Assessment and Evaluation
Written by Shirley Taylor
Wellington College of Education, October 2000
Evaluation is an integral part of programming and consideration of it happens as part of the planning process. Universal questions such as those suggested by Reid (1996, p. 380-381) can be asked:
- What will these students be able to do differently after participation in this particular programme?
- How will students' "products" and / or "performances" be different because of the programme?
- What would these students think, say, or do differently if the programme was successful?
- Has the programme done as much as it could for these students? Has it maximised their learning?
There are two major types of evaluation:
- evaluation of a student's learning, and
- evaluation of the effectiveness of programmes.
They are linked as evaluation of each individual's learning contributes to the evaluation of the effectiveness of a programme.
The following diagram which was adapted from Sylvia Rimm's evaluation model (Rimm, 1977 in Davis & Rimm, 1998) combines the two types into one model. It can be used to evaluate a specific programme or programming over a period of time, say a year. It is not intended as an evaluation for a unit of work but could be used, for example, if a school had run a one term withdrawal enrichment programme.
Explanation of components of the model
Assessment of input
Assessment data is collected on the personnel, resources, and types of training that contribute to programmes. This is useful to ascertain whether the most appropriate personnel are running programmes, how parents and community are being involved, whether staff have had sufficient training, whether material resources were available, and whether funding was sufficient.
Assessment of process
The way in which students are identified and the way in which teaching and learning occurs are assessed. Identification needs to be inclusive and take account of potential and performance. How programmes are differentiated in terms of content, process, products, and environments and how they are delivered through various provisions or organisations such as clustering, workshops, ability grouping, class acceleration are also assessed.
Assessment of outcomes
This is where individual student outcomes are assessed in terms of skills, attitudes, achievement, and levels of independence. Schoolwide aspects may also be assessed, for example attitudes towards gifted students in the school – are they changing?
(See the following forms for specific criteria for evaluating these aspects.)
Assessment of Evaluation
Analysis of this assessment data leads to decision making about individuals and programmes. They are inevitably linked as students' progress affects whether a programme has been successful. However, it is important to assess individual student's progress within a programme, not just the group progress, or else individual needs are not being truly catered for.
Each of the three forms below provides both a framework for evaluating and an action plan. Some criteria to consider are stated. You might want to add to these. Staff involved need to decide which methods could be used to assess against particular criteria. A few have been filled in as examples.
Evaluation of programming input
| Criteria | Methods | Who carries out/is asked | Future action | When |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Most appropriate staff used in programme – necessary specific knowledge and personal characteristics | Self evaluation questionnaire Management evaluation |
Staff involved in programme Senior management |
||
| Appropriate involvement of parents | ||||
| Appropriate involvement of community personnel | ||||
| Availability of books, resources, equipment, facilities | ||||
| Funding available | ||||
| Staff had received professional development necessary to run programme effectively |
Process
| Criteria | Methods | Who carries out/is asked | Future action | When |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Identification procedures appropriate and inclusive | Questionnaires | Students, teachers involved in running programme, parents | ||
| Content was differentiated to suit needs of learners | ||||
| Process was differentiated to suit needs of learners | ||||
| Products were original and produced for a purpose | Product evaluation form Student self evaluation form | |||
| The learning environment was appropriate | ||||
| Provisions / organisations were appropriate to deliver the programmes | ||||
| Appropriate time frames for programmes |
Outcomes
| Criteria | Methods | Who carries out/is asked | Future action | When |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Programme objectives were achieved | Teacher checklist and anecdotal notes Product evaluation |
Teachers involved in programme | ||
| Individual students achieved objectives | Student self evaluation questionnaire/interview Parent questionnaire Teacher notes |
|||
| Student attitudes (including task commitment) improved | ||||
| Attitudes of others was accepting of gifted students |
Methods
Some possible methods for assessment are outlined in Gifted and Talented. Meeting Their Needs in New Zealand Schools (Ministry of Education, 2000).
Maker and Neilson (1995) explain what is needed for differentiation of content, process, product and learning environment.
Examples of student product evaluation forms and questionnaires for parents, students and resource teachers are contained in: Renzulli, J & Reis, S (1993) The schoolwide enrichment model. Australia: Hawker Brownlow.
Renzulli, J Reis, S & Smith, L (1981) The revolving door identification model. Connecticut: Creative Learning Press.
Treffinger's Model of Self Directed Learning (1975) is useful for assessing levels of self direction or independence as it specifies four levels moving from teacher directed through levels of increasing capability for autonomy.
- Teacher directed – teacher sets work; students carry it out.
- Self directed 1 – teacher sets work; students have choice.
- Self directed 2 – students involved in creating options.
- Self directed 3 – students create choices and self evaluate.
If the level of independence is assessed in this specific way then the process of programming can take this into account in terms of degree of student input, choice, and self assessment. This can be reflected in the way students are grouped.
The following checklist for rating the independent learning characteristics of students is based on Treffinger's and Maker's checklists.
Levels of self direction – criteria for assessment
Teacher directed
- Can carry out activities prescribed by and supervised by the teacher
- Cannot realistically evaluate own work
Student directed 1
- Can choose one of the options provided by the teacher
- Can choose a topic to study, from several topics
- Can choose in which order to carry out learning activities set by the teacher
- Can carry out an activity which has directions on how to carry out the task
- Needs feedback from teacher on progress
Student directed 2
- Can identify interest areas within a general topic
- Can identify with help of teacher, prerequisite skills necessary for accomplishment of project
- Can choose and carry out open-ended learning activities
- Can stick with self-identified topic if contract has set out procedures
- Can identify several sources of information on a given topic
- Needs intermittent feedback from teacher on progress towards goals
- Can pinpoint some general areas of strength and weakness in own products
Student directed 3
- Can identify problems or topics of interest
- Likes to develop own learning options
- Can set own goals
- Asks questions about new topics
- Can identify various alternative methods for accomplishing a goal
- Can identify prerequisite skills for a project
- Can select the most relevant sources of information for a study
- Can break independent study down into steps
- Can stick with self-identified topic until completed
- Can determine criteria for evaluation and self-evaluate
Evaluation, while daunting sometimes, is necessary and integral to teaching and learning. Hopefully some of the ideas outlined will be useful in your school.
References
Davis, G., & Rimm, S. (1998). Education of the gifted and talented (4th ed.) Needham Heights, MA: Allyn & Bacon.
Maker, C. J. & Neilsen, A. B. (1995). Teaching models in education of the gifted (2nd ed.) Austin, TX: PRO-EDUCATION.
Reid, N. (1996). Evaluation of programmes. In D. McAlpine & R. Moltzen (Eds.), Gifted and talented. New Zealand perspectives. Palmerston North: Massey University, ERDC Press.
Treffinger, D. (1975). Teaching for self directed learning: A priority for the gifted and talented. Gifted Child Quarterly , 19 (1), 46-59.