UNIVERSITY OF CAPE COAST

COLLEGE OF EDUCATION STUDIES

FACULTY OF EDUCATIONAL FOUNDATIONS

DEPARTMENT OF BASIC EDUCATION

MASTER OF PHILOSOPHY (BASIC EDUCATION)

COURSE TITLE: CURRICULUM DEVELOPMENT,

IMPLEMENTATION & APPRAISAL IN BASIC SCHOOLS

COURSE CODE: EBS 805

LECTURER

DR. H.D. ANGBING

INDEX NUMBER: EF/BEP/19/0006

NAME: NANCY BAABA LONGDON

PRESENTATION ON:

TYPES OF CURRICULUM EVALUATION

 THURSDAY, 21ST NOVEMBER,2019.

INTRODUCTION

Curriculum planning and development of curriculum processes is incomplete without

curriculum evaluation. It is the process by which the effectiveness of curriculum in

terms of goals and what has actually been achieved is measured. Monitoring of

student progress is conducted midway to ensure that teachers are meeting

instructional objectives in a timely fashion. Evaluation comes when the curriculum

has been completed. This is done through a multi-pronged method to assess whether

the content and methodology has resulted in students having acquired the necessary

understanding or skills.

A system for periodic reviews of the implementation of each initiative must be

developed, involving communication of results, updating and revision. These

questions needs to be asked and addressed:

Is the change working in the way it was envisaged? To what degree? What is the

other issue affecting its success?

Curriculum evaluation defined

Broadly, curriculum is a system of learning experiences deliberately designed and

transacted for realizing certain goals. As for evaluation, it is a systematic process

of determining and appraising the proficiency level of a system or practice. The

proficiency level is judged on what the system or practice has accomplished in

comparison to what it was supposed to achieve in the light of its objectives.

Curriculum evaluation is an attempt to toss light on two questions: do planned

courses, programmes, activities and learning opportunities as developed and

organized actually produce desired results and how can the curriculum offerings best

be improved, Guba ans Lincoln (1981).

Evaluation, as an assessment tool is the process of examining a program or process to

determine what's working, what's not, and why?. It determines the value of learning

and training programs and acts as blueprints for judgment and improvement.

(Rossett, Sheldon, 2001)

To simply define, curriculum evaluation is mainly the determination of the extent to

which the instructional objectives have been achieved. Evaluation takes place at the

end of the curriculum transaction cycle, usually annually. As evaluation is a post

event phenomenon, good curriculum management demands periodic monitoring

which acts like a guided missile system to keep the curriculum on target. This can

take place while the course is in progress with the help of monitoring tests to

determine the effectiveness of instruction.

Curriculum evaluation, thus involves systematically appraising and measuring the

appropriateness and effectiveness of learning experiences at a particular level. A

systematic analysis of the course gives an idea about the selection and sequence of

content, the choice of teaching and assessment methods. The main aim of evaluation

is to better the course for students of the future.

TYPES OF EVALUATION

Classification of evaluation into types emanates naturally from the purpose, which

the curriculum planner has in mind before evaluating. One classification has been

identified as Direct and Indirect Evaluation by Daramola (1995).

Direct evaluation is the evaluation of the programme itself. This is done to determine

whether the programme is adequately serving its purpose or not. It involves the

assessment of goals to determine its suitability, the adequacy of the subject content

and the appropriateness of the instructional materials and personnel. It is the

programme that is to be evaluated not the students. This type of evaluation is done by

experts, who judges each of the parts of the educational programme against some

criteria to determine whether the educational programme will serve or is serving its

purpose or not.

Indirect evaluation involves the assessment of students’ performance in the

programmes. The purpose is to find out whether or not the desired behavior change

has taken place. Evaluation tools such as tests and other measuring devices are used

in this type of evaluation.

Assessing the curriculum is a key part of making sure that schools are functioning at

an adequate level. With high-stakes testing and a hefty emphasis on accountability,

assessing the curriculum is a key part of making sure that schools are functioning at

an adequate level.
According to Gafoor (2013), there are basically two primary types of evaluation,

formative and summative, that assesses academic curriculum for effectiveness.

Within each major category, there are different models that guide the assessment

process when it comes to information that is needed and how to gather it. There are

many different evaluation models, because different specialists have undergone

somewhat different experiences in learning and doing evaluation. Evaluation

specialists have proposed an array of models. Some of them include the following:

 Bradley’s Effectiveness Model

 Tyler’s objectives-centered Model

 Scriven’s Goal-Free Model

 Stake’s Responsive Model

FORMATIVE EVALUATION

A formative evaluation, sometimes referred to as internal is a method for judging the

worth of a programme while the programme activities are

forming or in progress. They can be conducted during any phase of the process. This

part of the evaluation focuses on the process.

Thus, formative evaluations are basically done on the fly. They permit the designers,

learners, instructors, and managers to monitor how well the instructional goals and

objectives are being met. Its main purpose is to catch deficiencies as soon as possible

so that the proper learning interventions can take place to allow learners master the

required skills and knowledge.

Formative evaluation is also useful in analyzing learning materials, student learning

and achievements, and teacher effectiveness. Formative evaluation is primarily a

building process which accumulates a series of components of new materials, skills,

and problems into an ultimate meaningful whole, - Wally Guyot (1978).

