Evaluation of an event is always possible from several points of view, due to which there are concepts of objectivity and subjectivity. Evaluation is a way of indicating the quality of information acquisition and determining the degree of assimilation of the program. In addition, assessment is also a qualitative criterion of the learning process and influences its continuation. The possibilities of new approaches to assessment and the implementation of different practices in assessing the learning process allow for a comprehensive study of the learning process as a whole (Co, 2019). Thus, curriculum evaluation is centered on the idea of a new way of looking at the program and a modern interpretation of assessment.
The hourglass model is one of the common approaches to curriculum assessment. The model brings together the key concepts according to which the learning process is implemented. I see the most critical stage because it is possible to conclude the program and the options for providing information. The idea of creating a portfolio of individual achievements allows students to open up and realize their potential (Ornstein & Hunkins, 2018, 292). In addition, the interpretation process will become not only accessible but also detailed. In my opinion, the model has to be implemented to emphasize forming a healthy attitude toward the observation.
I want to focus on five questions to guide program evaluation. First, intrinsic value addresses two key issues: program relevance and quality (Ornstein & Hunkins, 2018, 293). For example, inclusion in photographic training programs should not include language courses or political issues. Photographic professionals are likely to be deceptive about this. It also provokes other deviations from the purpose of the program. Second, I was interested in the problem of program selection: comparing and evaluating their goals (Ornstein & Hunkins, 2018, 293). Programs change, and teachers choose the one that aligns with their ideas about the subject. Because of this, pedagogical conflicts and misunderstandings arise on the part of the students. I only paid attention to these issues because, in a changing world and the emergence of new research, the problem of choice is acute.
Theories of approaches to the educational process are based on the philosophical ideas of educators. In this regard, the views of teaching are different: scientific and humanistic orientations are apparent opposites of different approaches. Each model defines a different approach to hands-on learning, prioritizing either technical features and laboratory work or associative thinking and unique memorization techniques (Co, 2019). Whereas followers of scientific theories adhere to statistical analysis and precise characterization, humanists (or postmodernists) focus on the aesthetic or perceived effect of the program (Ornstein & Hunkins, 2018, 295). For me, the second approach is closer, as self-satisfaction with the results will allow both educators and students to become imbued with the subject and develop a love for it (Ornstein & Hunkins, 2018, 296). I also like Doll’s interpreted advice: reduce internal responsibility for results, and concentrate on the activities in progress. This approach will allow the teachers to realize themselves and improve the attitude of the students.
In a separate category is payoff theory, which can conclude the effectiveness of training programs. The payoff is the quantity and quality of information obtained after evaluating the program’s impact on the experimental groups (Ornstein & Hunkins, 2018, 302). Educators are interested in analyzing the set of criteria for assessing each program. Although this approach generally provides insight into the curriculum, in my opinion, it is focused on a specific outcome at a given point in time. Long-term and retrospective evaluation of the curriculum seems to be more important than capturing short-term results without a finite summation.
Stack’s assessment model covers curriculum design, development, and implementation (Ornstein & Hunkins, 2018, 307). The approach focuses on three stages: preparation, learning process, and outcome. This model provides a visual representation of the influencing factors on the development, then the implementation of the program through educator-student interaction, followed by an evaluation of all accomplishments. In addition, the model involves all groups of students, thereby equally giving even “unsuccessful” people a chance (Co, 2019). I find it interesting that this model also assesses non-obvious outcomes and student attitudes toward the program. Based on this model, I would like to work as an educator, as this will realize my full potential.
Ornstein, A. J. & Hunkins, F. P. (2018). Curriculum: foundations, principles, and issues. Pearson.
Co, E. (2019). The power of practice: adjusting curriculum to include emphasis on skills. Journal of College Science Teaching, 48(5), 22–27. Web.