Carl
Westine (Email: cwestine@westga.edu, Office Telephone: 678-839-6095).
CONFIDENTIALITY AND NONDISCLOSURE
This evaluation effort is considered to be an internal evaluation for the purposes of program
improvement, the results of which will not be released or disseminated beyond Extended Day
Program. Only staff members as approved by the Evaluation Client will be able to view the
findings of the program evaluation. All data will be kept confidential, and no student names or
identifying characteristics/information will be used in the evaluation report.
EXTENDED DAY PROGRAM 39

EVALUATION PLAN AND CONTRACT APPROVAL

The evaluation plan including the evaluation contract was reviewed and accepted by:
Evaluation Client:
Tammy Corbin
Print Name
Charles Spencer Elemenatary
Name of Organization
tcorbin @tiftschools.com
Email Address
<NOT NEEDED>
Signature Date

Evaluator:
Allison Ballard, Betsy Roth, Elizabeth Sorrells, and Ginger Harn
Print Name

Signature Date