Stakes Countenance With Case Study (Emily Howard)
-
Upload
lj-feliciano -
Category
Documents
-
view
40 -
download
2
Transcript of Stakes Countenance With Case Study (Emily Howard)
Participant-oriented Evaluation Participant-oriented Evaluation Approaches: Stake’s Approaches: Stake’s
Countenance Countenance
Emily HowardProgram Evaluation and Policy Analysis
Responsive EvaluationGrew out of dislike for
mechanical and preordinate evaluation methods in the late
1960s.
Characteristics include :
1. Depends on inductive reasoning
2. Uses a multiplicity of data
3. Does not follow a standard plan
4. Records multiple rather than single realities
Fitzpatrick, Sanders, Worthen 2004
Quick Vocabulary LessonQuick Vocabulary Lesson
Antecedent: A condition existing prior to instruction that may relate to outcomes. (Inputs, resources, etc.) Example: Teacher background.
Transaction: Successive engagements or dynamic encounters constituting the process of instruction. (Activities, processes, etc.) Example: Behavioral interactions.
Outcomes: The effects of the instructional experience. (Including observations and unintentional outcomes.) Example: Teacher performance.
Stake and his Countenance Stake and his Countenance The two basic acts of evaluation are description and judgment.
Insert Matrix Here
What Does it Do? What Does it Do?
Stresses importance of being responsive to realities in program and concerns of participants rather than relying on preconceptions.
The ultimate test of an evaluation’s validity is the extent to which it
increases the audience’s understanding of the entity that was evaluated.
Responsive evaluators in continuous communication with stakeholders.
Disinterested in formal objectives and formal data collection.
Affords the evaluator information needed to analyze the levels of congruency.
Events in Stake’s Countenance Events in Stake’s Countenance
clock image here
Advantages Advantages
Evaluators look at the needs for those whom the program serves.
Attempts to reflect the complexity of the program as realistically as possible.
Has great potential for gaining new insights and theories about the field and program it evaluates.
Disadvantages Disadvantages Approach accused of being too subjective.
Possibly over-minimizes the importance of data collection instruments and quantitative evaluation.
Can be cost prohibitive and labor intensive.
Case Study: Case Study: Evaluating an Environmental Education Evaluating an Environmental Education
Professional Development Course Professional Development Course Purpose: “Evaluate an environmental education professional development course using Stake’s Countenance Model as the organizational framework.”
Case BackgroundCase Background
Evaluation of a Chesapeake Watershed Ecology course.
Course designed to educate teachers about research and
instructional strategies used to investigate community environmental issues.
Course included laboratory procedures, data collection trips,
and data analysis.
Evaluation Methodology Evaluation Methodology Criterion levels were established to judge discrepancies between what
was intended and what was observed to occur.
Antecedents:Teacher background
Appropriate curriculumResource availability
Transactions:Component participationBehavioral interactionsCourse choreography
Outcomes:Improved performance
Teacher attitudesIntent to use
Data Collection Instruments:1. Pretest2. Posttest3. Teacher opinion survey4. Expert opinion questionnaire 5. Attendance records6. Background information7. Teacher journals 8. Instructor journal
Unexpected Outcomes:Enhanced professional
confidenceNot enough time to study and
reflectAdministrative barriers to
implementing what they learned
The table shows the outstandingcharacteristics of the course.
The table compares intents toobservations and describes the judgment standards and thejudgment of the evaluator.
Countenance Matrix
Evaluation Results & Summary Evaluation Results & Summary Benefit of using Stake’s
Countenance:
• Facilitated in-depth understanding of the course.
• Revealed unanticipated consequences as well as reasons and consequences for the effects.
Results of Evaluation:
1. Teachers were familiar with basic concepts but not advanced techniques.
2. Established importance of ties between perceived resource ability, class participation, and curricular choices.
3. Linked knowledge gains and improved professional confidence expressed by the teachers.
Quality of the Case Study Quality of the Case Study
Would different techniques have yielded different results?
Would other techniques have been more or less helpful?
Some of the judgments could have possibly been culled from survey results as well.
Did not see voice of the evaluator. Judgments largely a result of participant experience and rating.
Does the evaluator do more than facilitate? Does the evaluator make “big picture” observations?
Is the technique more than the matrix, and is an evaluator necessary?
Case study did not tackle a complex issue, hard to judge the technique.
Tool seemed well-suited to case; in education evaluation should be participant-oriented.
Questions Observations
Questions?Questions?
Graphic
Emily HowardParticipant-oriented Evaluation: Stake’s Countenance