Program Evaluation

Program Evaluation

Group Members

Stephanie Dean, Abeni El-Amin, Mandy Velligan, Sabrina West,

Strategies for Teaching Adults

Self-Directed/Individual Learners

EDAC 634

Ball State University

Group Member	Roles	Commented On
Stephanie Dean	Create evaluation form and email ask, Send out evaluation form, Everyone reviews evaluation form, Write students’ responses, Everyone writes responses to group reflection, Review Paper and send comments/edits	Group 3: Social Cognitive Theory Group 5: Spiritual Learning
Abeni El-Amin	Compile individual group reflection into one response, Complete Table 1, Everyone reviews evaluation form, Write students’ responses, Everyone writes responses to group reflection, Review Paper and send comments/edits, Compile into one paper and check over grammar/APA, Submit the paper to Blackboard and post on blog	Group 2: Narrative Learning Group 3: Social Cognitive
Mandy Velligan	Everyone reviews evaluation form, Write students’ responses, Everyone writes responses to group reflection, Review Paper and send comments/edits	Group 2: Narrative Learning  Group 4: Spiritual Learning
Sabrina West	Group Leader, Complete Table 2, Everyone reviews evaluation form, Write students’ responses, Everyone writes responses to group reflection, Review Paper and send comments/edits	Group 2: Narrative Learning Group 3: Social Cognitive Theory

Professionals’ evaluation: http://sdlearning.blogspot.com/p/program-plan.html

Program Design Survey: https://www.surveymonkey.com/r/FLJPCB7

Program Design Student Responses (All)

• What do they like most about your program design?
•  What do they think should be improved? Why? And how?
• Do you agree with the evaluations or not? Why or why not?
• How would you improve your program design?

Steph Dean: We used two evaluators to look at the pros and cons of the program design we have created.  Some of the positive aspects noted by evaluators included the structure of material in the form of modules, relative brevity, and the rationale from practical programs.  One way to take that feedback to improve the program design would be to research more current programs using self-directed learning and use those to build credibility within the program.  An area of improvement noted by evaluators was the introduction to the program design. One of the evaluators felt that the introduction was much like a sales pitch. We also want educators at our school to be excited about introducing self-directed learning into the classroom.  Presenting the benefits of self-directed learning could be a way to increase excitement. 

Abeni El-Amin: What the reviewers liked most about the program design was the brevity and the module structure of the program design. Another reviewer thought we needed to link the program design to current and innovative teaching methodologies. One of the reviewers thought the introduction was complex and not concise enough. Straus’ review was constructive; however, Dr. Harsell’s review was unprofessional and provided unconstructive feedback. Further, this kind of feedback is an example of discouraging feedback which is harmful to student development and unprofessional in that his choice of words uses colloquialisms, which can be seen to learners as being demeaning and harsh. The evaluators provided feedback based on their academic preparation, experience in the classroom, and cultural context. Suggestions to improve the program design are to ensure the introduction, theoretical research, and program design align. Stronger correlations need to occur between the research and the application of the program design, so the methodology is aligned, clear, and easily executable. Overall, the program design is weak because it has few linkages to the theoretical framework of the introduction and does not incorporate major research components from literature. As a result, the overall program design is not as well-developed as possible.

Mandy Velligan: We asked two professionals working in higher education to review our program design and provide feedback.  One aspect of our program that was deemed a strength was our “relative brevity.”  I interpreted this comment to be positive as we want the program to be short but concise for the instructor.  Another area of strength of our program was the structure and design of our modules. This was based on the rational from other programs we researched. We wanted to take elements from these programs but enhance them for our self-directed learning program.  Based on the feedback on improvement, I believe we can reformat the introduction of the program to make it more enticing.  If we give additional details or examples of how this program can benefit the instructors and their students, they may be more invested and eager to participate in our program. 

Sabrina West: The feedback from our program design survey had a few items that were of interest to me. I did agree with the respondents “likes” of our program. One respondent stated they liked the “relative brevity”, which I interpreted as being clear and concise, that we did not overload our program with unnecessary features. Our other respondent liked how our modules were structured. I felt our group did an excellent job of pulling together ideas to ensure this aspect was strong and was pleased to see it recognized. To improve our design, I feel our group could research additional schools who are currently using a self-directed curriculum. This may provide a few more ideas to incorporate into our program. Our respondent’s comments on what they did not like about our program could be used to improve our final presentation. Our final presentation should highlight multiple educational institutions that are currently using a self-directed learning model. We need to build excitement about bringing this to Ball State. Providing success stories from other educational institutions and how application has benefited students in a variety of careers, will help us achieve that.

