The four types of evaluation support generic decision-making categories, following Stufflebeam’s idea.
Context Evaluation
A practical school administrator should prioritise understanding context evaluation over the other four categories of programme evaluation, even if they are all vital for managing information about educational programmes and services. Its importance often centres on three aspects that frequently influence whether decisions about educational curricula succeed or fail. Context assessment is useful for both short- and long-term planning decisions.
In many school systems, planning has evolved into an intellectual exchange between coworkers that reinforces positions taken by important decision-makers on a variety of topics. For a time, lack of expertise (maybe because of an excess of staff theorists), and dedication (fear of losing important decision makers), the planning process’s accommodations may be dismissed as administrative gimmicks that divert organisational resources from a school district’s day-to-day operations.
The second point is that context evaluation never stops or is extended for a service or project. The dynamic character of educational programmes makes them susceptible to modification, even after thorough and methodical design. The significance of the continuous nature of context evaluation might be downplayed if educational programmes were designed, produced, and implemented in a human-free environment.
ALSO READ: The featured articles published by PSM & Select the best journal for your submission: PSM Journals
Thirdly, context evaluation keeps on offering a baseline or reference point of data intended to look at the original goals and objectives of the plan. It permits close coordination between choices made following predetermined aims and objectives and the result of the project. At any point throughout a program’s lifespan, school administrators are free to review the original aims and objectives, overlay them with current events, and decide whether to continue, halt, or refocus the programme and its resources. The end effect is a reduction or avoidance of “after-the-fact” or “post-mortem” evaluations of educational programmes and services once they are finished.
Input Evaluation
The emphasis switches from planning decisions to resource allocation to meet the programme as one goes from context evaluation. A thorough assessment of this kind will yield valuable information on current initiatives and activities. It also offers a useful assessment of the effectiveness of the current programmes. There is a significant gap between what is and what is needed if, for instance, a school’s input analysis reveals a strong emphasis on highly intellectual, advanced instructional programmes while the context evaluation finds a strong need for fundamental skill emphasis. By focusing resources on areas with the most need, the building principal will be able to reduce inefficient usage and waste of limited resources with the use of this kind of input evaluation. It is suggested that resources be shifted and that their type and quantity be adjusted as a result of the input evaluation.
ALSO CHECK: Affordable Editing and Proofreading Services
Process Evaluation
Process evaluation is the definition, collection, and reporting of data whenever project staff members need it, particularly in the beginning phases of a project. Process evaluation is required to give people in charge of carrying out plans and processes regular feedback once a course of action has been approved and implementation has started. The three primary goals of process evaluation are to (1) identify or anticipate flaws in the procedural design or its execution stage; (2) supply data for pre-programmed decisions; and (3) keep a log of the procedure while it is carried out.
Read: Need and Implications of Evaluation Process in Management
Process assessment involves several tactics, one of which is to continuously evaluate the project’s possible sources of failure, such as interpersonal interactions, communication channels, and resource sufficiency.
Projecting and servicing planned decisions that the project manager must make throughout project implementation, such as selecting selected schools to participate in the project specifically, is another tactic. Another tactic is to make a list of the key components of the project design, including the concept to be taught and the volume of discussion to be held, and then use this information to describe what happens. This allows for the assessment of whether or not goals were met. Occasionally, the process or design is not to blame for the failure to achieve a goal.
It’s critical to understand that the process evaluator(s) use both official and informal methods for gathering data. This covers a variety of tools and records, such as interaction analysis, open-ended response sheets, interviews, rating scales, diaries, and semantic differential instruments used in staff meetings, as well as programme evaluation and review technique (PERT) networks.
It’s also critical to understand that the effectiveness of the context and input evaluations determines the outcome of the process assessment. Process evaluation is less necessary the more appropriate the context and input evaluations are; on the other hand, the more inadequate the context and input evaluations are, the more demanding and important it is to conduct a thorough and adequate process evaluation.
ALSO READ: The featured articles published by ABMRC & Select the best journal for your submission: ABMRC Journals
Product Evaluation
Product evaluation is the fourth category of evaluation. Its goal is to assess and evaluate results after each programme cycle as well as whenever needed throughout the project’s duration. Product evaluation provides insight into what is, but policymakers frequently utilise product expectations to define the aims and objectives of certain programmes and initiatives. Context, input, and process evaluation become more tangible when a board of trustees or an education board establishes a product aim or expectation.
The evaluation used to refer solely to the assessment of the product; context, method, and other variables had to be incorporated to enable an evaluation process that acknowledged as many of the diverse components of the overall evaluation contents as feasible. Put another way, meeting product expectations requires the use, modification, and adjustment of context, input, and process as tools, while expectations for the product themselves are real policy issues.
A range of facts need to be taken into account when evaluating a product. The context input and process evaluations can provide significant decision data if the policy setters have realistically created the product expectation, even though the product evaluation outcomes are rather accurate and simple. Adjustments to input or modifications to the process can alter product evaluations.
