The Role of Scientists in the Professional Development of Science Teachers (1996) / Chapter Skim
Currently Skimming:
7 Evaluation of Professional-Development Programs
7 Evaluation of Professional-Development Programs
Pages 73-81
The Chapter Skim interface presents what we've algorithmically identified as the most significant single chunk of text within every page in the chapter.
Select key terms on the right to highlight them within pages of the chapter.
From page 73... ...
Much of what we know about the effectiveness of professional-development programs is based on anecdotes and on reports from teachers, principal investigators, and program directors involved with the programs themselves. In our review of professional-development programs, we heard repeatedly that teachers felt empowered by their participation and gained an enhanced sense of professionalism.
|
From page 74... ...
The primary question to be answered is, "Has the professional-development program being evaluated helped teachers to create a high-quality learning environment so that the students are doing better in science? " To develop evaluation strategies that answer that primary question, we must know what forms of evaluation are required, who should conduct evaluations, what tools and programs we need to conduct useful evaluations, what levels of funding are needed to conduct useful evaluations, and how the administrative structure supports program evaluation.
|
From page 75... ...
· Choose instructional strategies and followup activities that are consistent with the objectives of the program and reinforce core concepts. · Establish mechanisms for receiving continuing participant feedback.
|
From page 76... ...
~ ~ ca 0 lo ~ ca ca hi · ~ Ct 8 ..= ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ° ~ ~)
|
From page 77... ...
We found a lack of overall program evaluations linking teacher participation in professional development with enhancement of teaching skills or student performance. To determine the ultimate impact of a program, long-term evaluation is needed to keep track of program participants and how they incorporate new information and techniques into their classroom activities.
|
From page 78... ...
They are unlikely to have training in the evaluation of educational programs. Unlike scientific research, whose product is a peer-reviewed paper, the "product" we are dealing with an education program involves human interactions and is not as readily subject to peer review.
|
From page 79... ...
And they can produce overall program reports that highlight difficulties faced during program implementation as a means of letting other program directors know how to improve their programs or avoid mistakes. When evaluation is seen as a means for educating others in the field, program staff might feel that they can be honest in their evaluation of their own programs.
|
From page 80... ...
Funding agencies should allocate more of their resources to support both evaluation of selected existing programs and evaluation research. NSF previously has placed the responsibility for evaluating programs on principal investigators, most of whom do not have a background in survey or social-science research.
|
From page 81... ...
· Program directors and principal investigators should not necessarily have primary responsibility for long-term evaluation of their own programs; these persons often do not have sufficient background in the methods of social-science and education research and might not be objective about their own programs. Ideally, professional-development programs include a budget item for a qualified evaluator, who should be involved from the onset of program.
|
Key Terms
This material may be derived from roughly machine-read images, and so is provided only to facilitate research.
More
information on Chapter Skim is available.