Adverse Evaluation and Behavioral Observation[1].Pptx Final Version

8/11/2019 Adverse Evaluation and Behavioral Observation[1].Pptx Final Version

1/20

Presented TO Dr. M. IqbalPresented by MAJ NAZIR HUSSAIN SHAHRoll No.20 M.Phil Education 1st semester

(MINHAJ UNIVERSITY LAHORE)

Topic of presentation:ADVERSE EVALUATION AND

BEHAVIORAL OBSERVATION


2/20

(MINHAJ UNIV RSITY AHOR )

Definition of Evaluation

Evaluation may be defined as

The systematic collection and interpretation of

evidence, leading to a judgment of value

intended to produce action.

(Worthen and Sanders.1996)


3/20

FORMAYTIVE AND SUMMATIVE EVALUATION:

INSTRUCTIONAL PROGRMMES

FORMATIVE EVALUATION/ PROCESS EVALUATION

Formative evaluation is concerned with

judgments made during the design and or

development of a programme which are

directed towards modifying , forming or

otherwise improving the programme before it is

completed. I t is used to monitor learning

progress during instruction and to providecontinuous feedback to both pupil and teacher

concerning learning successes and failures.


4/20

MAJOR CHARACTERISTICS of Formative Evaluation.1. Formative evaluation is done during an instructional programme.

2.The instructional programme should aim at the attainment of certain

objectives during the implementation of the programme also.3. It is done to monitor learning and modifying the programme if neededbefore its completion.

4. It is for current students .

5. Relatively focuses on molecular analysis.

6. Interested in broader experiences of the programme users.7. Design is exploratory and flexible.

8. Tends to ignore the local effects of particular programme.

9. Seeks to identify influential variables .

10. It requires analysis of instructional material for mapping the

hierarchal structure of the learning task and actual teaching of thecourse for a certain period.


5/20

Summative Evaluation

Summative evaluation describes judgments about the merits ofalready completed programme, procedure or product.

Summative evaluation typically comes at the end of a course (orunit) of instruction. It is designed to determine the extent towhich the instructional objectives have been achieved and isused primarily for assigning course grades or certifying pupilmastery of the intended learning outcomes. Summativeevaluation is conducted at the end of instructional segments

determine if learning is sufficiently complete to warrantmoving the learner to the next segment of instruction. Asummative evaluation can provide evidence that the programmeis satisfactory and should be continued for next year studentlearning and learning attitudes are so negative that a newprogramme is needed. This evaluation is done at the conclusion

of instruction and measures the extent to which students haveattained the desired outcomes.


6/20

MAJOR CHARACTERISTICS

of Summative evaluation

Summative evaluation is done at the end or completion of a particularinstructional programme whose duration may vary from a semester towhole year. There should be some instruction programmed before

summative evaluation;

Evaluation should check whether there has been learning or not. If theanswer is yes, then what is the quantity and quality of the learning inrelation to pre-determined objective?

Instructional programme should for the attainment of some objectives.

Learning Provides feedback to the classroom teacher for the success orfailure of the programme or and of the student.

The summative Evaluation lends to the use of well-defined evaluationdesign, focuses on analysis, provides descriptive analysis and tends o stresslocal effects. the evaluation is unobtrusive and non-reactive as far aspossible, concerned with broad range of issues and instruments are reliableand valid.


7/20


8/20

Needs Priority Objective

Identifications Setting Settings

Specifications of Learners

Design and Development ofTraining (Curriculum methods and media)

Delivery of Training

Reinforcement

of Learning

Fig,3.1 The Training Cycle (Linear Version)


9/20

The Training Cycle

In Figure 3.1 the elements of diagnosing the learningneed, designing and then delivering the training , andproviding follow-up reinforcement have been brokendown into a number of discrete stages. As it stands

however, the model is linear rather than cyclical. Thetraining has been put together in a more effective way,but there is no way of knowing whether or not thetraining itself is having any effect. The loop is closed bythe feedback element of evaluation the range of

techniques that asks three important questions:Has this training done what was intended?

Was what was achieved worth the effort?

Is there a better way of doing it?


10/20

Needs Priority Objective

Identifications Setting Settings

Specifications of Learners

Design and Development ofTraining (Curriculum methods and media)

Delivery of Training

Reinforcement

Evaluation of Learning

Fig,3.2 The Training Cycle (with evaluation feedback)


11/20

Figure 3.2 shows the loop completed by theelement of evaluation. In an ideal world,

evaluation would not be necessary becauseall training would be perfectly designed,skillfully implemented and thoroughly rein-forced in the workplace. Even in the realworld, much can be done to minimize theneed for evaluation, through properlyconsidered training design. However, this

covers the fundamentals of effectivedesign, drawing upon the experiences ofevaluation research and consultancy.


