Loading presentation...

Present Remotely

Send the link below via email or IM

Copy

Present to your audience

Start remote presentation

  • Invited audience members will follow you as you navigate and present
  • People invited to a presentation do not need a Prezi account
  • This link expires 10 minutes after you close the presentation
  • A maximum of 30 users can follow your presentation
  • Learn more about this feature in our knowledge base article

Do you really want to delete this prezi?

Neither you, nor the coeditors you shared it with will be able to recover it again.

DeleteCancel

Make your likes visible on Facebook?

Connect your Facebook account to Prezi and let your likes appear on your timeline.
You can change this under Settings & Account at any time.

No, thanks

Decision-Oriented Evaluation Approach

No description
by

LaSonya Moore

on 14 February 2014

Comments (0)

Please log in to add your comment.

Report abuse

Transcript of Decision-Oriented Evaluation Approach

Decision-Oriented Evaluation Approach
Decision-Oriented Evaluation Approach
Stufflebeam defined the CIPP model as, "the process of delinating, obtaining and provoking useful information for judging decision alternatives" (Stufflebeam, 1973, p. 129).
Definition:
UFE concentrates on making evaluations useable and meaningful by involving the stakeholders within the evaluation process, choosing correct evaluation procedures, and ensuring the intended use of the evaluation by the users.
UFE
LIMITATION:
Focus on Decisions
Hierarchy
Social Equity and Equality are not addressed
This model takes on a systems approach to the stages of program development and the information needed at each stage.
CIPP
Context Evaluation
Input Evaluation
Process Evaluation
Product Evaluation
Identifies primary users and works closely with them to identify information needs in addition to conducting the study.
This is not truly an evaluation approach, but it provides information to the managers to help with the decision making process and is therefore included in the 3rd decision-oriented approach.
Performance Monitoring
STRENGTHS
:
Longevity
Helps People

UFE is situational and flexible method in which the evaluator must work closely with the leadership of an organization to facilitate the evaluation activities. The evaluator must remain positive regarding the evaluation.
Utilization-Focused Evaluation is based on two assumptions:

The primary purpose is to inform decisions

Use will occur if the evaluator identifies one or more stakeholders who are about the evaluation and are in a position to use it
CIPP
Context Evaluation (Planning Decisions):
Determining what the program needs , studying the context of the program, what are the problems etc.

Input Evaluation (Structuring Decisions):
Determining what are the organizations assets and potential interventions and how to implement those particular interventions.

Process Evaluation (Implementing Decisions):
During this phase decisions are made on the implementation process and the need to modify and address barriers that threaten the programs success. Procedures are then monitored adapted and refined.

Product Evaluation (Recycling Decisions):
Judging the program attainment
Decision-Oriented Evaluation Approach
By
LaSonya Moore
Jessica Schofield
Evaluation Complex Problems of Practice
University of Central Florida
EDF7468
Professor: Dr. Bonnie Swan


Three Major Decision-Oriented Approaches

1. Context, Input, Process, Product (CIPP)

2.Utilization-Focused Evaluation (UFE)

3. Performance Monitoring
Utilization-Focused Evaluation
(UFE)
Decision Oriented Developers
Stufflebeam
Alkin
Provus
Patton
Wholey

CENTRAL ELEMENT
People are the Central Element
References
Fitzpatrick, J., Sanders, J., & Worthen, B. (2011). Program evaluation alternative approaches and practical guidelines. Upper Saddle River, NJ: Pearson.

Stufflebeam, D. L. (1966). Evaluation under Title 1 of the Elementary and Secondary Educational Act of 1965. Retrieved from http://www.eric.ed.gov/contentdelivery/servlet/ERICServlet?accno=ED024156

Stufflebeam, D. L. (1968). Evaluation as enlightenment for decision-making. Retrieved from http://www.eric.ed.gov/contentdelivery/servlet/ERICServlet?accno=ED048333

Stufflebeam, D. L. (2001). Evaluation models. New
Directions for Evaluation, 89.

Stufflebeam, D. L. (2007). Evaluation theory, models, and
applications. Indianapolis, IN: Jossey-Bass.





Context
used to examine and describe
the goals of the program,
including the environment and
its needs, determine objectives,
look for opportunities
Input
used to list the strategies
and resources needed, figure
out alternative approaches
that might be more cost
effective, cost benefit,
design the program, assess
necessary/available
resources
Process
used to monitor the
implementation of the program
and its outcomes, steer the
program, monitor progress,
guide process, formative
evaluation through feedback,
ensure legal/ethical guidelines
are being followed,
interpret outcomes
Product
used to access the outcomes
of the program, document
strengths, summative
evaluation, retrospective
cost/benefit, assess
outcomes, document and
promote successes,
identify failures
CIPP 2nd Edition
Revised in 2003 and 2007
Expanded to 10 steps
Product
Impact
Effectiveness
Sustainability
Transportability
Metaevaluation

Final Synthesis Report
http://wmich.edu/evalctr/archive_checklists/cippchecklist_mar07.pdf
Pros
empowers stakeholders
increased likelihood that
findings will be used
does not advocate a particular social agenda/geared towards an audience agenda

Cons
evaluator gives away authority
geared towards an audience agenda
doesn't require assessments of merit and worth
manipulative
Decisions of program managers are the pivitoal organizer for the evaluation (Stufflebeam,1968).

This approach emphasizes that program evaluation should be used proactively to help improve a program as well as retroactively to judge its merit and worth (Stufflebeam, 2001).
Full transcript