Responsive Client Centered Evaluation - PowerPoint Presentation

Slide1

Responsive Client Centered Evaluation

Michelle Cavazos

UTRGV

EDTC 8373- Evaluation and Assessment

of Instructional Technology

Dr. Rodriguez Slide2

Introduction

This approach was developed by Stake (1975) and focuses on background, process, standards,

judgements

, and outcomes. (Guerra-Lopez, 2008, pg. 41) This approach was published in 1975 calling for continuing communication between the evaluator and stakeholders for the purposes of discovering, investigating, and addressing important issues. (Guerra-Lopez, 2008, pg. 41) “Responsive evaluation studies emphasize social issues and cultural values as well as personal and programmatic dilemmas.” (Stake, 2004 ) Slide3

Conceptual Framework

They are the clients in the sense that they support, develop, administer, or directly operate the programs under study and seek or need evaluators’ counsel and advice in understanding, judging, and improving programs.

(

Stufflebeam, 2001, pg. 63) Advanced organizers can be used with this approach to investigate concerns and issues in the program including different points of the program.

The approach charges evaluators to interact

continuously

with, and respond to, the evaluative needs of the various clients, as well as other stakeholders.

(

Stufflebeam

, 2001, pg. 63)

Essentially this approach was created to satisfy a diverse clientele. Clients could include anyone from administrators, teachers, business people, lawyers, or any taxpayer. Slide4

Conceptual Framework

Philosophical Base

The client-centered/responsive approach has a strong philosophical base: evaluators should promote equity and fairness, help those with little power, thwart the misuse of power, expose the huckster, unnerve the assured, reassure the insecure, and always help people see things from alter- native viewpoints.

(Stufflebeam, 2001, pg. 69)

Continuing Interactions

The interactions that take place during the evaluation are key to success for the evaluation. If there is not communication occurring, then the evaluation has become unresponsive and not client-centered. Slide5

Background of the approach

“Stake

(1967, 1975, 1999) is the pioneer of the client-centered/responsive type of study, and his approach has been supported and developed by Denny (1978), MacDonald (1975),

Parlett and Hamilton (1972), Rippey (1973), and Smith and Pohland (1974). Guba’s

(1978) early development of constructivist evaluation was heavily influenced by Stake’s writings on responsive

evaluation

.

“ (

Stufflebeam

, 2001, pg.70)

This statement shows that the approach has had a heavy influence on evaluation programs for a period of time. Slide6

Summary Literature Review

Snufflebeam

(2001) provides great input and allows the reader to view both the strengths and weaknesses that are associated with this specific evaluation.

Snufflebeam praises this evaluation system for its diversity, but says it might bring confusion to stakeholders who are wanting just one complete and definitive answer. The other texts that are associated with the presetntation also offer reviews of the evaluation program as one of the “classics” and a program that does really well. The literature regarding the application of the evaluation was particularly insightful. Slide7

Constant Communication

Emerging Questions

Comprehensive Evaluation

Larger Perspective A major strength of the responsive/client-centered approach is that it involves action-research, in which people funding, implementing, and using programs are helped to conduct their own evaluations and use the findings to improve their understanding, decisions, and actions. (Snufflebeam, 2001, pg. 71)

Strengths of the Model Slide8

Limitations of the Model

This model would not work for people that are unwilling to communicate or be open to a complete picture.

Vulnerability regarding external credibility is a weakness. Slide9

Application of the Model

“Responsive

evaluation is especially appropriate in health promotion contexts characterized by ambiguity. Ambiguity refers to the absence of or contradictory interpretations about what needs to, can and should be done, when and where (

Weick, 1995; Abma and Noordegraaf, 2003). High degrees of ambiguity can be found in the following situations.”The characteristics of responsive evaluation allow for the correct context of health promotion and the need for ambiguity. Slide10

Application of the Model

NEW T-TESS Teacher Evaluation System

As with the new teacher evaluation system in Texas, there is constant communication and emerging questions

occuring in order to get the best possible evaluation.

This is a great example of seeing the responsive client centered approach in use current day. Slide11

Summary

In closing, the

responsvie

client centered approach is a valuable tool that has the diveresity to be used by many professionals as an evaluation approach.

Guba

(1981) also notes the approach to be very effective.

The approach provides a communicative investigation process that uncovers more and more information for the program being evaluated.

The approach is useful in many different areas and is easy to understand. The limitations are subjective in this approach.Slide12

References

Abma

, T. A. (2005). Responsive evaluation in health promotion: its value for ambiguous contexts.

Health Promotion International, 20(4), 391-397.Guba, E. G., & Lincoln, Y. S. (1981). Effective evaluation: Improving the usefulness of evaluation results through responsive and naturalistic approaches.

Jossey

-Bass.

Guerra-

López

, I. J. (2008).

Performance evaluation: Proven approaches for improving program and organizational performance

(Vol. 21). John Wiley & Sons

.

Stake, R. E. (2004).

Standards-based and responsive evaluation

. Sage

.

Stufflebeam

, D. (2001). Evaluation models.

New directions for evaluation

,

2001

(89), 7-98.