12/20

DIAGNOSTIC EVALUATION

Diagnostic evaluation is a highly specialized procedure. It isconcerned with the persistent or recurring learning difficulties that areleft unresolved by the standard corrective prescriptions of formativeevaluation. If pupil continues to experience failure in readingmathematics or other subjects despite the use of prescribed alternatemethods of instruction.

You cannot have cost-effective training without accurate diagnosis ofneeds, which means going out into the workplace to discover justwhat it is that people need to learn on order to workplace to discoverjust what it Jobs. Diagnosis starts from such questions as, what arepeople doing (or not doing) that needs, to be changed?, or, What

would you, the manager, like to see people doing differently after theyhave been trained? the emphasis must be on the observed behaviorthat needs to be changed, or introduced. It is never a diagnosticresponse to say, what this person needs is a course on..., or, thisperson has a bad attitude to.


13/20


14/20

Evaluation within the training Cycle

In figure 3.4, I showed how the training cycle is completedonly when evaluation is included. The first point to note isthat the value of what you find out by using evaluation is verydependent upon two factors in particular .

1.well-designed training objectives.

2.use of an appropriate evaluation technique.If the learning objectives were fuzzy, so will be yourevaluation findings. When people return from a training eventsaying like , Great event ,Really enjoyed it , Feel I learned alot, then the warning bells should ring.

Clear objectives produce specific outcomes,What I can now do differently is----


15/20

Techniques of Evaluation

Response sheets

Questionnaire

Interviews

Committees and Panels

Critical Incident Review Repertory Grid

Action Plan Review

Written Test

Practical Test

Behaviour Observation Costbenefit Analysis

Timing of Training Assessment


16/20

Standardization of term is still limited ,but the

following distinctions are common

1 time ongoing (as opposed to ex- post ) evaluation iswhile an activity is still continuing .

2-Monitoring as data-collection and reporting occur

during the operation but serve both ongoing and ex post work;data is also collected before and after the operation.

3-Rolesthe rational for formative, evolution is to improve aprogrammed which will continue ,

Summative evaluation considers total effect an weatherprogrammed should have been undertaken or

Be continued

Evaluation may be internal that is done with in a

programmed , or external


17/20

WHY HAPPY SHEETS DON,T ASSESS TRAINING

ADEQUATELYThe happy sheet has major limitations. The most significant are as under:1- It does not measure learning at most it gives an indication of whether

or not trainees think that they have learnt something , this self

perception of learning is often very unreliable .

2- It provides no information on whether or not learning will transfer into

the workplace what trainees say they will do on happy sheets and what

actually happens may diverge widely

3- It does not reliably assess the effectiveness of training methods , nor

that of the trainers themselves, trainees can rarely make useful

judgments about the appropriateness of the raining methods , andjudgments about trainer performance or far too easily swayed by

personal feelings (positive or negative ) that do not determine the

amount of learning achieved


18/20

Behavior Observation

Behavior observation is of course a type of practical test,in which the person trained in some aspect of interpersonal skills(as distinct from the technical or commercial skills which are thefocus of practical tests) demonstrates the ability to perform thatskill.

The technique provides a method for accurate, systematicobservation of verbal and physical behavior, before, during andafter training post- training assessment in the work place is oftenthe most useful application and this of course depends on theinvolvement of mangers or supervisors, Behavior observation

checklist require very careful preparation and trained observers.The strength of the technique is that it emphasizes

observable behavior and discourages guessing at subjectsattitudes.. This gives it its objectivity, as well as acting as areinforcement of behavioral learning objectives.


19/20

One of the greatest problems in evaluation is to try tofilter out the personal views and prejudices of thosewho actually conduct the evaluation. People are notobjective. Just like facts and figures. Rather than try toneutralize personal prejudices. Some have argued thatthey should be accepted and used. If a person is to beused in the evaluation of programme, why not use aperson who is publicly known to be opposed to colour afavorable evaluation. The opposite is true in that aperson with negative attitudes towards, for example, aparticular approach to or programmes for women willnot be expected to make favorable comments, anypositive views expressed can be, therefore, consideredas very good responses

R f


20/20

^Powell K. Opening a window to the autistic brain. PLoS Biol. 2004;2(8):E267.

doi:10.1371/journal.pbio.0020267. PMID 15314667. PMC509312.

^ abcdefghijklmMyers SM, Johnson CP, Council on Children with Disabilities. Management of

children with autism spectrum disorders. Pediatrics. 2007;120(5):116282.

doi:10.1542/peds.2007-2362. PMID 17967921. Lay summary:AAP, 2007-10-29.

^ abOspina MB, Krebs Seida J, Clark B et al.Behavioural and developmental interventions for

autism spectrum disorder: a clinical systematic review. PLoS ONE. 2008;3(11):e3755.

doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0003755. PMID 19015734. PMC2582449.

