Curriculum Design, Implementation and Evaluation
- 2. Meaning of Curriculum Evaluation C.G. Soumelis (1977) “.... for evaluating something or someone is to estimate worth, quality, importance, relevence, performance, etc. with a view to pricing, rating, correcting, improving or changing. For this relative nature of the concepts, evaluation as a process implies a comparison of what is to be evaluated with something which may be considered as a criterion, i.e., an ideal state whose qualities are well known to the evaluators. The criteria or standards could be either quantitative or qualitative.”
- 3. Cronbach (1963), “We may define evaluation broadly as the collection and use of information to make decisions about an educational program. ”
- 4. Stufflebeam et. al. (1971), “Evaluation is the process of delineating, obtaining and providing useful information for judging decision alternatives.”
- 5. Keith Cooper (1967), “Curriculum evaluation is the collection and provision of evidence, on the basis of which decisions can be taken about the feasibility, effectiveness and educational value of curricula.”
- 6. Oliva (1988) curriculum evaluation as the process of delineating, obtaining, and providing useful information for judging decision alternatives. The primary decision alternatives to consider based upon the evaluation results are: to maintain the curriculum as is; to modify the curriculum; or to eliminate the curriculum.
- 7. Models of Curriculum Evaluation Tyler’s Model CIPP Model Stake’s Model Roger’s Model Scriven’s Model Krikpatricks model
- 8. Different Model of Curriculum Goal – oriented model of evaluation Assessment of merit of the programme Decision –oriented model
- 9. Centre for Educational Research and Innovation(CERI 1970) g~ j¨v q wkÿvi e¨vcK jÿ¨ wba©viY we‡kl D‡Ïk¨ mbv³KiY wkÿvi AvMÖn I mvg_©¨ wbiƒcY welqe¯‘ wbe©vPb wkLb-‡kLv‡bv Kvh©vewj wbe©vPb ev¯Íevqb
- 10. Curr. Dev. & Eve. (Lewy, 1977)
- 11. wkÿvµg Dbœq‡bi avc Dbœq‡bi KvR g~j¨vq‡bi KvR mvaviY jÿ¨ wba©viY mvaviY jÿ¨ I ¯‹z‡ji msMVb m¤ú‡K wm×všÍ MÖnY cÖZ¨vwkZ cwieZ©b, mvs¯‹…wZK g~j¨, mvgvwRK kw³, eZ©gvb cvi`wk©Zvi gvb Ges m¤úv`b †hvM¨Zv m¤ú©‡K Rwic cwiKíbv -Course outlines wjLb -wkLb mvgMÖx cÖYqb -D‡Ïk¨, welqe¯‘, c×wZi Dchy³Zv wbiƒcY -wkLb mvgMÖx wePviKiY UªvB AvDU -‡kÖwYK‡ÿ wkÿv`vb gwbUwis - wkLb mvgMÖx -ch©‡eÿY, wePviKiY I wkÿK wkÿv_©xi mv‡_ Av‡jvPbvi gva¨‡g Z_¨ msMÖn
- 12. wkÿvµg Dbœq‡bi avc Dbœq‡bi KvR g~j¨vq‡bi KvR wdì Uªvqvj -wkÿvµ‡gi wKQzUv cwigvR©b -wkÿvµg e¨env‡ii me©vwaK AbyKzj Ae¯’v wba©viY -bgybv wbe©vPb -wewfbœ Ae¯’vq wkÿvµ‡gi djcÖm~Zv m¤ú©‡K Z_¨ msMÖn ev¯Íevqb cwi`k©b, cixÿv e¨e¯’v I wkÿK-cÖwkÿ‡Yi m‡½ mshy³KiY -P‚ovšÍ e¨e¯’v cixÿv -e¨e¯’v mshy³Ki‡Yi djcÖm~Zv hvPvB -wkÿK cÖwkÿ‡Yi djcÖm~Zv hvPvB gvb wbqš¿Y -mycvwik ev¯Íevqb -ÔwØZxq cÖRb¥Õ -ev¯Íevq‡bi gvb cixÿv -djcÖm~ bv nIqvi KviY we‡kølY
- 13. CIPP Model Stufflebeam (1963) Context evaluation- Planning decisions Input evaluation- Programming decisions Process evaluation- Implementing decisions Product evaluation- Recycling decisions
- 14. The CIPP Evaluation Model
- 15. CIPP View of Institutionalized Evaluation
- 16. Context (What needs to be done and in what context?) Planning Decision: What is the situation of the existing course? What is the entering ability of students? — What are the learning skills of students? — What is the motivation of students? What needs are to be addressed? — What are the objectives of the course? Is the time adequate? — Is the course relevant to job needs? — Should course be integrated or seperate? — Is there a need for the course?
- 17. Input (How should it be done?) Structuring Decisions: Are the aims suitable? —Are the objectives ‘smart’? —Is the course content clearly defined? —Does the content (KSA) match student abilities? —Is the content relevant to practical problems? —What resources/equipment are available? —What books do the teachers have? —What books do the students have? —How strong are the teaching skills of teachers? —How supportive is the classroom environment?
- 18. Process (Is it being done?) How well is the plan being implemented? What are the barriers? What revisions are needed? What is the workload of students? —How well/actively do students participate? —Are there any problems related to teaching? —Are there any problems related to learning? —Is there effective 2-way communication? —Is knowledge only transferred to students, or do they use and apply it? —Are there any problems which students face in using/applying/analysing the knowledge and skills? —Is the teaching and learning process continuously evaluated? —Is teaching and learning affected by practical/institutional problems? —How is discipline maintained?
- 19. Product (Did it succeed?) Is there one final exam at the end or several during the course? — Is there any informal assessment? — What is the quality of assessment (i.e. what levels of KSA are assessed?) — What are the students’ KSA levels after the course? — Is the evaluation carried out for the whole PCD process? — How do students use what they have learned? — How was the overall experience for the teachers and for the students? — What are the main ‘lessons learned’? — Is there an official report? — What should be done with the program?
- 20. Methods used to evaluate the curriculum —Discussion with class —Informal conversation or observation —In-depth interviews with students and teachers —Evaluation checklist —Classroom observation —Video-tape of own teaching (micro-teaching) —Organizational documents —Performance test —Questionnaire —Self-assessment —Written test
- 21. Formative and Summative Evaluation of Curriculum Formative Evaluation During the formation or development of curriculum. The aim of formative evaluation is to obtain information to improve a programme. According to Robert Stakes, When the cook tastes the soup, That’s formative evaluation; When the guests taste the soup, That’s formative evaluation. Summative Evaluation At the end of the curriculum development process. - New curriculum implemented in full (i.e. evaluate the effectiveness of the programme) - To see how far the programme objectives achieved. - Examine the outcome of the programme
- 22. CIPP Model relies on both formative and summative evaluation Formative Summative Context Input Process Product
- 23. Phases of curriculum evaluation Aspects of the curriculum to be evaluated Data Collection Analysis of information Reporting of information
- 24. THANK YOU ALL