Project Evaluation Don Millard John Yu [email protected] [email protected]@[email protected] March 27, 2012 Guy-Alain Amoussou Lou Everett [email protected].

Project Evaluation

Don Millard John Yu [email protected] [email protected]

March 27, 2012

Guy-Alain Amoussou Lou Everett [email protected] [email protected]

March 28, 2012

Handout 1

mailto:[email protected]




Before you leave the session please complete the assessment survey:

http://www.nsflsu.com

Note: please correct this URL in your handouts

BEFORE you leave today!

Most of the information presented in this workshop represents the presenters’ opinions and not an official NSF position

Local facilitators will provide the link to the workshop slides at the completion of the webinar.

Participants may ask questions by “raising their virtual hand” during a question session. We will call on selected sites and enable their microphone so that the question can be asked.

Responses will be collected from a few sites at the end of each Exercise. At the start of the Exercise, we will identify these sites in the Chat Box and then call on them one at a time to provide their responses.

3

Important Notes

Learning must build on prior knowledge ◦ Some knowledge correct ◦ Some knowledge incorrect – Misconceptions

Learning is ◦ Connecting new knowledge to prior knowledge◦ Correcting misconceptions

Learning requires engagement◦ Actively recalling prior knowledge◦ Sharing new knowledge◦ Forming a new understanding

Framework for the Session

4

Effective learning activities ◦ Recall prior knowledge -- actively, explicitly◦ Connect new concepts to existing ones◦ Challenge and alter misconceptions

Active & collaborative processes◦ Think individually◦ Share with partner◦ Report to local and virtual groups ◦ Learn from program directors’ responses

5

Preliminary Comments

Active & Collaborative Learning

Coordinate the local activities

Watch the time◦Allow for think, share, and report phases◦Reconvene on time -- 1 min warning ◦ With one minute warning, check Chat Box to see if you will be

asked for a response

Ensure the individual think phase is devoted to thinking and not talking

Coordinate the asking of questions by local participants and reporting local responses to exercises

6

Facilitator’s Duties

The session will enable you to collaborate more effectively with evaluation experts in preparing credible and comprehensive project evaluation plans…. it will not make you an evaluation expert.

Goal for Project Evaluation Session

7

After the session, participants should be able to: Discuss the importance of goals, outcomes, and

questions in the evaluation process◦ Cognitive and affective outcomes

Describe several types of evaluation tools◦ Advantages, limitations, and appropriateness

Discuss data interpretation issues◦ Variability, alternative explanations

Develop an evaluation plan in collaboration with an evaluator◦ Outline a first draft of an evaluation plan

Session Outcomes

8

The terms evaluation and assessment have many meanings◦ One definition

Assessment is gathering evidence Evaluation is interpreting data and making value judgments

Examples of evaluation and assessment◦ Individual’s performance (grading)◦ Program’s effectiveness (ABET and regional accreditation)◦ Project’s progress and success (monitoring and validating)

Session addresses project evaluation◦ May involve evaluating individual and group performance – but in the

context of the project Project evaluation

◦ Formative – monitoring progress to improve approach◦ Summative – characterizing and documenting final accomplishments

Evaluation and Assessment

9

Think about your favorite course. What types of in-class activities could be called:◦ Assessment versus Evaluation?◦ Formative versus Summative Evaluation?

Exercise ---- 6 min◦ Think individually -------- ~2 min◦ Share with a partner ----- ~2 min ◦ Report in local group ---- ~2 min

Watch time and reconvene after 6 min Use THINK time to think – no discussion, Selected local

facilitators report to virtual group

With one minute warning, check Chat Box to see if you will be asked for a response

Activity

Evaluation vs AssessmentFormative vs Summative

10

An in-class quiz could be called assessment. Using the in-class quiz results to realize the students are not

achieving a learning outcome is an evaluation. Using your evaluation results to change your approach as the

course progresses is a formative evaluation. Integrating your evaluation over the whole semester to

determine if you achieved your objective is summative evaluation.

