Systematic Education Evaluation (Research Paper Sample)

Systematic Education Evaluation
Student’s name
Institutional affiliation
Empowerment/Constructivist Oriented Evaluation Model
The Empowerment model of evaluation is in many ways an inventive approach of evaluation. The system has been embraced in various disciplines including governments, higher education institutions, nonprofit institutions and other foundations throughout the world. The main focus of this model is the programs in hand although it is possible to apply the model on organizations, individuals, societies, cultures and communities. Empowerment evaluation defined is the application of evaluation techniques, concepts and findings with the objective of nurturing self-determination and development.
The evaluation model employs qualitative and quantitative techniques. The value oriented model is unequivocal eliminating ambiguity and is designed to offer support to people. The objective is to encourage self-evaluation and contemplation for efficiency. The objective is to encourage self-evaluation for all participants and client. The presence of external evaluation only serves as a coaching undertaking or extra facilitation. This is subject to the potential of the program. The evaluation model is more of a collective activity as opposed to personal quest. The presence of an evaluator can never empower individuals. People can only motivate themselves with coaching support. The evaluation technique is highly democratic in that it encourages examination of concerns by the population and participation in opinionated debates.
Evaluation of the worth and value of a program is not the major purpose of the empowerment model. The evaluation process is only part of a process aimed at improving the worth of a program. The new perspective provides highlights the fact that worth and merit are not static project denominators. The simple facts are often overlooked. The undertaking to institutionalize and internalize the process of self-evaluation presents a responsive and dynamic approach of evaluation that considers the new shifts.
There are several result oriented steps necessary to helping participants evaluate their own programs. These steps include: determination of the program standing including its strength areas and weak points, emphasis on goal development motivated by vision and improvement of the program, formulation of strategies that encourage the participants to determine their own footing aimed and achieving objectives with minimal supervision and assisting the participating entities to establish the evidence necessary for progress documentation geared towards achieving the set goals.
For empowerment evaluation to be to be relevant, effective and dependable, many factors must be in play. The participating parties must be allowed the latitude to experiment while at the same time bare the risk and consequence of what they do. The environment must be ripe for shared successes and failures. The presence of evaluators is necessary for process monitoring and can assist in maintaining the credibility of the process, provide impetus, tracking successes, reality checks and ensuring the process quality is under control. The evaluator must be seen not as superior to the process but an equal partner sharing in the process bias and thought process.
The accountability principle in empowerment evaluation remains unchanged as is with traditional evaluation models. There is always an agenda to protect. An example is the requirement for all graduate schools to meet the accreditation requirements by the respective associations or adherence to a designed five year plan by the district school superintendent. The contextual existent of the empowerment evaluation model is very much similar to the other evaluation models. There is however an infinite relationship between intermediate goals relating to daily activities and the collective goals. The ability to formulate evocative intermediate milestones linked to the broader universal goal serves as an empowerment tool to self-determination.
It is important to understand that empowerment evaluation and the external models of evaluation do not operate exclusive. There is a lot of interrelation notwithstanding the self-determination focus of empowerment evaluation. The different evaluation models enhance each other in many ways that one. It is correct to suggest that empowerment evaluation serve as a rich source of information facilitating an exhaustive external process of examination. The interplay between internal and external evaluation models in essence presents reality check with regard to internal expectations against the external requirements. This results to numerous information statistics necessary for purposes of external evaluation. The expectation is that empowerment evaluation will in essence serve to shape craft of collective input as opposed to exclusive application of a distinct approach.
There are ten principles that define empowerment evaluation. The principles were crafted and detailed by Wandersman et al in 2005. The principles outline the values, theories and the thoughts that inform decision making and activities of the evaluators. The argument by Wandersman et al (2005) is that in the light of the similarities shared by empowerment evaluation with other evaluation models, the entirety of the empowerment evaluation principles differentiates empowerment evaluation from other approaches. Core to the values of EE its objective is to prompt the quality of the program. The power and evaluation responsibilities lie with the program stakeholders and adherence to evaluation standards must be adhered to.
Empowerment evaluation principles
Ownership by the community: the responsibility for formulation and evaluation of the program is on the stakeholders with input from the evaluators. Both entities are responsible for adherence to the requirements of the findings.
Democracy in participation: the presence of inclusion in decision making is highly valued. This is achieved through active participation. The process is characterized by deliberation, communication and collaboration.
Improvement: the main aim of EE is development of people, organizations, programs and communities and importantly to assist them achieve desired results.
Application of community knowledge: input from the community is highly regarded. Knowledge, experience and information from the community is incorporated in decision making, understanding of the local framework and interpretation of the results gathered from the evaluation expedition.
Inclusion: all the participants, all levels of staff in the program, community members and financiers are welcomed to participate in the evaluation process.
Strategies are based on evidence: the value of evidence based experiential justification for any important action can never be compromised. Such a decision has to be founded on facts and other comparable strategies that have shown evidence of success. Such an undertaking saves resources and time. It is however important to remember that strategies must embrace the cultural and environmental situation around. (Fetterman & Wandersman 2005)
Social justice: programs must be seen to foster an equitable society. Social justice makes sure that inequities in the society are dealt with through building of capacity. The larger social good is the social responsibility of a progressive institution.
Accountability: all the individual commitments form the basis upon which they are held to account. The expectations placed on funders form their accountability standard. The involved parties pledge interventions geared towards results and continuous development.
Capacity building: The staff and participants to a program endeavor to conduct self-evaluation. Provided with the necessary tools and conditions, all participants are viewed as being able to carry out self-evaluation. This is what will often result capacity building.
Learning for the organization: Empowerment evaluation is a tool necessary for the creation of a learning community. Reflections based on the evaluation programs and the organization portrays a group of the organization or community that is responsive to changing dynamics. Results from evaluation are important in guiding improvement.
Limitation of the empowerment evaluation model
To fully implement Empowerment evaluation considerable funding is required, enough time and the resources necessary for training the staff and community members must be forthcoming. Enough resources and pragmatic strategies are required for the involvement of various factions like students, volunteers and teachers. Different perceptions against the evaluation process may trigger resistance from people. Some people view evaluation as a process that is purely judgmental affecting funding and the job sector as opposed to a process that is geared towards learning and self-improvement.
The presence of agendas that carry potential conflict, the understanding behind management of programs from various perspectives, power relations in play and the participating communities must be carefully managed. The consultants involved in evaluation must have necessary skills to negotiate, facilitate and manage conflicts.
It is not possible for everyone to participate in programs that are large scaled since the level of understanding and the complexity of the perspectives involved may sideline some people who may not have the requisite skills to participate in the evaluation workshop. The disempowering effects of universal participation may come into play. Community participation and people empowerment is a principle that needs to be questioned and criticized. The theories of Empowerment evaluation and the underlying assumptions must essentially be questioned.
The planning and execution of evaluation workshops is time consuming. The necessary resources a...