Professional evaluators may play several roles in the field of education. One of the curious descriptions of an evaluator’s role is “a critical friend,” someone who provides feedback to organizations to foster learning and developmental change (Fitzpatrick et al., 2011, p. 17). However, the implementation of this function varies dramatically, with some of the potential roles of a mediator, teacher, managing consultant, organizational development expert, and social worker (Fitzpatrick et al., 2011). All these roles serve to encourage a learning environment by having the organization learn and improve. This profession has a multifaceted function since evaluators interact with different stakeholders to stimulate dialogue between them regarding program planning (Fitzpatrick et al., 2011). Additionally, evaluators may inform the stakeholders about the available and relevant programs and research, further the organization’s understanding of future system designs and steps (Fitzpatrick et al., 2011). Ultimately, all these roles may change depending on individual and organizational needs.
To perform these roles, evaluators may engage in various activities. Evaluators’ may perform more administrative work: reach a deal with the stakeholders regarding the end goal of their assessment, create agreements, search for school staff, manage finances, or write reports (Fitzpatrick et al., 2011). Fitzpatrick et al. (2011) highlight that one of the crucial matters is the scientific, systematic, and objective approach. Thus, evaluators may also collect data, identify marginalized or underprivileged groups in the community, or distribute the information collected (Fitzpatrick et al., 2011). Fitzpatrick et al. (2011) note that while professionals often perform these activities and roles, this is not always the case – staff members may also take on these responsibilities.
As a high school mathematics educator, I supervise roughly 150 pupils from various backgrounds: some have limited English proficiency while others are fully proficient. My work setting is a Title I one school, which educates primarily Hispanic or black students. Title I is a provision of the Elementary and Secondary Education Act (ESEA), which aims to improve the academic performance of “educationally deprived children,” in particular, in the areas “with a high incidence of low-income families” (Program Development Department of the Office of Federal, State and Special Projects, 1971, p. 8). Thus, a large part of this struggle is that students belong to underprivileged groups. One of the examples of how evaluation is used in education is enabling teachers to determine the quality of specific content in school curricula (Fitzpatrick et al., 2011). In my case, our system needs to embrace a differentiated model of material delivery to improve the situation, which, especially with my subject, has been dire. I see myself revising the mathematics curriculum to address the matters with which the underprivileged students struggle the most.
Moreover, I believe that equal access to education should be practically supported. Another example of evaluators’ role in education is certifying schools that meet the minimum accreditation standards (Fitzpatrick et al., 2011). The school I work in has a graduation rate of 71% and is considered a Tier 2 since students’ academic performance is not satisfactory for the district and state requirements. According to the Program Development Department of the Office of Federal, State, and Special Projects (1971), the most in need students will be prioritized. The schools that are already struggling to meet the standard requirements should be granted more attention and support to ensure that everyone has an equal chance to succeed. I think that emphasizing the collaborative aspect of evaluators’ approach and encouraging discussion around any potential ways to improve performance outside of just my teaching. Thus, I can apply the principles of program evaluation to rework the methods of delivering material in general by incorporating innovative strategies and technology-oriented solutions. Lastly, collaboration in evaluation can be further supported by involving multiple stakeholders, including students’ parents. For instance, parents can meet with school representatives to learn about ways to support and motivate their children or shine a light on any underlying issues that students may experience. Overall, I think that program evaluation principles will be beneficial in my line of work.
The historical development of education has had several pivotal moments, and one of them was the implementation of ESEA. ESEA signified the turn that the US took in instituting a nationwide commitment to equity in education. Title I was designed to close the education access gap in areas like reading, writing, and mathematics; it accounts for most federal funding that the ESEA committee authorizes (Program Development Department of the Office of Federal, State and Special Projects, 1971). In terms of the Act’s significance for the program evaluation discourse, it states that “a clear relationship should be established between the behaviors program proposes to change, the services or materials purchased for the program, and the actual behaviors of students in the program” (Program Development Department of the Office of Federal, State and Special Projects, 1971, p. 22). Title I was designed to either “provide direct service to children or indirect service through training staff who will work with them” (Program Development Department of the Office of Federal, State and Special Projects, 1971, p. 16). Therefore, the program is crucial since it created a framework for critically evaluating the current problems and then devising practical solutions, which can be supported financially.
References
Harris, C. (2018). A program evaluation of a technology-based formative assessment for algebra readiness (Paper 1530192549) [William and Mary]. Dissertations, Theses, and Masters Projects. Web.
Fitzpatrick, J. L., Sanders, J. R., & Worthen, B. R. (2011). Program evaluation: Alternative approaches and practical guidelines (4th ed.). Pearson Education.
Kainz, K. (2019). Early academic gaps and Title I programming in high poverty, high minority schools. Early Childhood Research Quarterly, 47, 159–168. Web.
Program Development Department of the Office of Federal, State, and Special Projects. (1971). Elementary and secondary education act of 1965: Title I planning handbook (Vol. 1). Education Resources Information Center. Web.