Evaluationplan

Evaluation Plan
Content
Purpose.. 2
Audience.... 3
Issues..... 3
Resources.. 4
Evidence........ 5
Data-Gathering.. 5
Analysis.. 6
Reporting.... 6
Evaluation Schedule. 7
Sign Off... 8
Purpose
The purpose of this evaluation is to determine the effectiveness of the self-paced online
instructional unit that is being created and developed for the University of Memphis. The
unit will teach learners about the history and importance of engaged scholarship at the
university.
The unit will be evaluated by the Subject Matter Expert (SME) Jennifer Barker,
members of the Engaged Scholarship Committee, professors at the University of
Memphis, and students currently attending the university. The results of the evaluation
will help in developing and improving the content of the unit and to determine the time
requirements needed to complete the unit. The objective of the unit is to inform the
students and community of the University of Memphis of how engagement is beneficial
to both parties.
The Engaged Scholarship Committee knows that the university thrives off of its
relationships with community partners and in order for it to continue, students need to
understand the importance and benefits, as well as, current and future community
partners.
Audience
The information that is received from this evaluation will be used by the Engaged
Scholarship Committee. The committee will be the one to set which professors will give
the unit as part of their course and keep track of the data once the unit is live.
Issues
The evaluation should answer some specific questions:
After receiving the instruction, can the learner analyze what it means for the
University of Memphis to be an urban-serving research institution?
After receiving the instruction, can the learner tell how engagement enhances the
undergraduate experience?
After receiving the instruction, can the learner analyze how people differ in their
levels of power and privilege?
After receiving the instruction, can the learner analyze and understand the
practices associated with partnership building?
After receiving the instruction, can the learner analyze and understand how asset
based community engagement is a particular way of framing community work?
After receiving the instruction, can the learner analyze and understand how
capacity building represents a significant mindset shift in community work?
Are the instructions through the lesson clear?
Do the instructions follow a logical order?
Is the content accurate?
3
The answers to these questions will help Visible Innovation adjust the instructional unit
to insure success. If the questions above cannot be answered in the evaluation, then
the unit content and/or design will be adjusted accordingly to insure success of the
objectives.
Resources
To help Visible Innovation prepare to evaluate the online instructional unit, a chart has
been created to help in scheduling and understanding material needs.
Stage
People
Materials
Forms
SME
1 computer with
internet capabilities
- SME Notes form
II
3 faculty and staff

members with Tipton
County Schools
- 3 computers with
- 1st updated
instructional unit
- Attitude Survey
- Observations Notes
Form
- Interview Protocol
III
5-8 University falculty

and students chosen
by the client
- 5-8 computers with

- 2nd updated
instructional unit
- Attitude Survey
- Observations Notes
Form
- Interview Protocol
Total
9-12 volunteers
9-12 computers
Updated instructional
unit
- 8-11 Attitude
Surveys
- 8-11 Observations
Notes Forms
- 8-11 Interview
Protocol Forms
- 1 SME Notes Form
Evidence
The evidence that is collected through the evaluation process will come from the
multiple forms listed in the Resources section and the pre and post tests from the
instructional unit. This data will help make needed changes to the current online unit so
that it will be handed off to the client in optimal condition. The sample of each stage is
small, but since the unit is geared towards all students and community members of The
University of Memphis, there will be a good representation of the intended audience
now and in the future. Each stage will have an increase in volunteers.
Data-Gathering
We will collect the data during each of the stages. There are three stages to this
evaluation. Here is a description of each.
Stage 1 We will connect with our SME Jennifer Barker and have her look over
screenshots of the completed modules. This will be done via phone conference with our
project manager Kaylah Holland. She will take down the notes from the SME and from
that information, make changes to the online unit.
Stage 2 The Lead Evaluator will conduct stage II using 3 volunteers from the Tipton
County Schools. They will be given the website to look at in the computer lab, the
attitude survey, observation notes form, and the interview protocol form. Any questions
from the volunteers will be recorded and changed in preparation of stage III.
Stage 3 The Lead Evaluator and Lead Instructional Designer will conduct stage III in
the IDT Lab at The University of Memphis. The client will provide the 5-8 volunteers for
this final stage. Notes will be collected from the volunteers and used to revise the unit
one last time.
Analysis
Once all stages have been completed, the data from the notes and pre/post tests will be
analyzed and shown in a final report. Stages II and III will not be completed until the
SME has made her corrections and has OKd the instructional unit as a whole. Changes
will be made after each stage is completed so that the unit can have optimal
effectiveness. By the end of the stages, the instructional unit will be ready for
mainstream use by the client.
Reporting
A final evaluation report will be shared with the client. This will officially notify them as to
the results, adjustments and finalization of the evaluation process.
Evaluation Schedule
This schedule helps to set a time allotment for the evaluation process and the
adjustments that are needed for the lesson. The dates may vary if the results from one
section require more time resources than expected to correct the lesson. It would then
have at least the same time increase for each of the following lessons.
Evaluation
Stage I
Stage II
First name
Jennifer
Location
4/9/2016
Phone conference
4/11/2016
Covington
Integrated Arts
Computer Lab
4/11/2016
Covington
Integrated Arts
Computer Lab
4/11/2016
Covington
Integrated Arts
Computer Lab
Volunteer will fill

out evaluation
form
4/16/2016
UofM IDT Lab
Volunteer will fill

out evaluation
form
4/16/2016
UofM IDT Lab
Volunteer will fill

out evaluation
form
4/16/2016
UofM IDT Lab
Volunteer will fill

out evaluation
form
4/16/2016
UofM IDT Lab
Volunteer will fill

out evaluation
form
4/16/2016
UofM IDT Lab
Volunteer will fill

out evaluation
form
4/16/2016
UofM IDT Lab
TBD
TBD
TBD
Stage III
Dates: Begin/End
Client/Sponsor Sign Off

_________________________________________________
Jennifer Barker, Subject Matter Expert

Department of Architecture
University of Memphis Engaged Scholarship Committee
_________________________________________________
Dr. Carmen Weaver, Project Sponsor

The University of Memphis
___________________________________________________
Kaylah Holland, Project Manager

Visible Innovation
_________________
Date
_________________
Date
04/06/2016
_________________
Date

Evaluationplan

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Evaluationplan

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Evaluationplan

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Evaluation Plan

- SME Notes form

3 faculty and staff

5-8 University falculty

- 5-8 computers with

Volunteer will fill

UofM IDT Lab

Volunteer will fill

UofM IDT Lab

Volunteer will fill

UofM IDT Lab

Volunteer will fill

UofM IDT Lab

Volunteer will fill

UofM IDT Lab

Volunteer will fill

UofM IDT Lab

Client/Sponsor Sign Off

Jennifer Barker, Subject Matter Expert

Dr. Carmen Weaver, Project Sponsor

Kaylah Holland, Project Manager

You might also like