The two models that I have chosen are Tyler’s Objective
Model and Eisner’s Connoisseurship Model.
Tyler’s Objective
Model
Ralph Tyler developed this model in 1949. He was the original idea of the concept of
curriculum evaluation. He coined the
term “evaluation” to encompass his idea of aligning measurements and testing
with educational objectives. The model that he has developed has been the
building block of what we have today in curriculum and evaluation. By developing this model he was able to clearly
identify what was to be taught and measured.
Tyler’s model is a four part
summative model that consists of objectives, instructional strategies and
content, organization of learning experiences, and assessment and evaluation
that was designed based on four questions:
1. What is the object of education?
2. What teaching experiences that we have to provide in order to achieve educational object?
3. How to effectively organize the educational experience?
4. How can we know whether these objects have achieved? (How to evaluate?)
1. What is the object of education?
2. What teaching experiences that we have to provide in order to achieve educational object?
3. How to effectively organize the educational experience?
4. How can we know whether these objects have achieved? (How to evaluate?)
I would use this model when
teaching very specific content objectives (TEKS), that I know are need for the district
mandated ACP for an Art I course. There
are cons for this model I think that it can lead to tunnel vision that you are
only focusing on the objective to be taught, no other outcome. It probably would not be the ideal in a
diverse environment, but when it comes to the test, all take the test regardless
of language and special needs.
Eisner’s
Connoisseurship and Criticism Model
I thought it would be appropriate to research this model of
evaluation given that I am an art educator.
According to Eisner (1998), connoisseurship is “the art of appreciation”
and educational connoisseurs are those who have a distinctive awareness of qualities
in different settings. Eisner’s expertise-oriented evaluation was influenced by
his background in art education. Eisner
emphasizes the importance of an evaluator as judge and relies on qualitative
data. At times it is difficult to
explain the success of an arts program due to the lack of quantitative date
(figures & percentages). With this
model the evaluator is said to have an “enlighten eye”. The evaluator is considered to be the
expertise in the field and is the one that will provide the evaluation.
I would use this model for evaluation for a lesson in
abstract art, such as the student’s ability to illustrate the idea of
abstraction. I the evaluator would
require an expertise in order to determine the success for a lesson. Many times my fellow colleague and I will sit
down and evaluate our student’s projects together, so that there two experts
involved.
This model it is used in other professions. When walking this morning with a friend of
mine, who is a clinical therapist, I asked her if she was a connoisseur in her
field, especially when it came to evaluation of a client. She explained that though she did have a
checklist for evaluating her client, in the end it is her expertise that makes
the diagnosis.
The questions that I would believe to be useful to know are
the following:
- What are our demographics?
- Are the test questions written on the appropriate age level?
- Do we have the resources needed?
- Is the classroom instruction aligned with the test materials?
- How relevant was the instruction to learner?
- Is the information appropriate for the learner?
- What is the cost effectiveness of producing this evaluation?
- What are the long term goals?
- How will teachers be held accountable for results of the evaluations?
Phases of Situational Leadership
Phase
1: Leaders tell their people what to
do and how to do it.
Phase
2: Leaders provide information and
direction, but there's more communication with followers. Leaders
"sell" their message to get people on board.
Phase
3: Leaders focus more on the
relationship and less on direction. The leader works with the team, and shares
decision-making responsibilities.
Phase 4:
Leaders pass most of the responsibility onto the follower or group. The leaders
still monitor progress, but they're less involved in decisions.
When
planning a professional development in technology during a time of economic
decline I would use the four phases above in the following manner.
Phase 1: First I would develop an outline of
the professional development sessions that would contain what to do and how to
do.
During
this time I would ask what are the resources here on campus. Who specifically uses the resources? What is
the most effective use of the resources?
For example,
the Math and English classrooms on our campus typically use the ELMOS, and the
Smart Boards are typically used in the Math and Science classrooms. This may be a perfect example of managing
resources during a time of economic decline.
As not all departments have the same resources due to funding.
Phase 2: I would get on board a group of core
teachers that use the specific technology in their classroom daily, this will
be the team. The team should have a proficient knowledge
of the technology. The team will then plan, organize, and
develop the professional development session for the targeted group of teachers.
Phase 3: During this phase I would coach the
team, and build relationships with the team.
Provide encouragement and rewards
for their hard work, listen to any concerns or problems that the team may be
dealing with during the development of the session.
Phase 4: During this phase I would monitor
the team. As the team is preparing for the professional
development session the team will make the all final decisions that are needed
for the professional development.
Kristen. I think in many ways teachers are also connoisseur in the field of education. Many times we must be the expert that makes the "diagnoses." Throughout the day we are having to make decisions based on student achievement, intervention strategies, behavior, etc. Although data is very important and we must be aware of it and understand it, it does not always represent the success of a student. That is where we must make expert decisions to push the student to his/her best potential.
ReplyDeleteI also appreciated you mentioning that you and your teammate will critique a piece of art for the sake of sharing different opinions and grading it appropriately. Working with a team that gets along and can work together is part of being successful within the classroom and in return the students are successful too.
I enjoyed reading about Tyler’s Objective Model and agree with your tunnel vision statement. You do a good job of pointing what could be a big concern if the entire focus is on objectives. I have always had concerns in my class even with learning targets. There has to be a balance of control and giving kids/teachers some voice in the learning is important.
ReplyDeleteI like the idea of creating a core group of teachers that are using the toll effectively. Teachers often give more value to their "own peers" ideas than those of admin or leadership. Having those experts as a go-between would be very valuable. I believe the relationship aspect is the most important part of the process and I am glad you mentioned building those relationships. Building relationships is crucial to being a productive manager or leader.
I like how you organized your post. It was easy to read and follow.
ReplyDeleteNice job on finding a evaluation model that fits your educational area. I imagine that art is not quantitative and further illustrates why we need those models to evaluate. I imagine you were surprised to see it relate to other professions such as your clinical therapist friend.
You came up with a good list of questions also. How teachers will be held accountable is interesting; a sensitive area indeed.
I also included costs in my response.
I am curious about the demographics in how that might play a factor. If you have something in mind and wouldn't mind elaborating, I would be interested.
I agree that the phases of the situational leadership are as you have them listed, but I undestand it differently than you explained. As I see it, the phases of leadership are based on each individual on the team. Some team members will be in phase 1 while others are in phase 4. The goal is to engage the members where they are and motivate them based on what they need. Do they need motivation or knowledge? For some, you can enlist their help because they are highly motivated and skilled and their ability to help will fuel their ongoing participation.