The Application of Selected Program Evaluation Standards on the Implementation of Web 2.0 Tools in Classrooms

As a superintendent who has spent nearly 25 years in public school education, it seems that K-12 public school administrators and teachers are on a constant mission to improve student outcomes. One of the latest efforts to increase student achievement is rooted in the implementation of instructional technology.  Many schools and districts are feverishly building infrastructure and adding devices.  As schools and districts race to implement iPads, Chromebooks, laptops, and WiFi to take advantage of Web 2.0 tools and personalized learning, there are program evaluation standards that may assist district and school stakeholders in making sound implementation decisions.

According to Yarbrough, Shulha, Hopson, and Caruthers (2011), there are Utility Standards developed by the Joint Committee on Standards for Educational Evaluation (JCSEE) that can be used to guide quality program evaluation.  Program evaluation is designed to assist stakeholders in determining if their organization is situated to take advantage of an opportunity to implement a new initiative that leads to improved outcomes.

Although there are eight Utility Standards, I will focus on U2 Attention to Stakeholders.  Again, the full list of Utility Standards can be found here.  

U2 Attention to Stakeholders 

According to Yarbrough, Shulha, Hopson, and Caruthers (2011), stakeholders are individuals who have a connection to a program or are served by a program. Evaluators can gain valuable insight from internal and external stakeholders with respect to program implementation.  For example, a principal might be excited about implementing personalized learning for all students in his/her school.  However, teachers may be hesitant about personalized learning.  Parents and Board of Education members will also take a stance on personalized learning.  Finally, students will also have a perspective on personalized learning.  In fact, Headden (2013), wrote that shrinking school budgets has served as a catalyst for school systems to explore technology as a means of offering individualized instruction.  On the other hand, Headden (2013), also wrote that a criticism of personalized learning is that is lacks the human element of teachers.  As one can imagine, each stakeholder group from above will likely support one statement or the other with respect to personalized learning.

Attending to the needs of all stakeholders can lead evaluators to a variety of perspectives that can either contribute to, or detract from a successful program implementation (Yarbrough, Shulha, Hopson, and Caruthers, 2011).  Rather than spending millions of dollars on another failed attempt at improved student outcomes, skilled evaluators (using the utility standards) can help organizations make collaborative decisions that can lead to greater success in implementing new initiatives.

So, as one attempts blast off with implementing instructional technology, the lesson here is to engage all stakeholders in meaningful dialogue and allow people to express their fears and opposing opinions. Often times, there is much to be learned from the sharpest critics.  I recently heard the following quote at a CUE Rockstar event that summed it up perfectly:

The cave you fear to enter  holds the treasure you seek ~Joseph Campbell

Reference

HEADDEN, S. (2013). The Promise of Personalized Learning. Education Next, 13(4), 14-20.

Yarbrough, D. B., Shulha, L. M., Hopson, R. K., & Caruthers, F. A. (2011). The program evaluation standards: A guide for evaluators and evaluation users (3rd ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.