Education Assessment of Facing the Future
The following treatise will be a critique of Facing the Future, which develops and allocates global issues curriculum to teachers and students throughout the United States and the world. Facing the Future incorporates a comprehensive evaluation process into the program to obtain information from stakeholders. The evaluation process assembles information from teachers and students at various stages of the program (Bernier & Wheeler, 2004). This treatise will include the notation of goals and strengths as well as recommendations for improvement. In addition, this treatise will identify the evaluation measures used, if additional measures are needed, and how this supplementary data can enhance the results and conclusions.
Goals and Strengths
Facing the Future's curriculum teaches students to think critically about the associations between environmental degradation, social equity, population, consumption, and peace and conflict. This curriculum encourages understanding of how individual choices influence these issues both in the community and around the world, and empowers students to employ positive action to resolve community issues. In addition, in consideration of the No Child Left Behind Act (NCLB), an equally significant indicator of Facing the Future's effectiveness is the program's ability to satisfy national and state education standards (Bernier & Wheeler, 2004). Teachers contend that the curriculum of Facing the Future does align with state standards. The guidelines for determining the effectiveness of student assessment and program evaluation include considering applicable federal, state, and local programs. The No Child Left Behind ACT (NCLB) necessitates consideration in determining the existing effectiveness of student assessment (Harvest, 2008). Federal legislation instituted NCLB to warrant educational accountability, consequently, student assessment must now be considered for the core tenets of NCLB (Hoff, 2008).
Facing the Future's program evaluation process is iterative and involves defining program outcomes, program design, implementation, assessment, and revision. Facing the Future's evaluation process is built around an assessment of four essential goals. The teachers support of global issues education and instruction concerning the relationships between them, students and teachers internalize the relationships among population, poverty, consumption, the environment, and conflict, teachers apply service learning and engagement as a tool to empower youth, and students intermesh with the world via engagement. The organization integrates these goals into organizational inputs, activities, outputs, and outcomes to help direct the development of indicators and survey tools (Bernier & Wheeler, 2004).
The Facing the Future program does maintain the overall goal of enhancing student achievement. Teachers are able to engage students by having the resources to reach students at different levels and learning styles. The teacher accomplishes this process through various teaching methods, such as group projects, activities, real-world applications, and action opportunities (Bernier & Wheeler, 2004).
Recommendations for Improvement
The program evaluation of Facing the Future is lacking an assessment of students' knowledge and skills and mainly focuses on the viewpoints of teachers through surveys. Student assessment is obtaining information concerning students' abilities and program evaluation is using that information to formulate decisions in relation to student abilities (Asselin, 2003). Educators can use student assessment to determine an educational program's strengths and weaknesses, which will facilitate any changes or modifications to improve learning outcomes (Allen, 2004). Educators can also use student assessment to guide programs in order to obtain specific educational goals since student assessment is instrumental in determining what knowledge was gained through the program (Allen, 2004). The program evaluation does assist to determine the goals regarding teachers but lacks assessment regarding the goals regarding students. The value of any educational program is dependent upon its involvement in student achievement (Harada, 2005).
Program evaluation provides data indicating that the program is accomplishing the intended goals and objectives (Andrade, 2008). Facing the Future only provides data concerning teachers' viewpoints through surveys. An effective evaluation should provide information on how the program influences students. In addition, a program evaluation should demonstrate how different components in the program influence students or the educational organization (Goldie, 2006).
The program evaluation should also include information concerning if the resources and funds adequate to assist in meeting the goals and objectives of the program (Goldie, 2006). Evaluation of a program ties into student assessments since individual assessments are part of the program evaluation. The evaluation of a program should supply teachers with an overall framework in which they can link instruction. The goals of the program and instruction should be to enhance student learning, performance, and achievement (Goldie, 2006).