In addition, prototyping is used in formative evaluations to test a particular design

aspect by using one or more iterations. Thus, instead of waiting until the end of the

school year to look back on how well the curriculum worked, using a formative

evaluation allows you to get feedback on a consistent basis, according to the

Carnegie Mellon University. This type of assessment allows educators and

administrators to make changes as the school year progresses and adapt the

curriculum for different learning styles. Methods for formative evaluation may

include collecting student reflection papers after lessons, midterm course evaluations

or reviewing summaries that the students write on instructional units.

Characteristics of Formative Evaluation:

The characteristics of formative evaluation are as follows:

a. It is an integral part of the learning process.

b. It occurs, frequently, during the course of instruction.

c. Its results are made immediately known to the learners.

d. It may sometime take form of teacher observation only.

e. It reinforces learning of the students.

f. It pinpoints difficulties being faced by a weak learner.

g. Its results cannot be used for grading or placement purposes.

h. It helps in modification of instructional strategies including method of teaching,

immediately.

i. It motivates learners, as it provides them with knowledge of progress made by

them.

j. It sees role of evaluation as a process.

k. It is generally a teacher-made test.

l. It does not take much time to be constructed.

Examples of formative evaluation:

i. Monthly tests.

ii. Class tests.

iii. Periodical assessment.

iv. Teacher’s observation, etc.

SUMMATIVE EVALUATION

Summative evaluation is done at the end of a course of instruction to know to what

extent the objectives previously fixed have been accomplished. In other words, it is

the evaluation of pupils’ achievement at the end of a course.

The main objective of the summative evaluation is to assign grades to the pupils. It

indicates the degree to which the students have mastered the course content. It helps
to judge the appropriateness of instructional objectives. Summative evaluation is

generally the work of standardized tests.

It tries to compare one course with another. The approaches of summative evaluation

imply some sort of final comparison of one item or criteria against another. It has the

danger of making negative effects.

This evaluation may brand a student as a failed candidate, and thus causes frustration

and setback in the learning process of the candidate, which is an example of the

negative effect.

The traditional examinations are generally summative evaluation tools. Tests for

formative evaluation are given at regular and frequent intervals during a course;

whereas tests for summative evaluation are given at the end of a course or at the end

of a fairly long period (say, a semester).

The functions of this type of evaluation are:

(a) Crediting:

Crediting is concerned with collecting evidence that a learner has achieved some

instructional goals in contents in respect to a defined curricular programme.

(b) Certifying:

Certifying is concerned with giving evidence that the learner is able to perform a job

according to the previously determined standards.

(c) Promoting:

It is concerned with promoting pupils to next higher class.

(d) Selecting:
Selecting the pupils for different courses after completion of a particular course

structure.

Characteristics of Summative Evaluation:

a. It is terminal in nature as it comes at the end of a course of instruction (or a

programme).

b. It is judgemental in character in the sense that it judges the achievement of pupils.

c. It views evaluation “as a product”, because its chief concern is to point out the

levels of attainment.

d. It cannot be based on teachers observations only.

e. It does not pin-point difficulties faced by the learner.

f. Its results can be used for placement or grading purposes.

g. It reinforces learning of the students who has learnt an area.

h. It may or may not motivate a learner. Sometimes, it may have negative effect.

Examples of summative evaluation:

1. Traditional school and university examination

2. Teacher-made tests

3. Standardized tests

4. Practical and oral tests

5. Rating scales, etc.

Unlike formative evaluations that take place on a consistent basis, giving ongoing

feedback, summative evaluation measure curricular success by reviewing the

outcomes against benchmark standards. These are evaluations of learning for

accountability and are not necessarily used to boost the educational process,

according to educational consultant and learning specialist Judith Dodge on the

website Scholastic Teachers.

A summative evaluation (sometimes referred to as external) is a method of judging

the worth of a program at the end of the program activities (summation). The focus is

on the outcome.

All assessments can be summative (i.e., have the potential to serve a summative

function), but only some have the additional capability of serving formative

functions.

CONCLUSION

In conclusion, curriculum evaluation deals precisely with the systematic process of

determining and appraising the proficiency level of the learning experiences of a

particular level of studies. In order to plan the evaluation in accord with the most

appropriate evaluation method, it is necessary to understand the difference between

evaluation types. There are a variety of evaluation designs, and the type of evaluation

should match the development level of the programme or programme activity

appropriately. The programme stage and scope will determine the level of effort and

the methods to be used.

REFERENCES:

Daramola, S.O (1995), Curriculum Development in schools. Ilorin: Lekan Printing

Press.

Guyot, W.M. (1978). Summative and Formative Evaluation. The Journal of Business
Education. 54(3):127-129.

Rossett, A., Sheldon, K. (2001). Beyond the Podium: Delivering Training and
Performance to a Digital World . San Francisco: Jossey-Bass/Pfeiffer

Saettler, P. (1990). The Evolution of American Educational Technology . p350.

Englewood, Colorado: Libraries Unlimited, Inc.

Scriven, M. (1967). The methodology of evaluation. R.W. Tyler, R M. Gagne, M.

Scriven (eds.), Perspectives of curriculum evaluation, pp.39-83. Chicago, IL: Rand

McNally.

Cousins, J. B. (2003). "Utilization effects of participatory evaluation". In T.

Kellaghan, & D. Stufflebeam (eds.) International Handbook of Educational

Evaluation.(245-267), Boston: Klewer.

Bloom, B.S; Hastings, J.T & Madans, G. F (1971). Handbook on Formative and

Summative Evaluation of Student Learning. N. Y; Mcgraw Hill Book. CN.

Tyler R. W (1971), Basic Principles of Curriculum and Instruction Chicago and

London: The University of Chicago Press.