Fundamental Issues in Education and Social Program

Order ID	53563633773
Type	Essay
Writer Level	Masters
Style	APA
Sources/References	4
Perfect Number of Pages to Order	5-10 Pages

Description/Paper Instructions

Fundamental Issues in Education and Social Program

42

 

The Role for an Evaluator: A Fundamental Issue for Evaluation

 

of Education and Social Programs Heng Luo

 

Department of Instructional Design, Development and Evaluation, Syracuse University 330 Huntington Hall, Syracuse University, Syracuse, NY, 13244, USA

Fundamental Issues in Education and Social Program

E-mail: heluo@syr.edu Abstract This paper discusses one of the fundamental issues in education and social program evaluation: the proper role for an evaluator. Based on respective and comparative analysis of five theorists’

positions on this fundamental issue, this paper reveals how different perspectives on other fundamental issues in evaluation such as value, methods, use and purposes can result in different roles for evaluators, and how such

difference can affect evaluators’ responsibilities in different stages of an evaluation.

 

Then the paper proposes its own resolution of the issue of evaluator’s role and discusses its implication and limitations. Keywords: Role for an evaluator, Program evaluation, Fundamental issue 1. Introduction Fundamental

 

issues in evaluation include the purpose of evaluation, the nature of evaluation, the best methods, strategies and tools of conducting evaluation, the practical concerns such as politics, clients and resources and their influence on

evaluation, as well as the roles, ethics and responsibilities of evaluators. Fundamental issues are defined as “those underlying concerns, problems, or choices that continually resurface in different guises throughout our

evaluation work.” (Smith, 2008, p.2) Although those fundamental issues will resurface periodically in the field of evaluation in new forms and cannot really be solved once and for all; the awareness of the recurring nature of such

fundamental issues can help one view the current problems in evaluation from a better historical perspective.

Fundamental Issues in Education and Social Program

By identifying and examining such fundamental issues, evaluators can have a deeper understanding of their importance, constraints and alternative solutions, thus propose a more effective, yet still impermanent resolution for

the existing problems. 1.1 Evaluator’s Role as a Fundamental Issue The fundamental issue discussed in this paper is the role for an evaluator. Over the years, many evaluation theorists have proposed different roles for

evaluators. For example, Scriven sees evaluator as a “judge” who justifies the value of an evaluand and offers his summative judgment in the final report; while Stake believes an evaluator should be a “program facilitator” who

works with different stakeholders and assists them to “discover ideas, answers, and solutions within their own mind”.

Fundamental Issues in Education and Social Program

Campbell prefers a “methodologist” role for an evaluator, advocating rigorous experiment design that yields strong causal inferences; but Whole believes an evaluator should be an “educator”, whose role is to infuse useful

information to the potential users of the evaluation. The emphasis resides not only in the immediate outcome of a program, but also in the inputs, implementation and long-term outcome of the program. However, terms such as

“judge”, “methodologist” and “educator” are just metaphors to facilitate understanding and cannot always accurately describe the role an evaluator plays during an evaluation. In fact, evaluators often play different roles in

different phases of an evaluation.

Fundamental Issues in Education and Social Program

For example, an evaluator can be a judge during the phase of selecting criteria of merit, a methodologist when collecting data, a program facilitator during the program implementation, and an educator during the results

dissemination. The roles an evaluator takes during an evaluation reflect his or her beliefs in other fundamental issues such as theories, values, methods, practice and use, etc. Other issues such as education background,

previous working experiences, the nature and setting of social programs might also contribute to shaping the proper roles for an evaluator. 1.2 Importance of Evaluator’s Role as a Fundamental Issue Just like any other

fundamental issue in evaluation, there is no final resolution to defining the proper role for an evaluator. However, studying the different roles an evaluator can play, as proposed by different theorists, is still quite important for

evaluators, clients and evaluation as a profession. Turning first to evaluators, studying the different roles for an evaluator is actually studying the different approaches of conducting evaluation. An evaluator’s role is not self-

claimed; rather it is defined by the things an

Fundamental Issues in Education and Social Program

International Education Studies Vol. 3, No. 2; May 2010

Fundamental Issues in Education and Social Program

43

Fundamental Issues in Education and Social Program

evaluator does during the evaluation. For instance, we wouldn’t use the metaphor “judge” to describe the evaluator’s role in Scriven’s theory if evaluators’ job doesn’t include determining the criteria of merits, setting comparative standards and giving a final summative judgment. Or we wouldn’t compare the role of evaluator in Weiss’s theory to an educator if providing “enlightenment” (Note 1) is not a primary task for her evaluators. The familiarity with different roles an evaluator can play allows one to take a more flexible approach to conduct evaluation according to specific context, the nature of social program, available resources, and different client expectations.

