A Collaborative Model for School and Program Evaluation: Lethbridge School District No. 51.

Institution	Lethbridge Separate School District #51 (Alberta).
Titel	A Collaborative Model for School and Program Evaluation: Lethbridge School District No. 51.
Quelle	(1993), (121 Seiten) PDF als Volltext kostenfreie Datei Verfügbarkeit
Sprache	englisch
Dokumenttyp	gedruckt; online; Monographie
ISBN	0-7732-1138-1
Schlagwörter	Art Education; Curriculum Evaluation; Educational Assessment; Educational Cooperation; Educational Indicators; Educational Quality; Elementary Secondary Education; Evaluation Criteria; Evaluation Methods; Foreign Countries; Library Services; Models; Parent Attitudes; Program Evaluation; Questionnaires; School Districts; School Effectiveness; School Libraries; Student Attitudes; Teacher Attitudes + Suchen Sie Ihr Suchwort? Arts; Education; Art in Education; Kunst; Bildung; Erziehung; Curriculum; Evaluation; Curriculumevaluation; Lehrplan; Rahmenplan; Evaluierung; assessment; Bewertungssystem; cooperation; Kooperation; Educational indicato; Bildungsindikator; Quality of education; Bildungsqualität; Ausland; Bibliotheksarbeit; Analogiemodell; Elternverhalten; Programme evaluation; Programmevaluation; Fragebogen; School district; Schulbezirk; Schuleffizienz; School library; Schulbibliothek; Schülerverhalten; Lehrerverhalten
Abstract	The Lethbridge School District Number 51 Project attempted to develop a more effective model for system, school, and program evaluation in the Lethbridge, Alberta (Canada) schools. A literature review suggested that a collaborative model would be effective and would result in empowerment of school-based personnel through active involvement. The use of educational quality indicators served as a key component in development of the model. Current literature and input from committees and stakeholder groups were used to develop criteria in terms of indicators of effectiveness, quality, and improvement. Findings from the initial study were applied to the development of an evaluation of the arts and library programs with responses from 3,329 teachers, parents, and students for the art program; and 2,858 teachers, parents, and students for library programs. The final project stage focused on the art program and resulted in the identification of input, process, and outcome indicators of program effectiveness. Assessment processes to measure and verify outcomes were identified or developed, and a generic model was developed that could be applied to most program areas. The developed model is considered more effective than the former evaluation model used. Two tables and three figures illustrate the discussion. Five appendixes discuss the project teams and contain questionnaires and instruments used in the surveys. (SLD)
Erfasst von	ERIC (Education Resources Information Center), Washington, DC