Evaluation Measures
The evaluation process the organization uses will determine if Facing the Future's program meets the organization's desired outcomes, and if not, to guide the redesign of the program. The organization incorporates program assessment into the program, which permits modifications as necessary as well as ideas for future learning. The data the organization collects from surveys offers a comprehensive review of the program and permits updates and editing of Facing the Future's curriculum. Educators offer ideas in regard to activities and content that they feel will enhance the curriculum (Bernier & Wheeler, 2004). The assessment of Facing the Future's program contains surveys of all educators who use Facing the Future's curriculum and a more thorough evaluation of teachers and students of the Washington Teacher Partnership Pilot Program. Figure 2 illustrates the assessment tools the organization uses to present a collection of quantitative and qualitative data on the effectiveness of the global studies program. The most recent survey included 64% public school teachers, 16% independent schoolteachers, 9% post-secondary educators, and 11% non-formal educators. Of those surveyed 60%, teach high school, 38% middle school, 17% undergraduate/graduate, and 12% elementary school (Facing the Future, 2007). The results of the survey were as follows:
86% of teachers surveyed observe an increase in student engagement when
using Facing the Future resources in the classroom
93% say Facing the Future curriculum helps increase their students' critical
thinking skills
95% say Facing the Future curriculum increases their students' global
perspective
83% say Facing the Future curriculum increases their students' belief that they
can make a difference on global issues
69% say their students are more likely to take action to help solve global issues
after using Facing the Future curriculum
75% of students showed improvement in their knowledge about global issues
and sustainability from the pre-test to the post-test
50% of students became more confident that they can help solve community and global issues and that their actions have an impact on people and places in other parts of the world. (There was no change for 21% of students - many of whom already felt confident about their impact)
Facing the Future programming is equally effective with students of different
races and ethnicities (Facing the Future, 2007).
Additional Evaluation Measures Needed to Enhance Results and Conclusions
One major deficit in Facing the Future's program evaluation is the lack of additional assessments to support the findings. Program evaluation assists teachers in evaluating what is happening in the classroom and the effectiveness of their instruction. Teachers should reflect on the outcomes of student learning and identify ways to improve student learning (Hackney, Gilbride, and Scarborough, 2003). Factors are considered when selecting, scoring, and interpreting students' results. NCLB establishes the opportunity to develop and implement valid and reliable accountability systems that correctly recognize effective schools (Duran, 2005). Livingston, Reynolds, and Wilson (2006) note that reliability refers to consistency and consequently, program evaluation that measures consistency is considered reliable. Reliability is essential and valuable and offers information that will aid educators to make better decisions. The reliability and validity of that information is essential (Livingston, Reynolds, and Wilson, 2006). Good decisions in education require reliable and valid information. Validity refers to the extent theoretical and empirical evidence supports the meaning and interpretation of test scores. Factors that can influence validity include under-representation, construct-irrelevant variance, variations in instructional procedures, test administration, and scoring procedures, and student characteristics. Educators use test scores to make decisions regarding students, teachers, and curriculum (Bolt & Thurlow, 2004). Educators must understand the intended purpose of assessments and be able to use the information to improve instruction and learning, and capable of relating the information to various stakeholders (Duran, 2005).
Bernier and Wheeler (2004) offer the impression that placement has taken place in Facing the Future's curriculum since the assertion is that teachers are able to reach students on different levels and learning styles. Placement involves assessment for the purpose of placing students on different levels of either instruction or education (Nitko, 2004). Facing the Future does make use of formative evaluations in the program. Bernier and Wheeler (2004) contend that teacher surveys serve as a formative evaluation of the program. Formative evaluation is the means through which the quality of student's achievement is determined and can be helpful to monitor the progression of student learning (Nitko, 2004). Formative evaluations permit educators to modify a program so that the information becomes more relevant and effective for the student in order to achieve the intended objectives (Hackney, Gilbride & Scarborough, 2003). Facing the Future does not divulge information concerning summative evaluations. Summative evaluation is the means through which the quality or value of achievement is determined after instruction is complete. (Nitko, 2004). Summative evaluations offer empirical evidence regarding outcomes of the program, which may become valuable to support of the program (Hackney, Gilbride & Scarborough, 2003). Most summative evaluations involve data that are both valid and reliable. Placement, formative evaluation, and summative evaluation all aid in the assessment process and assist educators to decide what to teach, how to teach it, and how successful their instruction has been and can assist instructional decisions (Nitko, 2004).
The tools to evaluate program effectiveness should include data-driven assessment. Data-driven evaluation measures the effectiveness of student assessments and program evaluations through data-informed curriculum and instruction (Petersen, 2007). The use of data can support the educational institution to increase student achievement in reading, math, and science, the subjects specifically identified in the intent of NCLB (Petersen, 2007). Facing the Future's curriculum is used in a variety of subjects as depicted in Figure 3. The organization contends that the global issues education of Facing the Future's program is taught in various subjects because addressing global issues requires an interdisciplinary approach (Bernier & Wheeler, 2004).