As for the clients of an evaluation, the awareness of the different roles of an evaluator can play will help them select the right candidate according to their specific needs; and reach an agreement with the selected evaluator about his/her job responsibilities as well as the obligations clients shall make in order to facilitate the evaluation process. For example, for a program that does not welcome intrusion, an evaluator who prefers doing an experiment might not be the best candidate. For an evaluator who prefers the role as a “program facilitator”, program administrators should anticipate frequent meetings with the evaluator and make incremental changes according to his/her feedback.

The basic knowledge about evaluator’s roles is especially important in today’s world of globalization, where evaluation in a different nation or culture becomes more common. Clarifying the role an evaluator should play beforehand is a good way to avoid surprise, misunderstanding, and conflict later on. Finally, evaluation as a profession will benefit from a deeper understanding of the roles of evaluators. How is an evaluator different from a social scientist? Can a methodologist be hired to do the job of an evaluator? What is the difference between evaluation and research? What are the competencies that are unique for an evaluator? Those questions are raised due to the lack of distinction between evaluation and other social science professions.

Explicating the proper roles for a professional evaluator will be a good approach to address such distinction and solidify the status of evaluation as a profession. 2. Theorists’ Positions on the Fundamental Issue of Evaluator’s Role Many theorists in the field of evaluation have different opinions regarding the proper roles for an evaluator. Their opinions on this issue reflect their overall philosophy about doing evaluation as well as their stances on other fundamental issues in evaluation. This section will first discuss the resolutions proposed by different theorists regarding the role of evaluator, analyzing the strength and weakness of each resolution.

Then a comparative analysis will be conducted to study the positions across those theorists. 2.1 Scriven Scriven believes that an evaluator’s role is to investigate and justify the value of an evaluand. Such investigation and justification shall be supported with joining empirical facts and probative reasoning. “Bad is bad and good is good and it is the job of evaluators to decide which is which” (Scriven, 1986, p.19). He rejects the notion that an evaluator’s role is simply to provide information to decision-makers and claims that “the arguments for keeping science value free are in general extremely bad” (Scriven, 1969, p.36). According to Scriven, an evaluator’s responsibilities during an evaluation include:

Fundamental Issues in Education and Social Program

RUBRIC QUALITY OF RESPONSE NO RESPONSE POOR / UNSATISFACTORY SATISFACTORY GOOD EXCELLENT Content (worth a maximum of 50% of the total points) Zero points:  Student failed to submit the final paper. 20 points out of 50:  The essay illustrates poor understanding of the relevant material by failing to address or incorrectly addressing the relevant content; failing to identify or inaccurately explaining/defining key concepts/ideas; ignoring or incorrectly explaining key points/claims and the reasoning behind them; and/or incorrectly or inappropriately using terminology; and elements of the response are lacking. 30 points out of 50:  The essay illustrates a rudimentary understanding of the relevant material by mentioning but not full explaining the relevant content; identifying some of the key concepts/ideas though failing to fully or accurately explain many of them; using terminology, though sometimes inaccurately or inappropriately; and/or incorporating some key claims/points but failing to explain the reasoning behind them or doing so inaccurately.  Elements of the required response may also be lacking. 40 points out of 50:  The essay illustrates solid understanding of the relevant material by correctly addressing most of the relevant content; identifying and explaining most of the key concepts/ideas; using correct terminology; explaining the reasoning behind most of the key points/claims; and/or where necessary or useful, substantiating some points with accurate examples.  The answer is complete. 50 points:  The essay illustrates exemplary understanding of the relevant material by thoroughly and correctly addressing the relevant content; identifying and explaining all of the key concepts/ideas; using correct terminology explaining the reasoning behind key points/claims and substantiating, as necessary/useful, points with several accurate and illuminating examples.  No aspects of the required answer are missing. Use of Sources (worth a maximum of 20% of the total points). Zero points:  Student failed to include citations and/or references. Or the student failed to submit a final paper. 5 out 20 points:  Sources are seldom cited to support statements and/or format of citations are not recognizable as APA 6th Edition format. There are major errors in the formation of the references and citations. And/or there is a major reliance on highly questionable. The Student fails to provide an adequate synthesis of research collected for the paper. 10 out 20 points:  References to scholarly sources are occasionally given; many statements seem unsubstantiated.  Frequent errors in APA 6th Edition format, leaving the reader confused about the source of the information. There are significant errors of the formation in the references and citations. And/or there is a significant use of highly questionable sources. 15 out 20 points:  Credible Scholarly sources are used effectively support claims and are, for the most part, clear and fairly represented.  APA 6th Edition is used with only a few minor errors.  There are minor errors in reference and/or citations. And/or there is some use of questionable sources. 20 points:  Credible scholarly sources are used to give compelling evidence to support claims and are clearly and fairly represented.  APA 6th Edition format is used accurately and consistently. The student uses above the maximum required references in the development of the assignment. Grammar (worth maximum of 20% of total points) Zero points:  Student failed to submit the final paper. 5 points out of 20:  The paper does not communicate ideas/points clearly due to inappropriate use of terminology and vague language; thoughts and sentences are disjointed or incomprehensible; organization lacking; and/or numerous grammatical, spelling/punctuation errors  10 points out 20:  The paper is often unclear and difficult to follow due to some inappropriate terminology and/or vague language; ideas may be fragmented, wandering and/or repetitive; poor organization; and/or some grammatical, spelling, punctuation errors 15 points out of 20:  The paper is mostly clear as a result of appropriate use of terminology and minimal vagueness; no tangents and no repetition; fairly good organization; almost perfect grammar, spelling, punctuation, and word usage. 20 points:  The paper is clear, concise, and a pleasure to read as a result of appropriate and precise use of terminology; total coherence of thoughts and presentation and logical organization; and the essay is error free. Structure of the Paper (worth 10% of total points) Zero points:  Student failed to submit the final paper. 3 points out of 10: Student needs to develop better formatting skills. The paper omits significant structural elements required for and APA 6th edition paper. Formatting of the paper has major flaws. The paper does not conform to APA 6th edition requirements whatsoever. 5 points out of 10: Appearance of final paper demonstrates the student’s limited ability to format the paper. There are significant errors in formatting and/or the total omission of major components of an APA 6th edition paper. They can include the omission of the cover page, abstract, and page numbers. Additionally the page has major formatting issues with spacing or paragraph formation. Font size might not conform to size requirements.  The student also significantly writes too large or too short of and paper 7 points out of 10: Research paper presents an above-average use of formatting skills. The paper has slight errors within the paper. This can include small errors or omissions with the cover page, abstract, page number, and headers. There could be also slight formatting issues with the document spacing or the font Additionally the paper might slightly exceed or undershoot the specific number of required written pages for the assignment. 10 points: Student provides a high-caliber, formatted paper. This includes an APA 6th edition cover page, abstract, page number, headers and is double spaced in 12’ Times Roman Font. Additionally, the paper conforms to the specific number of required written pages and neither goes over or under the specified length of the paper.

GET THIS PROJECT NOW BY CLICKING ON THIS LINK TO PLACE THE ORDER

CLICK ON THE LINK HERE:  https://phdwriters.us/orders/ordernow

Also, you can place the order at www.collegepaper.us/orders/ordernow / www.phdwriters.us/orders/ordernow
Do You Have Any Other Essay/Assignment/Class Project/Homework Related to this? Click Here Now [CLICK ME] and Have It Done by Our PhD Qualified Writers!!

Fundamental Issues in Education and Social Program

PLACE THE ORDER WITH US TODAY AND GET A PERFECT SCORE!!!