Welcome

1. Welcome Welcome Learning objective: Knowledge of evaluation paradigms

2. Evalueringsparadigms Evalueringsparadigms Stufflebeam (2000) has identfied two paradigms of evalution. The Factory Model The Travel Model

3. The Factory Model The Factory Model: Teaching and learning has been to associate with factories. Like the manager of a cotton mill, the managers in higher education could supervise employees,keep the enterprise technically up to date, and monitor the uniformity andquality of the productWithin this view of education, standardizedtesting is an important technique

4. The Factory Paradigm The Factory Paradigm: The curriculum is the means of production. The student is the raw material to be transformed into a finished and useful product. The teacher is a highly skilled technician. The outcomes of production are carefully plotted in advance according to design specifications.

5. The Factory Paradigm of education persists The Factory Paradigm of education persists Business and commercial terms such as outputs, bottom line, deregulation, accountability, destandardization, competition, and free market forces are often used

6. … Teaching is regards as … Mind set tends to view education as producing an educated workforce or making the country more competitive. Teaching is regarded as a skilled craft technical expertise solve problems with student learning applying appropriate techniques mapping of cause effect learning process

7. Factory or technology models of evaluation Factory or technology models of evaluation appear to fall short. No mass-production Not assembly-line workers Not trouble-shooters Not robots Universities are complex

8. The factory paradigm still shaping The factory paradigm still shaping The goal-oriented approach fits Focus on the intuitively appealing concept of achieving predetermined goals or objectives. Like various decision-oriented or management-oriented evaluation models which focus on inputs, processes, and products

9. The Travel Paradigm The Travel Paradigm Alternatives to the factory models. Dissatisfaction with quantitative and mechanistic approaches fostered new approaches. Different starting point: Teaching and learning seen as a travel.

10. A route, a journey A route, a journey Students travel The teacher guides Companion Students affected differently A great effort is made to plot the route so that the journey will be as rich, as fascinating, and as memorable as possible.

11. Factory models: Factory models: The evaluator focus on the stated bottom line: Did skills and knowledge improve? This is the goals-oriented approach to evaluation.

12. Travel models Travel models The evaluator will show a concern with program processes differential impacts Evaluations center on activities, transactions, and effects rather than on program goals.

13. Design and focus Design and focus Observation of program transactions; Iterative process Themes Issues Data collection Ongoing proces Observation Interviews

14. Methods employed by evaluators … Methods employed by evaluators under the travel paradigme Inspired by eg. anthropology: long-term, direct observation open-ended interviews document analysis Artefact analysis in-depth case studies Traditional quantitativ data to support conclusions drawn from qualitative data.

15. The END The End Thank you Palle Qvist http://www.plan.aau.dk/~palle