Nh responds evaluation component
This presentation is the property of its rightful owner.
Sponsored Links
1 / 18

NH RESPONDS Evaluation Component PowerPoint PPT Presentation

  • Uploaded on
  • Presentation posted in: General

NH RESPONDS Evaluation Component. Pat Mueller David Merves October 6, 2008. Why We Collect Data/Evaluate?. Somebody said you had to Inform instruction School improvement Local, state, and federal accountability Public information Choose/set policy Marketing

Download Presentation

NH RESPONDS Evaluation Component

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation

Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author.While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server.

- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - E N D - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -

Presentation Transcript

Nh responds evaluation component

NH RESPONDSEvaluation Component

Pat Mueller

David Merves

October 6, 2008

Why we collect data evaluate

Why We Collect Data/Evaluate?

  • Somebody said you had to

  • Inform instruction

  • School improvement

  • Local, state, and federal accountability

  • Public information

  • Choose/set policy

  • Marketing

  • Because that’s what all the cool kids are doing…

State personnel development improvement grants sig spdgs

State Personnel Development Improvement Grants (SIG/SPDGs)

SIG/SPDGs are measured against…

  • OSEP program performance measures

  • NH RESPONDS performance measures

Spdg program performance measures

SPDG Program Performance Measures

  • % of personnel receiving professional development (PD) on scientific-or evidence-based instructional practices.

  • % of projects that have implemented PD/training activities that are aligned with improvement strategies in the State Performance Plan (SPP).

  • % of PD/training activities provided that are based on scientific-or evidence-based instructional/behavioral practices.

Spdg program performance measures1

SPDG Program Performance Measures

  • % of PD/ training activities that are sustained through on-going and comprehensive practices (e.g., mentoring, coaching).

  • % of SPDG projects that successfully replicate the use of scientifically based or evidence-based instructional/behavioral practice in schools

Steps for conducting an evaluation

Steps for Conducting an Evaluation







1 define the criteria to be evaluated

1. Define the Criteria to Be Evaluated

  • Terminology

    • Goals Long-Term Outcomes or Impact

    • Objectives Short-term & Intermediate Outcomes

    • Activities Outputs

Two types of evaluation standards

Two Types of Evaluation Standards

  • Process/Formative: Assesses ongoing project activities

    • Begins at program implementation and continues throughout program

    • Is the program being delivered as planned?

    • Is the program progressing towards its goals and objectives?

Two types of evaluation standards1

Two Types of Evaluation Standards

  • Outcome/Summative: Assesses the program’s success and whether the program or initiative had an impact.

    • Compares the actual results to projected goals/objectives.

    • Typically used for decision making purposes

    • Important to look for unanticipated outcomes

2 logic models

2. Logic Models

  • A conceptual model that links an initiative’s goals and objectives, with expected outputs and/or outcomes.

  • Numerous types of logic models.

  • There are many other methods of illustrating the conceptual framework of an initiative.

3 writing an evaluation plan

3. Writing an Evaluation Plan

  • Components to include:

    • Program goal/objectives

    • Evaluation questions

    • Performance indicators

    • Data collection procedures

    • Data analysis method

    • Person responsible

    • Timeline

4 collecting data

4. Collecting Data

  • Process/formative data

    • Amount and type of PD provided

    • Satisfaction and utility of PD provided

    • Products developed

    • These data tend to be gathered by those providing PD

  • Outcome/Summative data

    • Reduced office discipline referrals

    • Reduced suspensions/expulsions

    • Improved reading scores

    • These data tend to be collected from the LEA or SEA

Nh responds data collection tools

NH RESPONDS Data Collection Tools

  • PD Activity Log completed by TA/PD providers

  • Minutes

    • Leadership Team meetings

    • Workgroup meetings

    • School & District Improvement Team minutes/products

  • Surveys/Interviews/Focus groups

    • Annual Participating Personnel Survey (March/April)

    • Workshop surveys

Nh responds data collection tools1

NH RESPONDS Data Collection Tools

  • Fidelity instruments (for PBIS & Literacy)

    • Benchmarks of Quality

    • School-wide Evaluation Tool

  • Existing data

    • Office Discipline Referrals

    • Suspension/expulsion data

    • Reading scores

5 analyzing data understanding results

5. Analyzing Data & Understanding Results

  • SAU/School-Level

    • Analysis of student performance to improve instruction (i.e. reading scores)

    • Analysis of school-level data to improve safety and/or climate (i.e. SET)

  • Project/Grant Level

    • Analysis of formative data for program improvement purposes

    • Aggregate analysis of all outcome data to describe impact of NH RESPONDS

6 communicate the findings reporting

6. Communicate the Findings (Reporting)

  • Provide on-going feedback to project management (what’s working/what’s not).

  • Provide on-going data to the NH Bureau related to completion of objectives and success of project efforts.

  • Provide annual report to the U.S. Department of Education related to completion of objectives and success of project efforts.

Evergreen educational consulting

Evergreen Educational Consulting


[email protected]

(802) 434-5607


  • Login