Group reflection (All)

Highlights/Process: What are the highlights, or the uniqueness, or the most significant parts of your assignment? How did you complete this assignment? What are the lessons/tips you have gained in this process? Any other information that you would like to share with us, such as how to manage one’s time, how to work with a group, and what new technology, skills, knowledge you have learned, etc.

Steph Dean: While working through the Program Design and Evaluation assignment, our group communicated well and bounced a variety of ideas off of one another. When a member was confused, we would chat to clear up any miscommunications and figure out the best way to move forward. As, we used a variety of platforms throughout the course of the assignment to communicate as a group and with the program evaluators such as GroupMe, Survey Monkey, and Box.  I would recommend future groups try these outlets to see if it works for their projects as well!  

Abeni El-Amin: The highlights of the program design were to interview instructional professionals on an ideal program structure to educate adult learners. Likewise, the most significant aspect of the assignment was to deliberate and develop the structure of a course that would appeal to adult learners. Teams should consider incorporating Tuckman’s Model (1965) as there are deliberate actions one must take to manage and move the team forward during each stage of the group dynamics model. First, observe, The Four Stages of Tuckman’s Model (1965), which include the life cycle of a team involves four stages. At each stage, the dynamics of the team change dramatically from phases of inefficiency and anxiety through a phase of high performance. The four stages are forming, storming, norming, and performing (Tuckman, 1965). Within these aspects of building high-performance teams: content, process, and feeling are the reasons why issues persist with individual and group behavior. In the forming stage team members are uncertain about roles and look outside for guidance. Some of the issues teams have are building trust, building group identity, sharing data, building clear structures, formation of factions or informal subgroups, and understanding assignment deliverables (Adams & Adams, 1997). Group leads should state goals, purpose, issues, and concerns at an initial meeting, and reiterate them often to mitigate angst. Utilizing a standard format for communication is a way to ease confusion and the discomfort of teams. Group leads should conduct teleconference meetings, as appropriate and not solely rely on informal communication methods such as electronic methods. In 1977, Tuckman developed a fifth and final stage called ‘adjourning’. The importance of the "adjourning" stage is that it involves the disengagement of relationships between team members and a brief phase of recognition for the team’s achievements (Quigley, Collins, Gibson, & Parker, 2018). 

Mandy Velligan: One of the highlights of our program is being able to provide tools to the instructor regarding the adult learner. If they can identify the different types of learners and how they best function in a self-directed environment, this can help shape their future courses. We decided early on to use the GroupMe app which I feel has been amazing for communicating and keep in touch with one another.  We also implemented Box so that we could post and edit documents in real time (as opposed to using email).  I also felt our group was welcoming so I felt comfortable asking questions or for feedback. Overall, I think our group did a good job in staying connected and making sure the project kept moving forward. 

Sabrina West: I think one of the highlights of our assignment was how well we worked together. Our group has been very communicative and open in exchanging ideas. I think one of the unique items of our assignment was asking additional questions of our participants. We learned more about the participants and their background with self-directed learning. Our process for completing this assignment was to first layout the responsibilities for each group member. Using the GroupMe app we shared ideas on what questions to include in our survey and to whom we would be sending the survey.  Communication in a distance learning situation can be very difficult. It is hard to read between the lines and always understand what your groupmates are saying. I feel our group worked together well and respected each other’s ideas for our assignment. 

Program Evaluation Table

Summary of ProgramEvaluation

Evaluators	Ideas for improving program design	Revisions/Your responses
Steph Dean	Reformat intro/highlight benefits	Update intro and Increase excitement for self-directed learning by explaining benefits to instructors and students
Abeni El-Amin	The intro, research, and the actual program design need to align. Stronger correlations need to occur between the research and the application of the program design, so the methodology is aligned, clear, and easily executable.	Overall, the program design is weak because it has few linkages to the theoretical framework of the introduction and does not incorporate major research components from literature. As a result, the overall program design is not well-developed.
Mandy Velligan	Reformat intro/highlight benefits	Update intro with additional details how the program could benefit instructors and students
Sabrina West	Highlight benefits/ensure final presentation highlights success stories of like courses	Ensure final presentation builds excitement of program with additional examples of like programs in use

References

Adams, J. R., & Adams, L. L. (1997). The virtual project: managing tomorrow's team today. PM network, 11, 37-42.

Quigley, N. R., Collins, C. G., Gibson, C. B., & Parker, S. K. (2018). Team performance archetypes: Toward a new conceptualization of team performance over time. Group & Organization Management,1059601118794344.

Tuckman, B. (1965). Developmental sequence in small groups. Psychological Bulletin, 63.