Assignment #2

Program Evaluation...Case Study

The case study describing a government funded program for children with severe/profound disabilities is not uncommon to Saskatchewan educators. Although this program focuses on children who may or may not be in school we, in elementary schools, may be involved in providing programs such as this one. Funding availability hinges on similar criteria such as diagnosis, documentation in the form of a personal program plan and of course the level of support being provided.

The Formative Evaluation Approach is the method I would choose to assess the program in place to meet the needs of the children identified in the ECS Program as described in the case study. Scriven defines formative evaluation as ongoing with the intent to improve while summative evaluation is conducted after a program is complete, usually for an external audience. The urgency to support young children in their early years of development cannot be overstated. That there is a limited time allotted to each child in this program would suggest ongoing evaluation needs to be conducted so necessary changes can be made to meet the ongoing needs and changes in the child. To wait until the end of the year to evaluate a program that supports a child’s emotional, social and cognitive growth and subsequent success of the program could be detrimental. The required minimum four visits during the school year provides the opportunity to evaluate the progress in the child and alter the program to support his or her ongoing development, that being said, the Formative Approach seems to be an obvious choice.

Formative Evaluation is a reflective method that as three important attributes that would support its implementation. First it allows the opportunity for quick feedback to determine the effectiveness of the program and strategies that are in place to meet the learning needs of the child. Secondly, cumulative documentation provides updated information on the techniques and resources that are being used and their effectiveness, what challenges are encountered and what impacts have been made not only at the end of the school year but early and mid way through as well. Lastly, formative evaluation supports planning and allows for reconsideration of or recommitment to the plans. It also allows for the reevaluation of goals and supports future planning and implementation. The three attributes described align with the necessary records that will lead the funders to continue or deny future financial support for a particular child with significant disabilities.

Another reason for choosing this method is the number of evaluation tools available as part of this process. The varying tools such as interviews, questionnaires, reports and student interaction allow for the evidence of learning to be triangulated through observation, conversation and product. With the triangulation of information the program provider can involve family and caregivers, medical personnel and the education team in gathering the necessary evidence. Involving the entire community of support is a necessary and important piece of a successful learning plan. In conclusion I would suggest that the importance of selecting the right strategies to work with some of the youngest and most needy children in a timely and effective way can be through the described formative evaluation.