FRIT 7237 Fall 2016

Final Project

New State Standards for Mathematics and Problem-based Learning

Evaluation Team Members:

Whitney Gaddis

Carrie Gossett

Shavannah Newkirk

Dana Nunnery

Danita Sanders

1
 FRIT 7237 Fall 2016

Final Project

Implementation Evaluation
Program impact in terms of results is important, however it is equally important to assess

how and to what degree a program is implemented to gain a deeper understanding of a program

as a whole, as well as to ensure the integrity of the program. Careful observation of program

implementation methods allows evaluators to more effectively assess observed outcomes

(Duerden & Witt, 2012).

The project at the focal point of this evaluation is a collaboration between Braxton

County Schools and Great Southern University. It consists of a professional development

experience designed to prepare teachers in grades 6, 7, and 8 in Braxton County, Georgia for the

implementation of the New State Standards for Mathematics (NSSM). The goal of the project is

for teachers to gain a deeper understanding of how mathematics is used in business and industry,

for teachers to learn new methods of learning, and to assist teachers with the use of instructional

technology. The Implementation Chart shows how the need for the project was assessed and a

plan for roll-out in the schools.

Implementation Evaluation
How was the need Needs assessments were conducted using the following:
of a project Survey of Braxton County Teachers to determine teachers perceptions of need and
determined? interest in the project.
Student achievement results (CRCT) in grades 6-8 to determine need.

2
 FRIT 7237 Fall 2016

Final Project

How were project Participants were to consist mainly of mathematics teachers in grades 6, 7, and 8
participants (targeted grades) but was open to any math teacher in grades K-12, not to exceed a
determined? limit of 16 participants.
Administrators from each school as space allows.
Braxton County Director of Professional Learning, Ms. Carla Lawson worked
along with program director to recruit participants.
Was the project Project Operation Plan was described in detail in Table 2 of the proposal.
implementation Professional development for teachers
planned 5 day summer workshop
effectively? Post-workshop meetings
Visits to local businesses and industries to see mathematics utilized

Summative Evaluation

Summative evaluation is often associated with more objective, quantitative methods of data

collection, is linked to accountability, and recommends using a balance of both quantitative and

qualitative methods in order to get a better understanding of what your project has achieved, and

how or why this has certain outcomes occurred. When conducting a summative evaluation on the

New State Standards for Mathematics and Problem-based Learning Grant Funded Project,

evaluators use and complete the following table and rubric to determine the quality and

effectiveness of activities, project goals, and specific objectives.

Summative Evaluation
When Project implementation and post-project: The project is tentatively scheduled to
begin in June 2015 and end no later than January 2016.

What: The goal of this project was to prepare teachers to create and utilize
What were the objectives authentic, mathematics learning experiences, which incorporate NSSM and
and/or goals? available instructional technologies.

3
 FRIT 7237 Fall 2016

Final Project

Who: An assessment of need for this project was conducted, that included a
Who are the program discussion with Braxton County Schools personnel, a survey of Braxton
participants and how were County mathematics teachers, and an examination of recent student CRCT
they recruited? data; Pool of Math teachers of grades 6, 7, and 8, up to 16 participants,
through a survey of Braxton County mathematics teachers conducted in
October 2011;Recruitment efforts will utilize email and paper mailings to
advertise the project
Why and How
(Results): Create PBL modules for mathematics, integrate available instructional
To assess the quality of technology into PBL experiences, implement and evaluate the learning
the initial program modules created;Timeline of project activities, associated personnel, and
activities, whether the alignment with project objectives with specified dates;Before creating
project has met its goals, problem solving modules, project participants and project staff members
whether there were any will visit select local businesses and industries to see the mathematics used
unintended consequences, in these contexts;Teachers will implement the modules with their students
what were the learnings, and conduct self-evaluations of the implementation, which will be shared
and how to improve. with project staff members.
Follow Ups:
Were the initial Two post-workshop meetings; Mid-implementation meeting to discuss
experience and follow up questions and concerns related to implementation of the PBL modules; Final
activities implemented as meeting to discuss the teacher-created self-evaluations, implementation, and
planned?What is the to identify best practices.
quality of follow up ands
support activities?
Data type Quantitative Qualitative
Questionnaires Focus Group
Surveys Assessments Given and Results
Observations Self-Evaluations

Pondering How did this program affect students with disabilities? Failed to identify or Missing
Questions/Suggestions: important technology resources to implement for Americans with Disabilities. Was
technology required for teacher and students to use if so, what kind? Develop an
explicit needs assessment inventory for technology, equipment, or software needed.
This was a grant funded project, but how much was the grant for and what was it
suppose to cover. Funding resources are not mentioned.

Summative Evaluation Rubric: See editable rubric link below

4
 FRIT 7237 Fall 2016

Final Project

Data Collection Schedule

Instrument Already
Data Set Date of Collection Developed Data Collected By

Students examination May 2015 Yes Project team

Math teacher Surveys June 2015 No Project team

Observations Sept 2015 Yes Project team

Questionnaires Sept 2015 No Project team

Focus Group Oct 2015 No Project team

Given Pre-Assessments Oct 2015 Yes Project team

Observations Nov 2016-Jan 2016 Yes Project team

Focus Group Nov 2015 No Project team

Given Post- Assessments Dec 2015 Yes Project team

5
 FRIT 7237 Fall 2016

Final Project

Self-Evaluations March 2016 Yes Project team

Data Collection Summary:

experience of the project. Great Southern University faculty will examine PBL modules and

implementation of technology by on site observations to ensure they meet program objectives.

External consultants will also review student work samples and their alignment to NSSM and

PBL. Great Southern University faculty and the external consultant team will compare their

findings in a summative evaluation for the implementation of the overall project.

References:

Duerden, M. D., & Witt, P. A. (2012). Assessing program implementation: What it is, why it's

important, and how to do it. Journal of Extension, 50(1), 1-8. Retrieved from

https://www.joe.org/joe/2012february/a4.php