Evaluating, Implementing, and Managing Instructional Programs and Projects

Evaluating the effectiveness of instruction and learning is an on-going part of teaching.  There are several models available to evaluate instructional programs against given criteria.  The two that I chose to investigate are the Logic Model and Abruzzese’s Evaluation Model.  These two models were designed for very different purposes, but both could be effectively adapted for use in evaluating classroom instruction and learning.

Logic Model

The Logic Model was designed with the idea that investments of resources (people, time, money, etc.) are directly linked to results.  The model holds that there are five core concepts that affect any program:  Inputs, Outputs, Outcomes, Assumptions, and External Factors.  In applying this to an instructional situation, the core concepts could be described in this way:

1. Inputs: What resources will be needed to present the instruction?  Are the materials appropriately aligned with the curriculum requirements?  
2. Outputs: What products will students be expected to complete to demonstrate their understanding of the concept?  Will students be given pre-tests, check-in assessments, and unit assessments or what other methods will be used to measure mastery?
3. Outcomes: What are the expectations for how this material will impact future learning?  Have appropriate measures been taken to tie this unit to past material and activate student schema?  Have bridges been built to connect this material to future material?
4. Assumptions:  Do we have student buy-in?  Are the students engaged and ready to learn?  Do the students believe they are capable of mastering the unit?
5. External Factors: Are there factors that we must consider about the unit concepts?  How will the material be received?  Is there controversial material included that could affect student engagement?  Are there pre-requisite concepts that students must have mastery of in order to be successful in this unit?

Abruzzese's Evaluation Model

Abruzzese's Evaluation Model was designed for evaluating nursing staff development modules so it is aligned directly with evaluation of instruction, learning, and effectiveness of a program.  These are the core components of the model:

1. Process evaluation: general happiness with the learning experience

2. Content evaluation: change in knowledge, affect, or skill on completion of a learning experience

3. Outcome evaluation: changes in practice on a clinical unit after a learning experience.

4. Impact evaluation – organizational results attributable in part to learning

5. Total program evaluation – congruence of program goals and accomplishments

Teachers assess learning in many ways on a regular basis from traditional pencil and paper tests to unit projects to a quick thumbs-up or thumbs-down poll during class.  Before teachers measure the effectiveness of their instruction and student learning through summative assessment pieces, there are several important components to attend to during the assessment design phase, such as: 

• Is the test material aligned with the classroom instruction and verbiage?
• Are the assessment questions written in a format that is appropriate for the content area?
• Is the assessment designed in a way that is appropriate for the age level of the students?

Students should never walk into a classroom feeling prepared for an assessment to find that these questions have not been considered!  If that happens, we have set our students up for failure rather than for success.

Situational Leadership

How would one apply the precepts of Situational Leadership to design and implement a staff development program during times of scarce resources?  This is a pressing question that the education field has been forced to address in light of the economic struggles our profession has faced over the last few years. Fortunately, teachers and administrators in our profession are amazingly creative and resourceful.  They have accepted the challenge of putting the pieces of this puzzle together with grace and professionalism!  Many new campus programs have been implemented and new leaders have stepped up to the plate.  Collaboration among teachers has become more than just a buzz word; it has become a must for all of us to be successful.

In designing a professional development program during times of thin resources, one must take into account the needs of the campus.  

• What technology resources are available on campus?  Are there classroom-assigned resources or are they shared campus-wide?  
• What is the most effective use of those resources?  
• Will the program meet cross-curricular needs?  
• Will it be applicable for all grade levels represented on campus?
• What is the engagement level of the staff toward the topic?  

Once a needs-assessment has been done, a team of grade-level or content-area leaders can be formed and a collection of topics can be developed either in brainstorming sessions or by campus polls.  When the list of topics has been developed, the leadership team can delegate the presentation among themselves or call on other campus specialists to provide their help.

It is critically important to ensure that the session presenters are well-prepared to cover the topic with relevant, easily- implemented ideas and strategies.  Teachers are inundated with the latest and greatest ideas, especially in the technology realm, but finding time to implement them is a tricky tight rope walk!  The end goal of staff development sessions is to assist the staff in making changes and taking risks to try new things.  We cannot come to teachers with a plan that is tedious, time consuming, and full of kinks or we will find that time and resources were wasted as the new ideas fall by the way side and old "I've always done it this way" mindsets are reinforced.  

We must establish a time line for implementation of the plan and monitor its use and effectiveness.  Based on the information from monitoring, we can then determine further steps for reteaching or changing direction.