11

PD Response

Evaluation vs AssessmentFormative vs Summative

Handout 2

Project Goals, Expected Outcomes, and Evaluation Questions

Effective evaluation starts with carefully defined project goals and expected outcomes

Goals and expected outcomes related to:◦Project management

Initiating or completing an activity Finishing a “product”

◦Student behavior Modifying a learning outcome Modifying an attitude or a perception

Evaluation and Project Goals/Outcomes

13

Goals provide overarching statements of project intention

What is your overall ambition? What do you hope to achieve?

Expected outcomes identify specific observable or measureable results for each goal

How will achieving your “intention” be reflected by changes in student behavior?How will it change their learning and their attitudes?

Learning Goals and Outcomes

14

Goals → Expected outcomes

Expected outcomes → Evaluation questions

Questions form the basis of the evaluation process

The evaluation process consists of the collection and interpretation of data to answer evaluation questions

Goals, Expected Outcomes, and Evaluation Questions

15

Read the abstract -- Goal statement removed Suggest two plausible goals

◦ One on student learning Cognitive behavior

◦ One on some other aspect of student behavior Affective behavior

Focus on what will happen to the students ◦ Do not focus on what the instructor will do

Long Exercise ---- 6 min◦ Think individually -------- ~2 min◦ Share with a partner ----- ~2 min ◦ Report in local group ---- ~2 min

Watch time and reconvene after 6 min Use THINK time to think – no discussion, Selected local facilitators

report to virtual group

Activity

Identification of Goals/Outcomes

16

The goal of the project is …… The project is developing computer-based instructional modules for statics and mechanics of materials. The project uses 3D rendering and animation software, in which the user manipulates virtual 3D objects in much the same manner as they would physical objects. Tools being developed enable instructors to realistically include external forces and internal reactions on 3D objects as topics are being explained during lectures. Exercises are being developed for students to be able to communicate with peers and instructors through real-time voice and text interactions. The project is being evaluated by … The project is being disseminated through … The broader impacts of the project are …

Two goals: one for student learning and one for student behavior

Non engineers should substitute: “Organic chemistry” for “statics and mechanics of materials” “Interactions” for “external forces and internal reactions”

Abstract

17

GOAL: To improve conceptual understanding and processing skills

In the context of course◦ Draw free-body diagrams for textbook problems◦ Solve 3-D textbook problems ◦ Describe the effect(s) of external forces on a solid object orally

In a broader context◦ Solve out-of-context problems ◦ Visualize 3-D problems◦ Communicate technical problems orally◦ Improve critical thinking skills◦ Enhance intellectual development

PDs’ Response: Goals on Cognitive Behavior

18Handout 3

GOAL: To improve◦ Self- confidence◦ Attitude about engineering as a career

PDs’ Response: Goals on Affective Behavior

19

Write SMART outcomes for your goals• Specific• Measurable• Attainable• Realistic• Timely

Achieving outcomes brings you closer to your goal, e.g. ◦Goal: My students will be life long learners◦Outcomes (some of these lack SMART components):

reading an unassigned technical article, attending a professional society meeting attending a non required seminar or talk

Outcomes provide observable effects that goals are being achieved

Transforming Goals into Outcomes

20

Write expected measurable outcomes for each of the following goals:

◦ Improve the students’ understanding of the fundamental concepts in statics (cognitive)

◦ Improve the students’ self confidence (affective)


Watch time and reconvene after 6 min Use THINK time to think – no discussion, Selected local facilitators

report to virtual group

Activity

Transforming Goals into Outcomes

Non engineers may substitute: “Organic chemistry” for “statics”

21

PDs’ Response: Expected Outcomes

Understanding of the fundamentals◦ By the end of the class, 70% of the students will be able to:

Correctly draw freebody diagrams of 2D truss structures Correctly write Newton’s laws when given a FBD Describe the effects on member force when one angle in a

2D truss is changed

Self-Confidence◦ By the end of the semester:

30% of the class volunteers to show the solution to any homework problem on the board

Self reported test anxiety reduces to 50% of the initial amount 80% will say the class was easier than they expected it would be 50% report they are excited about taking the follow-on course

22Handout 4

Evaluation Questions

Understanding of the fundamentals◦ Are the students better able to describe the effects of

changing some variable in a simple problem◦ Are the students better able to describe the effects of

changing some variable in a simple problem as a result of the intervention

Self-Confidence◦ Do the students express more confidence in their solutions◦ Do the students express more confidence in their solutions as

a result of the intervention

23

Questions

“Hold-up your virtual hand” and you will be called upon after we unmute your mike.