Although the organization contends that Facing the Future's assessment tools offer a range of quantitative and qualitative data on the program, little information is given except data compiled through teacher surveys (Bernier & Wheeler, 2004). The data from the teacher surveys, regarding Facing the Future's program, as previously mentioned, are inspiring. Hackney, Gilbride, and Scarborough (2003) contend that positive outcomes serve to build team effort and program commitment. When individuals realize the benefits of the program, investment in the program increases, and often attains new levels of success. However, other evaluation measures are needed to realize Facing the potential. Programs incorporate state efforts, including standardized exams, to guide and examine school district standards for measuring student assessment (Neill, 2006). Standardized exams can function as a means between federal demands for an increase in accountability, and local school district correctness in reporting instructional effectiveness (Piche, 2007). Hackney, Gilbride, and Scarborough (2003) assert that data can be both qualitative and quantitative and each type of data has a propensity to support and explain the other. The qualitative assessment of the teachers through surveys does enhance the perceptions of the Facing the Future program; however, quantitative data of student outcomes is lacking in the program evaluation. Quantitative data would add strength to the program evaluation by exemplifying reliable outcome data (Hackney, Gilbride & Scarborough, 2003).
In addition, the use of multiple assessments offers a more comprehensible representation of the student, teacher, or program than a single evaluation (Nitko, 2004). Multiple methods of assessment could include multiple-choice, open-ended questions, or portfolios (Nitko, 2004). Multiple assessments provide more information to educators and when used appropriately, and can enhance the curriculum and improve education (Nitko, 2004). In evaluating the program of Facing the Future, the only means of assessment is the completion of surveys by teachers. Surveys are an effective method to obtain information about the general reflections of the students and teachers although surveys do not reflect individual student achievement or performance (Nitko, 2004). Evaluation measures include instruments that assess student achievement. Tasks on a particular instrument are considered reliable if the task is stable in measurement and valid if the task measures what the task is supposed to measure (Ryser, 1994). Instruments provide educators with guidelines for curriculum and teaching to ensure that students have access to the knowledge necessary to achieve (Darling-Hammond, & Falk, 1997). Assessment methods in use by educators must be consistent with professional ethical and legal standards, which is an important yet fundamental aspect of assessment (Nitko, 2004). Teachers and administrators should convey understandable, challenging and attainable expectations for students; collect data on student performance by means of an assortment of assessment methods; keep a incessant and comprehensive record of student achievement; and offer continuing feedback of achievement to students and parents (Wilson, Squire, & Allan, 2000).
These assessments are capable of presenting educators with feedback on the success of their teaching methods, if the learning goals are practical, effective teaching activities, and which activities to adjust or discard. Educators need to have the aptitude to choose tests and other assessment methods that are fitting for the circumstances, technically acceptable, fair, and that present useful information. Consequently, educators need to have knowledge of assessment methods that are accessible for use in schools and the nature of information the various methods offer. To assess the technical qualities of tests, teachers need to be knowledgeable of both reliability and validity and be competent in making evaluative decisions about the value and appropriateness of various assessment methods (Reynolds et al., 2006). Most often, assessment information will originate from teacher-made tests. As a result, educators must be skillful in preparing, developing, and using classroom tests. Therefore, educators should be knowledgeable of principles and standards for developing various assessment practices including select-response items, construct-response items, performance assessments, and portfolios. Educators must also be able to assess the technical dimension of the instruments they develop. In addition, educators must have the ability to use assessment methods appropriately, realize the principles of standardization, and oversee tests in a standardized way (Reynolds et al., 2006). In the program evaluation, the organization does state that a more thorough longitudinal study is needed to fully address the impact of Facing the Future's curriculum on student achievement. As an educational organization, evaluation, assessment, and continuous monitoring will persist to form the development and expansion of global issues curriculum and programming.
Conclusion
The assessment and program evaluation the organization uses is ultimately about the students and the influence the Facing the Future's program has on their learning (Bernier & Wheeler, 2004). Student assessment relates to program evaluation since students' assessment expresses the effectiveness of the program. Program evaluation demonstrates the quality or value of the program, the curriculum, and other resources pertinent to students' achieving the established goals (Nitko, 2004).
In evaluating a program, student assessment, along with teacher practices, instruction, and curriculum should be examined as pieces of a whole (Reeves, 2002). The main function of program evaluation is to determine the value of the program being evaluated and can include such items as, learner outcomes, instruction methods, and facilitator effectiveness (Menix, 2007). Student assessment is evaluation of the learning process and is a key component in program evaluation. Information obtained through student assessment and program evaluation assist to establish program effectiveness. Program evaluation will determine the success or failure of the program and educators can then develop recommendations to modify the program. Student assessment is a process to determine the attainment of learning and to evaluate whether or not goals and objectives of the program were achieved. (Menix, 2007). Facing the Future's use of surveys, primarily as feedback from teachers, leaves students out of the program evaluation process.
