FRIT 7237

Evaluation Plan Final Project

Fall 2018

Sydney Banks
B. Maria McCardle
Jessica Shuff
Crystal Townsend
 Implementation Evaluation

This project is the result of a new collaboration between Great Southern University and

Braxton County Schools. The goal of the project is to prepare teachers of Braxton County

Georgia teachers the ability to create and utilize authentic, mathematics learning experiences,

which incorporate the New State Standards for Mathematics (NSSM) and available instructional

technologies. The implementation evaluation report for this project will focus on four questions

(see chart below) to evaluate if the goals of the project are being met. A variety of interviews,

surveys, and document analysis will be used to collect data on the program’s success. The

interviews will provide data related to the quality of the workshop. The surveys will aid in

planning support and follow-up activities. An analysis of program documents will provide

insight into the schedule of activities that took place during and following the workshop and if

they aligned with the program plan.

Implementation Questions Activities Timeline/Frequency

P1: Were the initial
experience and follow up
activities implemented as
planned?
● Initial meeting & unpacking
grade-level specific standards
in small groups
● Visiting local businesses to
discover how math is used in
real-world industries.
Monday, June 25: Introductions
and New Standards
Tuesday, June 26: Identifying
mathematics in context
P2: What is the quality of the
initial program activities?
P3: Who are the program
participants and how were
they recruited?
P4: What is the quality of
follow up and support
activities?
● Small group, collaborative
discussions, and the
implementation of problem-
based learning modules using
instructional technologies (in-
person).
● Refining and editing modules
in conjunction with GSU
faculty (wikis & e-mail).
● Up to 16 Braxton County
mathematics teachers in
elementary, middle, and high
school positions during the
2015-2016 school year via
email/paper mailings.
● Other participants included:
GSU faculty, local business
owners, & external
consultants.
● Participants will conduct self-
evaluations of module
implementations.
● Participants conduct a mid-
implementation meeting to
discuss questions and
concerns.
● Participants hold a final
meeting to discuss the teacher-
created self-evaluations,
Wednesday, June 27: Problem-
based learning and Instructional
Design; Identification/review of
Mathematics in context
Thursday, June 28: Instructional
Technology, Idea Sharing,
problem-based Learning Module
creation
Friday, June 29: Problem-based
Learning Module creation,
planning for implementation and
evaluation (action research)
July 2-July 20: Refinement of
Problem-based learning modules
through electronic communication
Recruitment was conducted
through e-mail and paper
advertisements prior to the start of
the project.
Fall 2015: Teachers conduct self-
evaluation of module
implementation
Fall 2015: Mid-implementation
meeting
Fall 2015 or Early 2016: Project
Debrief Meeting in Braxton County
 implementation, and to
identify best practices.

Summative Evaluation

The summative evaluation will assess the project’s success in meeting the goals at the

conclusion of the project based on the four objectives laid out in the initial program plan. The

summative evaluation will help answer the questions:

1. 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, 3)

2. To what extent were teachers able to implement and evaluate those modules? (Objective 4)

Data sources used for evaluation will include the Module Evaluation Rubric, NSSM

Standards, participant surveys, and teacher observation.

Evaluation Questions Objective Indicator Data Source

To what extent were teachers Create PBL Modules Modules draw on Module Evaluation
able to develop PBL modules based on local content and processes Rubric
that were connected to local businesses and from local businesses
business and industries, aligned industries and industries
with NSSM, and incorporated
appropriate uses of technology?

To what extent were teachers Create PBL Modules Module content, Module Evaluation
able to develop PBL modules addressing NSSM tasks, and Rubric, NSSM
that were connected to local assessments are Standards
business and industries, aligned aligned with
with NSSM, and incorporated appropriate NSSM
appropriate uses of technology?

To what extent were teachers Integrate technology PBL modules contain Module Evaluation
able to develop PBL modules into PBL activities that Rubric
that were connected to local experiences effectively use
business and industries, aligned technology
with NSSM, and incorporated
appropriate uses of technology?

To what extent were teachers Implement and Record of Focus Group,

able to implement and evaluate evaluate PBL implementation Participant Surveys
those modules? Modules Record of self-
evaluation

Data Collection Schedule

Dataset Date of collection Instruments Data collected by

already
developed?

Pre-Workshop June 2015 Yes Great Southern Faculty

Survey

Post-Workshop June 2016 Yes Great Southern Faculty

Survey

Participant and June 2015 Yes Evaluation Team

Project Leader
Interviews

Document July 2015 Yes Evaluation Team

analysis of July 2016
teacher-made
lesson plans

Participant Fall 2015 Yes Evaluation Team

Focus Groups July 2016

Module June 2016 Yes Evaluation Team

Evaluation
Rubric