BREAK15 min

BREAK1 min warning

Tools for Evaluating Learning Outcomes

Surveys ◦ Forced choice or open-ended responses

Concept Inventories◦ Multiple-choice questions to measure conceptual understanding

Rubrics for analyzing student products◦ Guides for scoring student reports, tests, etc.

Interviews◦ Structured (fixed questions) or in-depth (free flowing)

Focus groups◦ Like interviews but with group interaction

Observations◦ Actually monitor and evaluate behavior

Olds et al, JEE 94:13, 2005

NSF’s Evaluation Handbook

Examples of Tools for Evaluating Learning Outcomes

28

Comparing Surveys and Observations

Surveys Efficient Accuracy depends on

subject’s honesty Difficult to develop reliable

and valid survey Low response rate

threatens reliability, validity & interpretation

Observations Time & labor intensive Inter-rater reliability must

be established Captures behavior that

subjects are unlikely to report

Useful for observable behavior

Olds et al, JEE 94:13, 2005

29

Example – Appropriateness of Interviews

Use interviews to answer these questions:◦What does program look and feel like?◦What do stakeholders know about the project?◦What are stakeholders’ and participants’ expectations?◦What features are most salient?◦What changes do participants perceive in themselves?

The 2002 User Friendly Handbook for Project Evaluation, NSF publication REC 99-

12175

30

Originated in physics -- Force Concept Inventory (FCI) Several are being developed in engineering fields Series of multiple choice questions◦ Questions involve single concept

Formulas, calculations or problem solving skills not required

◦ Possible answers include distractors Common errors -- misconceptions

Developing CI is involved◦ Identify misconceptions and detractors◦ Develop, test, and refine questions◦ Establish validity and reliability of tool ◦ Language is a major issue

Tool for Measuring Conceptual Understanding – Concept Inventory

31

Tool for Assessing Attitude

Pittsburgh Freshman Engineering Survey◦ Questions about perception

Confidence in their skills in chemistry, communications, engineering, etc.

Impressions about engineering as a precise science, as a lucrative profession, etc.

Validated using alternate approaches: ◦ Item analysis◦ Verbal protocol elicitation◦ Factor analysis

Compared results for students who stayed in engineering to those who left

Besterfield-Sacre et al , JEE 86:37, 1997 32

Tools for Characterizing Intellectual Development

Levels of Intellectual Development◦Students see knowledge, beliefs, and authority in

different ways “ Knowledge is absolute” versus “Knowledge is

contextual” Tools ◦Measure of Intellectual Development (MID)◦Measure of Epistemological Reflection (MER)◦ Learning Environment Preferences (LEP)

Felder et al, JEE 94:57, 2005

33

Suppose you were considering an existing tool (e. g., a concept inventory) for use in your project’s evaluation of learning outcomes

What questions would you consider in deciding if the tool is appropriate?


Watch time and reconvene after 6 min Use THINK time to think – no discussion Selected local facilitators report to virtual group

Activity

Considering an Existing Tool

34

Nature of the tool◦ Is the tool relevant to what was taught? ◦ Is the tool competency based? ◦ Is the tool conceptual or procedural?

Prior validation of the tool◦ Has the tool been tested? ◦ Is there information concerning its reliability and validity? ◦ Has it been compared to other tools? ◦ Is it sensitive? Does it discriminate between a novice and an expert?

Experience of others with the tool◦ Has the tool been used by others besides the developer? At other

sites? With other populations? ◦ Is there normative data?

PDs’ Response

Evaluating an Existing Tool

35Handout 5

Questions

Hold up your “virtual hand” to ask a question.