^ abKrebs Seida J, Ospina MB, Karkhaneh M, Hartling L, Smith V, Clark B. Systematic reviews of

psychosocial interventions for autism: an umbrella review. Dev Med Child Neurol.2009;51(2):95104. doi:10.1111/j.1469-8749.2008.03211.x. PMID 19191842.

^ abcdRogers SJ, Vismara LA. Evidence-based comprehensive treatments for early autism.J Clin

ChildAdolesc Psychol. 2008;37(1):838. doi:10.1080/15374410701817808. PMID 18444052.

^ abcHowlin P, Magiati I, Charman T. Systematic review of early intensive behavioral

interventions for children with autism.Am J Intellect Dev Disabil. 2009;114(1):2341.

doi:10.1352/2009.114:23-41. PMID 19143460. ^ abEikeseth S. Outcome of comprehensive psycho-educational interventions for young

children with autism. Res Dev Disabil. 2009;30(1):15878. doi:10.1016/j.ridd.2008.02.003. PMID

18385012.

References
http://www.plosbiology.org/article/info:doi/10.1371/journal.pbio.0020267http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Digital_Object_Identifierhttp://dx.doi.org/10.1371/journal.pbio.0020267http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/15314667http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/PubMed_Centralhttp://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC509312/http://pediatrics.aappublications.org/cgi/content/full/120/5/1162http://pediatrics.aappublications.org/cgi/content/full/120/5/1162http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Digital_Object_Identifierhttp://dx.doi.org/10.1542/peds.2007-2362http://dx.doi.org/10.1542/peds.2007-2362http://dx.doi.org/10.1542/peds.2007-2362http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/17967921http://aap.org/advocacy/releases/oct07autism.htmhttp://www.plosone.org/article/info:doi/10.1371/journal.pone.0003755http://www.plosone.org/article/info:doi/10.1371/journal.pone.0003755http://www.plosone.org/article/info:doi/10.1371/journal.pone.0003755http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Digital_Object_Identifierhttp://dx.doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0003755http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/19015734http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/PubMed_Centralhttp://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2582449/http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Digital_Object_Identifierhttp://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1469-8749.2008.03211.xhttp://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1469-8749.2008.03211.xhttp://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1469-8749.2008.03211.xhttp://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/19191842http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2943764/http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2943764/http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2943764/http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Digital_Object_Identifierhttp://dx.doi.org/10.1080/15374410701817808http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/18444052http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Digital_Object_Identifierhttp://dx.doi.org/10.1352/2009.114:23-41http://dx.doi.org/10.1352/2009.114:23-41http://dx.doi.org/10.1352/2009.114:23-41http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/19143460http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Digital_Object_Identifierhttp://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.ridd.2008.02.003http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/18385012http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/18385012http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/18385012http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/18385012http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.ridd.2008.02.003http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Digital_Object_Identifierhttp://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/19143460http://dx.doi.org/10.1352/2009.114:23-41http://dx.doi.org/10.1352/2009.114:23-41http://dx.doi.org/10.1352/2009.114:23-41http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Digital_Object_Identifierhttp://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/18444052http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/15374410701817808http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Digital_Object_Identifierhttp://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2943764/http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2943764/http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2943764/http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/19191842http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1469-8749.2008.03211.xhttp://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1469-8749.2008.03211.xhttp://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1469-8749.2008.03211.xhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Digital_Object_Identifierhttp://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2582449/http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/PubMed_Centralhttp://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/19015734http://dx.doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0003755http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Digital_Object_Identifierhttp://www.plosone.org/article/info:doi/10.1371/journal.pone.0003755http://www.plosone.org/article/info:doi/10.1371/journal.pone.0003755http://www.plosone.org/article/info:doi/10.1371/journal.pone.0003755http://www.plosone.org/article/info:doi/10.1371/journal.pone.0003755http://aap.org/advocacy/releases/oct07autism.htmhttp://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/17967921http://dx.doi.org/10.1542/peds.2007-2362http://dx.doi.org/10.1542/peds.2007-2362http://dx.doi.org/10.1542/peds.2007-2362http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Digital_Object_Identifierhttp://pediatrics.aappublications.org/cgi/content/full/120/5/1162http://pediatrics.aappublications.org/cgi/content/full/120/5/1162http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC509312/http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/PubMed_Centralhttp://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/15314667http://dx.doi.org/10.1371/journal.pbio.0020267http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Digital_Object_Identifierhttp://www.plosbiology.org/article/info:doi/10.1371/journal.pbio.0020267

Adverse Evaluation and Behavioral Observation[1].Pptx Final Version

Documents

Transcript of Adverse Evaluation and Behavioral Observation[1].Pptx Final Version