Evaluación: Tipos de evaluación.

 

Types of evaluation

With these preliminary considerations in mind, it would be helpful to look carefully at the following and make some tentative choices regarding the role or roles that may seem most appropriate in your evaluation of the project, programme, innovation or other initiative (for simplicity sake we will encompass all of these from now on in the term ‘project’). The evaluator’s role is to be:

• as objective as possible (interviewing, questioning, reporting on findings, not being too close to the participants) and to report to the person or body for whom the evaluation is conducted;
• to collect data rigorously and scientifically;
• to feed back impressions to participants (so that they can take note of your findings and improve their activities);
• to understand and describe the project and make judgments;
• to be involved with the project from the outset, working with the project participants to plan their programme and the evaluation together;
• to define the nature and methodology of the evaluation professionally, to begin work when the project is operational and monitor it at agreed intervals and at the end;
• to monitor the ‘process’, that is, the implementation of the initial terms of reference or objectives of the project;
• to focus on the ‘life’ of the project in its relevant wider contexts;
• to investigate the ‘outcomes’, successful or unsuccessful, of the project;
• to judge whether the project has been (or is likely to be) value for money;
• to conduct an external evaluation and nothing more;
• to help participants to conduct an internal evaluation, in addition to the formal external one, or as a substitute for it;
• Or…..

It will be clear from the choices available that evaluation is far from being a simple or standard activity. The choices are neither right nor wrong, but may be more appropriate to particular programmes, conditions and requirements, and to the self-image of the evaluator. Evaluators and evaluation theorists have extensively explored the alternatives and these have been the focus of various kinds of controversy.  To compare your own preferences or issues with some of those in the literature in terms of types of evaluation click here.  We cannot here consider all of these alternative approaches, but it is important to emphasise two that are frequently met in the evaluation literature.

Process and impact

The purposes of evaluation can be encapsulated in these two terms, the former to highlight what is and has been happening, the latter to attempt to indicate what has happened as a result. Both encounter difficulties.

• Process evaluation is targeted on implementation, how the programme’s intentions are being interpreted and the experience of conducting the activity, together with the continuing or changing perceptions of the various constituencies involved. The kinds of questions that such evaluation raises may include conflicts in these perceptions for reasons not necessarily connected with the activity itself, confusion about the original terms of reference or doubts about their wisdom. The larger the programme the more difficult is the question of sampling (how many people to interview and how to select, what activities to attend…) and when it is reasonable to monitor what is taking place. For an external evaluator there may be problems of time allocation and frequency of involvement, depending on the nature and extent of the programme (multi-site, national…), though even with a small, single-institution activity initial decisions about the extent of the external evaluator’s involvement may cause problems. Often called ‘implementation evaluation’, this often causes difficulties in collecting reliable information on how successfully the implementation is taking place.

• Impact (or ‘outcomes’, or sometimes ‘product’) evaluation raises some of these issues, but also different ones. Would the ‘outcomes’ of the programme have happened without the intervention, and is there a credible causation between the activity and the impact? Answers to the question of what impact has taken place may be positive, negative or mixed, that is, an evaluation may be of non-success, evidence of non-impact or of the complexities that have arisen from other factors – for example, the result of other interventions, processes and contexts. Impact may cover time scales that vary considerably from programme to programme (eg a limited research/development programme in a school or university, or a World Bank project over a nation or region). Impact may be studied not only at the conclusion of an activity (or its funding) or after an interval of time, but also during the activity – especially if it is designed to provide regular feedback or if it is a longitudinal study. Evaluations of the American Head Start and similar programmes, for example, involved the evaluation of learning gains and other measures in a variety of ways at intervals over very long periods. It is common for evaluators of limited-time projects to feel (and suggest) that the real impact evaluation could only take place several years after the end of the programme. Depending on the project, impact evaluation may have policy or decision-making implications:

An impact evaluation assesses the changes in individuals’ well-being that can be attributed to a particular program or policy. It is aimed at providing feedback and helping improve the effectiveness of programs and policies. Impact evaluations are decision-making tools for policymakers and make it possible for programs to be accountable to the public. (World Bank, website)

Such a role for the evaluator raises questions, discussed below, of the kind of contract agreed at the beginning of the evaluation, and the possible influence of the audiences for the reporting procedure at the end. There are issues about the tentative or reliable nature of impact data, which may differ considerably by type of project. Since a funding agency may require impact data and an evaluator may find such data unattainable, there is room for misunderstanding and conflict.

