Discussion Assignment 7

Curriculum Evaluation is intended to determine whether the newly adopted curricula is producing the
expected results and achieving the stated objectives, and this is an essential component of the
process of adopting and implementing any new program. It is also intended to collect data that will
help identify areas requiring improvement of change.
The curriculum evaluation model do exist are many, in this work, we are going to discuss three
models of curriculum evaluation:
• Davis’ Process Model
Evaluators should begin by asking for whom is the evaluation intended and what does the audience
want to find out (Neethiperumal & Saravanakumar, 2018). This model shows that teaching, course
content and examinations all rely on clearly formulated aims. 
In Davis’ Process model, evaluators should begin by asking for whom is the evaluation
Intended and what does the audience want to find out. The decision should be made in consultation
(Woods, 1988). 
Examples of prospective audiences might include: an individual teacher a group of teachers (year
level, subject department) senior administrators (senior masters/mistresses, deputies, principals)
Ministry of Education Officials, parent and community groups commercial organizations
(Neethiperumal & Saravanakumar, 2018).  
In my milieu where I teach the system of evaluation takes places every trimester in what we call
(class council). And in this school meeting all teachers intervening in the given classroom are invited,
school administration is also present, and class representatives. They sit together to evaluate how
the school term has been, and evaluate each and every student’s performance in that given term so
that the valuable recommendation can be given to each student, on how to improve the learning
practices. 

• Stake's Countenance Model

This evaluation model has been developed by Robert Stake in 1967. In this evaluation model, Stake
argued that both intentions and what actually took place must be fully described. He then divided
judgemental acts according to whether they refer to the standards used in reaching judgements or
the actual judgements themselves (Slide Share, 2015).
On my humble point of view, I would like to say that it is the best suit the needs of the learning
community, because the intended objectives are clearly defined under this model and the actual
results are also presented then it can be objective to make judgements based on the results
performed if there is any need of improvements of the results are below the intended targets of
learning, or if there is a need keeping the same pace of learning performed.
• Eisner's Connoisseurship Model

This evaluation approach emphasizes qualitative appreciation. In this evaluation approach theory,
Eisner valued recognizing and appreciating through perceptual memory, drawing from experience to
appreciate what is significant (Neethiperumal & Saravanakumar, 2018). According to Eiser,
evaluation approach is the ability both to perceive the particulars of educational life and to
understand how those particulars form part of a classroom structure (Neethiperumal &
Saravanakumar, 2018). 
The ability to identify the efforts made in the learning process is crucial because some students need
to know where they are in the learning process, if the teacher manages to identify clearly those
efforts made by the learner to be recognized and appreciated is positive.

Conclusion
The above models of curriculum evaluation presented are important in the learning community. As I
was assigned to choose the curriculum evaluation models which I see legitimate in my learning
community, I would say that all these models are genuine because all these models are designed to
indicate that teaching, course content and examinations all rely on clearly formulated aims. 
If I am not a teacher the model or combinations of models that I feel would best suit the needs of the
learning community is Stake's Countenance Model because this model provides objective
judgements as these ones rely on the results performed which are compared with the intended
targets. And the teacher should always remember to compare the actual results and the intended
objectives of learning so that the gap in between identified should be corrected in line with the needs
identified.

References

1. Neethiperumal, M., & Saravanakumar, A. R. (2018). CURRICULUM EVALUATION: A

MULTIDIMENSIONAL MODEL. Alagappa University, 1–5. https://www.researchgate.net
2. Slide Share. (2015, March 19). Curriculum Evaluation. Https://Www.Slideshare.Net.
https://www.slideshare.net/valarpink/curriculum-evaluation-46065566
3. Woods, J. D. (1988). Curriculum Evaluation Models: Practical Applications for Teachers.
Australian Journal of Teacher Education, 13(1).
http://dx.doi.org/10.14221/ajte.1988v13n2.1