|
| Formative Evaluation | Critical Commenting
No matter by whom the materials were prepared, you can make a total students review of them and in case of a ambiguity ask for replacement or change of them. At an informal level this can simply involve one or more colleagues reading, listening to or looking at draft materials and providing comments in terms of the suitability of content (e.g. is it factually correct and supported by examples or evidence, up-to-date, at an appropriate level for the intended students, etc.) and the style of presentation (e.g. does it adopt an engaging style, employ appropriate sequencing and strategies, clearly present information and/or arguments, etc.). Except for peers or colleagues check you can involve some expert from outside; he will make more profound and careful estimation and evaluation of the materials.
Where arrangements have been made for systematic critical commenting, with teachers or writers reviewing the materials prepared by all the others working on the same course or program, there is the potential to improve not only individual teaching materials, but also the overall course of instruction. However, it is possible that a 'course team' approach can introduce new problems when writers come to revise their draft materials, as discussed in further detail below.
Developmental Testing
The development testing is occurred during the student’s preparation to the course. It includes the wide usage and approbation of draft educational materials by different groups of students. The feedback obtained is used to guide and inform writers' revisions to the materials before they are committed to print or tape (Nathenson & Henderson, 1980). Such testing may range from a fairly informal student try-out of a single piece of teaching, to an elaborate procedure for testing draft materials for a whole course of instruction. But in that case the risk of the materials being bad rises.
Students study the draft materials in the usual manner and may be asked to undertake any other requirements, for example submitting assignments, attending tutorial sessions, etc. and possibly sitting an examination upon completion of the course. Their opinion about the material, teachers and teaching process at the whole can be collected with the help of different questionnaires, forms and interviews plus observations and are fed into the process of revising the course materials for 'final' presentation.
The researches of many universities indicate the strength of the procedure for the revision of materials within the overall structure of the course and that these can be of benefit to both course writers and students. But it’s not the guarantee that the course will be straightly shifted. In an attempt to allow for greater flexibility, a number of other procedures have been tried that are part formative and part summative. These involve collecting feedback from students and tutors on a short-term 'published' version of course materials, to inform revisions to be made for subsequent presentations.
Revising
The comments and remarks about the checked or evaluated draft materials, their effectiveness are usually collected and the certain conclusions are made according to the ways of their improvement.
It should be recognized, however, that evaluation is always controversial and that course writers may face problems when trying to take account of evaluative information and data in the revision of their teaching. For example, it may be difficult to decide what is the main and most trustworthy origin source (especially if conflicting views have been expressed), comments on later parts of a course or program may not be as extensive as those on earlier parts, etc. The actual strategies adopted by writers for the revision of draft materials will, in part, be determined by emotional factors, as the process is not simply a technical task. Remember and consider this matter carefully.
|
|