Formative and summative

These may be, but are not necessarily, related to the above.

Hopkins (as we saw above in terms of types of evaluation) made the simple suggestion that formative evaluation was when the cook tasted the soup, and summative when the guest tasted it. He also suggested that the difference was ‘not so much when as why. What is the information for, for further preparation and correction or for savouring and consumption? Both lead to decision making, but toward different decisions’ (Hopkins 1989, p. 16). This latter distinction establishes the difference between these concepts and those relating to process and impact. Formative evaluation is designed to help the project, to confirm its directions, to influence or help to change them. It is more than monitoring or scrutinising, it serves a positive feedback function (which process evaluation does not necessarily do). Summative evaluation is not just something that happens at the end of the project, it summarises the whole process, describes its destination, and though it may have insights into impact, it is not concerned solely with impact.

Summative evaluation has often been associated with the identification of the preset objectives and judgments as to their achievement (again, not necessarily in terms of impact). The assumption in this case is that, unlike in formative modes, evaluation is not (should not be) involved in changing the project in midstream – otherwise the relationship between objectives and their achievement cannot be evaluated:

…every new curriculum, research project, or evaluation program starts with the specifications to be met in terms of content and objectives and then develops instruments, sampling procedures, a research design, and data analysis in terms of these specifications. (Bloom 1978, p. 69)

Starting specifications that are expected or required to be met therefore dictate the nature of the summative evaluation. The instruments or sampling procedures cannot produce ‘pure’ data if the process is corrupted by the intervention of evaluator feedback or other alterations to the original specifications. It is possible to conceive of evaluation as both formative and summative, but in this case ‘summative’ comes closer to meaning ‘final’, and cannot present data and make judgments as purely as is suggested in Bloom’s definition.

Other approaches to evaluation emerged in the last quarter of the 20^th century, and some will be mentioned further below in relation to methodology. These have included ‘illuminative’, ‘democratic’ (as opposed to ‘bureaucratic’ evaluation), ‘participative’ and ‘responsive’ evaluation. These all have implications for the role of the evaluator in relation to the project, for example, sharing with the project participants, responding to the activity not to specifications and intentions, identifying and reporting differences of perspective and values, emphasising the importance of understanding or recording competing perceptions. Much of this work relates to discussion in other RESINED components, notably action research and case studies.

You could at this point consult the paper by Parlett and Hamilton on ‘Evaluation as illumination’ in Hamilton et al., Beyond the Numbers Game (quoted in types of evaluation), and other contributions to this influential book. See also the chapter on ‘Program evaluation: particularly responsive evaluation’ by Robert Stake, in Dockrell and Hamilton, Rethinking Educational Research, and Helen Simons, Getting to Know Schools in a Democracy: the politics and process of evaluation.

Actividad:

Lee el texto y realiza un graphic organizer.

Fuente: http://www.edu.plymouth.ac.uk/resined/evaluation/

Evaluación: ¿Qué es?

 

What is evaluation?

Definitions

At the lowest level evaluation is a regular social activity, such as that conducted by Which? magazine and other publications, and by ourselves. It makes comparisons amongst products or services, with a view to making a selection – a kitchen utensil or an investment, a car or a Chardonnay. At this level evaluation is comparative on the basis of relatively straightforward criteria and available information, and is a preliminary to decision-making. The criteria, of course, are not the same for everyone evaluating – comfort may or may not override the cost or style of a car, and labelling may or may not influence choice of a wine. In education the purposes and the criteria are inevitably more complex and evaluation is a process of acquiring information. Evaluation of an innovation or an activity, a curriculum or organisational change, raises a series of sometimes difficult or contentious issues. Who is sponsoring the evaluation, what do they want to know, and why do they want to know it? What depends on the outcomes – more or less finance, promotion or redundancy? What is the salient issue for the evaluation – change in student learning, staff development, value for money, position in a league table… ? Whose opinion counts most – students’ feedback in the university, the teachers’ perceptions in the school, project managers, administrators?

Evaluation in education therefore encompasses competing criteria and purposes, and is situated in potentially sensitive political and ethical contexts.

