This week’s reading was an introduction to the theory of evaluation and I was fascinated by the different definitions of evaluation. After reading the author’s definition of the logic of evaluation, I felt that something was missing and so I decided to do some research to get a deeper understanding of the term. I realized that Russ-Eft and Preskill (2009)’s logic model works after the program has been implemented. It doesn’t explain the first step whereby a given phenomenon is studied and the steps that follow discovering the problem. I decided to find a model that helped me to understand the evaluation process in a much better way. 

Based on the model below, I came to understand that Inputs are the resources and raw materials that go into your program and this applies to any kind of program. Consider the resources that you need to operate your program, such as funding, staff, or volunteers. Some programs may require a facility, transportation services, educational materials, and other resources. During the evaluation process, the evaluator needs to understand whether they have enough input or not. Outputs on the other hand, quantify the services you provide. For example, courses offered, number of services received in an hour and so forth. 

 

The authors mentioned that evaluation is not research. When I first read that statement I didn’t agree with it. This is because after reading couple of pages some of their explanations sounded like action research. After reflecting on this statement for a few days I came to an understanding that although evaluation involves research, it differs from research because it is value-based and research is not value-based-research is based on the level of significance.

In this learning log, I would like to share my learning progress and the impression I have about the design of this course. After reading chapter six from the book, I got a clear understanding that research and evaluation are pretty much the same in how they are conducted. When I took my research classes, we talked about internal and external validity, pretest-posttest, control groups, etc. The big difference that I learned is that in research, the researcher’s main goal is to make conclusions whereas the evaluator’s goal is to make decisions based on the results. 

I like how we work in small groups for different assignments. I tend to participate more in a small group than in large group.

Towards the end of this week I realized that I need to improve on how to design evaluation questions and to have the right assumptions. 

 

As I reflected more about our method, I was reminded of triangulation of data that I covered in my research class. I believe triangulation of our data will make it easier for us to obtain more comprehensive data. 

Chapter eleven talks about creating probing questions during interview process. This is one of the areas that I need to develop. It is also very hard for me to remain neutral during the interview session.  

I appreciate the authors’ explanation that observations can be carried out more than one time and in different places. This is very important because not only can the evaluator get better results, he/she can determine how much external and internal factors impact the results.  

During this week, I got comments about my posts and the group assignment we submitted. My major takeaway from the comments I received is that questions have a great influence in the choice of evaluation method we may choose to use. This is also true with research. One may not know what method he/she is going to use until he/she has the question. 
The other thing I learned from reading chapter thirteen is that some people are more interested in numbers and others are not. It is very important to understand the population you are dealing with in order to choose the data analysis method that fits them.

I am still struggling to understand how existing framework such as UDL can be used to analyze qualitative data. Would you please explain this more explicitly? Thanks

This week Heather said that, “In class, teachers will often give out mid-quarter evaluations to help them understand how well the class is learning, and if anything needs to be changed. While many teachers do this, I feel like the ones who communicate the changes with the class, and actually incorporate changes into the second half of the class, is a great example of communicating the data and bringing about helpful changes.” She also mentioned that she has seen this done in most of the AEDT classes. Her discussion helped me to understand that sometimes changes may be applied right away and other times changes may occur after sometime.