References
Allen, J. (2004). The impact of student learning outcomes assessment on technical and
professional communication programs. Technical Communication Quarterly, (13).
Andrade, H. (2008). Self-assessment through rubrics. Educational Leadership, 65(4), 60-63.
Asselin, M. (2003). Assessment issues and recommendations. Teacher Librarian, (30).
Bernier, K.B.& Wheeler, G. (2004). Taking stock of our future: Program evaluation and
assessment of global issues education. Retrieved March 1, 2008 from
http://home.blarg.net/~building/strategies/assess/bernier_wheeler.htm
Bolt, S. E., & Thurlow, M. L. (2004). Five of the most frequently allowed testing
accommodations in state policy. Remedial and Special Education, 25(3), 141 - 152.
Darling-Hammond, L., & Falk, B. (1997). Using standards and assessments to support student
learning. Phi Delta Kappan, 79(3), 190 - 201.
Duran, A. (2005). Factors to consider when evaluating school accountability results. Journal of
Law and Education, 34(1), 73 - 100.
Facing the Future (2007). What educators say about our curriculum. Retrieved March 4, 2008
from www.facingthefuture.org
Frame, T. M., & Frame, M. J. (2008). Helping schools measure up. Retrieved January 26,
2008, from http://mooreschool.sc.edu
Gallagher, J.J. (2006). How to shoot oneself in the foot with program evaluation. Roeper
Review, (28).
Goldie, J. (2006). AMEE Education Guide no.29: Evaluating educational programs. Medical
Teacher, 28(3), 210-224.
Hackney, H., Gilbride, D., & Scarborough, J. (2003). Program evaluation: Looking in the mirror.
Counseling and Human Development, (35).
Harada, V.H. (2005). Working smarter: Being strategic about assessment and accountability.
Teacher Librarian, (33).
Harvest, D. (2008). Succeeding with struggling learners. Principal, 87(3), 12.
Hoff, D. J. (2008). Spellings seeks to cast her glow over NCLB. Education Week, 27(17), 1-20.
Retrieved February 18, 2008, from EBSCOhost database.
Menix, K.D. (2007). Evaluation of learning and program effectiveness. The Journal of
Continuing Education in Nursing, (38).
Michigan Department of Education (2002). What research says about parent involvement in children's education: In relation to academic achievement. Retrieved February 20, 2008, from Michigan Department of Education website:
http://www.michigan.gov/documents/Final_Parent_Involvement_Fact_Sheet_14732_7.pdf
Neill, M. (2006). Preparing teachers to beat the agony of NCLB. Education Digest, 71(8), 8-12.
Nitko, A. J. (2004). Educational assessment of students, (4th ed). Upper Saddle River, NJ:
Pearson Education Inc.
Petersen, J. L. (2007). Learning facts: The brave new world of data-informed instruction.
Education Next, 7(1), 36-42.
Piche, D. (2007). Basically a good model: NCLB can be fixed. Education Next, 7(4), 57-59.
Reeves, D. B. (2002). Holistic accountability: Serving students, schools, and
community. Thousand Oaks, CA: Corwin Press.
Reynolds, C. R., Livingston, R. B., & Wilson, V. (2006). Measurement and Assessment in
Education. Boston: Pearson Education Inc.
Ryser, G. (1994). Developing reliable and valid authentic assessments for the classroom. The
Journal of Secondary Gifted Education, 6(1), 62 - 66.
Published by Dr. Dennis Childers
Dr. Childers brings to associated content over twenty years of experience in business with an emphasis on management, marketing, finance, economics and education View profile
- My Hopes for the Future of EducationI read Barak Obama's views on education and while they looked pretty, ideas for sweeping change were not obvious. Fortunately, the website asked for ideas.
- Educational Assessment Goals and AssumptionsAssessment is an essential element of the learning process and ought to present pertinent information that improves teaching and supports learning.
- Future Third World Education
- Education of the Future
- There's No Education like a Florida Education
- The Past, Present and Future of Distance Education
- Do Children Really Need Early Childhood Education?
- Is Private Education Any Better Then Public Schools
- Is Year Round Education a Good Idea or Bad?