If you will be undertaking a 'task' at the end of this component you may find it helpful to make some notes as you go along.  At this point you could make a preliminary list of problems you think might be encountered in evaluating a new initiative in your own institution.

It is important to note that ‘evaluation research’ (a concept discussed below) is basically what is commonly called programme or project evaluation. The features of such evaluation (in its various forms) may be the same or similar at all levels of education, concern innovations, initiatives and developments of many kinds, and it is mostly conducted by individual evaluators or small teams. There are, however, other forms of evaluation that are not included in the discussion here. These include, commonly in higher education, the evaluation of teaching quality or of research or the evaluation of institutions, as part of a system approach to quality assurance conducted by national agencies. Teaching quality and institutional evaluation may also be conducted internally as a form of ‘self-evaluation’ (eg Ellington and Ross, ‘Evaluating teaching quality throughout a university’ [Robert Gordon University], and Adelman and Alexander, The Self-Evaluation Institution).

Definitions of ‘evaluation’ can indicate the intentions involved, but are elusive as complete explanations. The kind of definition that was often used in the 1950s and 1960s, notably in the United States, was:

Evaluation is the systematic assessment of the worth or merit of some object.

The judgmental tenor of that definition in fact reflects the evaluation of cars of Chardonnays – assessing their worth or merit in order to choose, though it does not reflect the casual nature of personal judgments that are often unsystematic. Subsequent attempts to define evaluation have adapted this formulation. Trochim, in the United States, for example, suggests:

Evaluation is the systematic acquisition and assessment of information to provide useful feedback about some object.

He explains the older and the revised versions, which both agree that evaluation is ‘systematic’ and use ‘object’ to refer to a programme, policy, technology, person, need, activity and so on. The revised definition, however, ‘emphasizes acquiring and assessing information rather than assessing worth or merit because all evaluation work involves collecting and sifting through data, making judgements about the validity of the information and of inferences we derive from it, whether or not an assessment of worth or merit results’ (Trochim,website). Whether evaluation makes judgments or is a preliminary to other people making judgments, is a contentious issue in the field (and is discussed further below). The former definition, assessing worth or merit, inescapably involves acquiring and assessing information, but the revised version does focus on the information. It suggests that assessing worth depends on an analytical approach to information, that is, on an understanding of the ‘object’ about which feedback is required.

Another, this time British, attempt at revising the first definition was in connection with the evaluation of educational institutions.  It defined such evaluation as involving:

the making of judgements about the worth and effectiveness of educational intentions, processes and outcomes; about the relationships between these; and about the resource, planning and implementation frameworks for such ventures. (Adelman and Alexander 1982, p. 5)

While retaining the notion of making judgments about worth, there are two important extensions in this version. First, the ‘object’ of study has acquired intentions, processes and outcomes; it is a complex sequence in which the parts have relationships, and it is therefore clear that evaluation is concerned in some way with that sequence. Second, this sequence is not isolated.  It is in a framework which has to do with resources, planning and implementation.  Evaluation therefore understands the sequence only by also taking account of the ‘framework’ in which the sequence takes place. The curriculum is in a classroom with its relationships, in a school, and in a complex and interactive context involving families and communities, authorities and the various levels of policy making - all of which affect what is taught and learned. Further education colleges and universities have their own departmental, disciplinary, institutional and other contexts that may have to be taken into account when a project or initiative is evaluated.

In considering evaluation in your institution are there possible major issues concerning relationships in the context of management, the whole institution, outside constituencies and agencies...? If you were to conduct an external evaluation in an institution other than your own, how different might the issues be from the ones you have considered above.

Tabla KWL:

What I Know	What I Want to Know	What I Learned
La evaluación es un proceso contante. Existen diversas formas para evaluar. Las teorías de evaluación han cambiado a lo largo de la historia. La evaluación no siempre es hacia otro individuo o ante un ámbito de la vida específico, sino que también nos evaluamos a nosotros mismos.	¿Qué implica evaluar? ¿Para qué evaluamos? ¿Existen teorías de evaluación? ¿Cuál es la forma más común de evaluación?	Existen diversas definiciones de evaluación. Varios autores definen la evaluación de formas diferentes y contrarias. Evaluamos en todo ámbito de la vida. Existen diversos criterios de evaluación, dependiendo del área en la que estemos evaluando. Los programas son un tipo de evaluación.