Interpreting Evaluation Data

Interpreting Evaluation Data

Comparision Group

Experimental Group

Comparision Group

Experimental Group

1 25 30 29% 23%2 24 32 34% 65%3 25 31 74% 85%

- - - - -

Question or

Concept

Percent w ith Correct AnswerNo. of Students

Data suggest that the understanding of Concept #2 increased

38

Comparision Group

Experimental Group

Comparision Group

Experimental Group

1 25 30 29% 23%2 24 32 34% 65%3 25 31 74% 85%

- - - - -

Question or

Concept

Percent with Correct AnswerNo. of Students

Data suggest that the understanding of Concept #2 increased

One interpretation is that the intervention caused the change

List some alternative explanations ◦ Confounding factors◦ Other factors that could explain the change


Watch time and reconvene after 6 min Use THINK time to think – no discussion Selected local facilitators report

to virtual group

Activity

Alternative Explanations For Change

Students learned the concept out of class (e. g., in another course or in study groups with students not in the course)

Students answered with what they thought the instructor wanted rather than what they believed or “knew”

An external event distorted the pretest data The instrument was unreliable Other changes in the course and not the intervention was

responsible for the improvement The characteristics of groups were not similar

PDs’ Response

Alternative Explanations For Change

40Handout 6

Data suggest that the understanding of the concept tested by Q1 did not improve

One interpretation is that the intervention did cause a change that was masked by other factors

Think about alternative explanations How would these alternative explanations

(confounding factors) differ from the previous list?

Alternative Explanations for Lack of Change

Comparision Group

Experimental Group

Comparision Group

Experimental Group

1 25 30 29% 23%2 24 32 34% 65%3 25 31 74% 85%

- - - - -

Question or

Concept

Percent w ith Correct AnswerNo. of Students

Evaluation Plan

List the topics that need to be addressed in the evaluation plan (a.k.a. summarize)


Watch time and reconvene after 6 min Use THINK time to think – no discussion Selected local facilitators report to virtual group

Activity

Evaluation Plan

43

Name & qualifications of the evaluation expert◦ Get the evaluator involved early in the proposal development phase

Goals, outcomes, and evaluation questions Instruments for evaluating each outcome Protocols defining when and how data will be collected Analysis & interpretation procedures Confounding factors & approaches for minimizing their

impact Formative evaluation techniques for monitoring and

improving the project as it evolves Summative evaluation techniques for characterizing

the accomplishments of the completed project.

PDs’ Response

Evaluation Plan

44Handout 7

Workshop on Evaluation of Educational Development Projects◦ http://www.nsf.gov/events/event_summ.jsp?cntn_id=108142&org=NSF

NSF’s User Friendly Handbook for Project Evaluation ◦ http://www.westat.com/westat/pdf/projects/2010ufhb.pdf

Online Evaluation Resource Library (OERL)◦ http://oerl.sri.com/

Field-Tested Learning Assessment Guide (FLAG)◦ http://www.wcer.wisc.edu/archive/cl1/flag/default.asp

Student Assessment of Their Learning Gains (SALG)◦ http://www.salgsite.org/

Science education literature

Other Sources

45

http://www.westat.com/westat/pdf/projects/2010ufhb.pdf

Identify the most interesting, important, or surprising ideas you encountered in the workshop on dealing with project evaluation

Take ---- 4 min◦ Think individually -------- ~2 min◦ Report in local group ---- ~2 min

Watch time and reconvene after 4 min

Use THINK time to think – no discussion, Selected local facilitators report to virtual group

Activity

Final Reflection

46

Questions

Hold up your “virtual hand” to ask a question.

Proposal & Award Policies & Procedures Guidehttp://www.nsf.gov/pubs/policydocs/pappguide/nsf11001/

To download a copy of the presentation- go to:


Please complete the assessment survey-go to:


Thanks for your participation!

Project Evaluation Don Millard John Yu [email protected] [email protected]@[email protected] March 27, 2012 Guy-Alain Amoussou Lou Everett [email protected].

Documents