El agua

Lee el siguiente texto y escribe un abstract acerca del mismo. 

PROPERTIES OF WATER

Covalent bonds form when atoms share electrons. Sometimes this sharing is not equal and leads to the formation of partial charges on molecules.

Consider water. The electron associated with the hydrogen atom tends to spend more time orbiting the oxygen atom. This doesn't result in the loss of electrons like we saw in ions. It's just unequally shared. Therefore:

• Oxygen has a partly "extra" electron making it slightly negative.
• Each hydrogen has "lost" an electron making it partly positive.

Hydrogen Bonds in Water

We know that opposite charges attract, even weak opposites. This weak attraction between the partly positive and partly negative parts of water allows for the formation of hydrogen bonds.

Pictured below, you can see the partial charges on a water molecule and how they then form hydrogen bonds with other water molecules.

  

  

Polar and Nonpolar Substances

Since the water has opposite charges on different parts of the same molecule we call it Polar.

• A Polar substance has charges that can interact with the charges in water. Therefore Polar molecules are said to be Hydrophilic too (water loving).

• A Nonpolar substance then lacks any charges and will not be able to interact with water. Nonpolar molecules are said to be Hydrophobic (water hating).

Since water molecules are attracted to each other by hydrogen bonds, water exhibits a property called surface tension. Water molecules will attract to each other to form a film and will resist any attempt to separate them. This is easily seen when water beads up on a hard surface to form something like a sphere.

Saturation

Even though the hydrogen bonds in water are considered very weak, they can be strong when in numbers. In some cases, weaker bonds can overcome stronger bonds

(salt or sugar dissolves in water)

Saturation occurs when there are no longer enough hydrogen bonds to overcome the stronger ionic bonds. This is why you can only dissolve a certain amount of sugar in iced tea. Eventually the water will not be able to interfere with the ionic bonds holding the crystals together.

In fact, if enough individual ions are added to water they will eventually form a crystal shape and fall to the bottom of the container.

Fuente: http://www.personal.psu.edu/staff/m/b/mbt102/bisci4online/chemistry/chemistry3.htm

Uniones químicas

CHEMICAL BONDING

Hooking Stuff Together

Chemical bonds are formed when the electrons in an atom interact with the electrons in another atom. This allows for the formation of more complex molecules.

There are 3 types of chemical bonds:

	Bond Strength	Description	Example
Covalent	Strong	Two atoms share electrons.	Bonding of Oxygen and Hydrogen in H2O
Ionic	Moderate	Oppositely charged ions are attracted to each other.	Bond between Na+ and Cl- in salt.
Hydrogen	Weak	Forms between oppositely charges portions of covalently bonded hydrogen atoms.	Bonds between water molecules.

Covalent

These strong bonds form when two atoms share electrons.

Sometimes the electrons in an atom get shared. It's much like when you were a kid and got to sleep over at a friends house. Your friends parents were in charge of you both for one night and the next night you would sleep over at your house and your own parents would be in charge. This sharing of responsibility is functionally similar to the way covalent bonding works.

Normally this sharing is an equal proposition. Sometimes it's not equal (but that gets us into hydrogen bonding discussed below.)

Ionic

Atoms gain or lose electron (opposites attract)

Ions have positive or negative charges. In dating situations, you may know that sometimes opposites attract. In Chemistry, opposites ALWAYS attract. This forms an ionic bond between two atoms.

Hydrogen

Weakest bond between atoms

Occurs in molecules that have covalent bonds. Sometimes the electrons are not equally shared; one atom tends to have an electron more often than the other atom. In this situation one atom of the molecule becomes partly negative and the other then becomes partly positive.

Now we have positive and negative things becoming attracted to each other. (remember ionic bonds?) This is especially common between water molecules.

 

Fuente: http://www.personal.psu.edu/staff/m/b/mbt102/bisci4online/chemistry/chemistry2.htm

Abstract:

Las uniones químicas se dan cuando los electrones de un átomo interactúan con los electrones de otro átomo. Dicha interacción da lugar a la formación de compuestos más complejos, denominados moléculas. ¿Cómo interactúan dichos electrones? ¿Cuáles son las uniones posibles entre átomos? Existen cuatro tipos de uniones químicas, siendo tres las más conocidas: covalente, iónico, fuerzas de Van Der Waals, metálico.

Cada uno de estos tipos de enlace químico, tiene sus características. A sí mismo, las moléculas tendrán determinadas propiedades, dependiendo del enlace que una a sus átomos.

El enlace covalente, es el más fuerte de todos los enlaces, donde los átomos comparten sus electrones; le sigue el iónico, donde los átomos pierden o ganan electrones; y luego las fuerzas de Van der Waals. Éstas últimas existen varios tipos, siendo el más estudiando los enlaces por puente de hidrógeno. 

Conocer qué enlaces forman los compuestos que nos rodean, es de vital importancia para poder entender sus propiedades y características. Por ejemplo ¿por qué el agua se encuentra en estado líquido a temperatura ambiente? ¿por qué el agua ebulle a 100°C a una atmósfera de presión? Responder estas preguntas no solo nos ayuda a conocer las características de la sustancia agua, sino también comprender más el mundo complejo en el que vivimos.

How To Make Chemical Reactions

Observa el video e indica si las siguientes oraciones son veradedas o falsas:
1. Las reacciones químicas ocurren cuando dos sustancias se combinan para formar otras nuevas.
2. Las sustancias iniciales que participan en una reacción química se denominan productos.
3. Los cambios químicos pueden manifestarse por un cambio de color.
4. No es necesario tener precausiones al trabajar con sustancias químicas.
5. Un tipo de reacción química ocurre cuando un elemento de una sustancia se combina con otro elemento, de otra sustancia, pera formar un nuevo compuesto.
6. Las reacciones de combustión son endotérmicas.
7. Una reacción del tipo: AB + CD = AD + CB corresponde a una reacción de doble desplazamiento.
8. En una reacción ácido-base, un ácido se combina con una base para formar diócido de carbono (CO2) y agua (H2O).
9. La reacción de síntesis es opuesta a la reacción de descomposición.
10. Una reacción de síntesis el del tipo: AB = A + B.

Átomo

ATOMS AND IONS
Atoms
Atoms are the basic unit of chemistry. They consist of 3 smaller things:

• Protons - these are positively charged (+)
• Electrons - these are negatively charged (-)
• Neutrons - these have no charge

These 3 smaller particles are arranged in a particular way. In the center is the Nucleus where you find the positive Protons and neutral Neutrons.
In orbit around the nucleus are the Electrons. These are found in a series of orbits (depending on the atom) with differing numbers of electrons as seen below.

Interaction of Atoms
It's the electrons in orbit around the nucleus that allow one atom to interact with other atoms so they can be linked together.
For example, H2O consists of an Oxygen atom linked to 2 Hydrogen atoms. The linkage or interaction between the electrons of the Hydrogen and Oxygen atoms is called a Chemical Bond. More on these later.
Atoms in the Human Body
The human body is made up of a couple dollars worth of chemicals.
The 12 most useful atoms for you to know about are listed below:

Ions

Sometimes atoms gain or lose electrons.  The atom then loses or gains a "negative" charge. These atoms are then called ions.

• Positive Ion - Occurs when an atom loses an electron (negative charge) it has more protons than electrons.

• Negative Ion - Occurs when an atom gains an electron (negative charge) it will have more electrons than protons.

The following image shows Na losing an electron and Cl gaining an electron

• Thus the Na becomes Na+
• The Cl becomes Cl-

Here are some examples of common ions:
Na+	Sodium
K+	Potassium
Cl-	Chloride
Ca++	Calcium
Fe+++	Iron

Fuente:http://www.personal.psu.edu/staff/m/b/mbt102/bisci4online/chemistry/chemistry1.htm


Actividad 1:
Skimming:
a. ¿Cuál es el tema principal del texto?
b. ¿Qué tipos de iones existen?

Scanning:
a. ¿Qué carga posee cada una de las partículas subatómicas fundamentales?
b. ¿cuál o cuáles partículas se encuentran en el núcleo y cuál o cuáles en la periferia?

Reading in detail:
Utilizando como ejemplo la primer imagen del texto y la tabla periódica de los elementos responde:
a. ¿Cuántos protones, neutrones y electrones posee un átomo de carbono 14?
b. ¿Cuántos protones, electrones y neutrones posee el ión Calcio, sabiendo que su carga es +2?