Vous êtes sur la page 1sur 5

Response to Request for Proposal

To develop an Evaluation Plan of the training program,


Determining Instructional Purposes (DIP)

Submitted to:
Far West Laboratory for Educational & Research Development (FWL)

Submitted by:
Shelly Richardson

Table of Contents

Page

Introduction

Description of Program

Evaluation Method

2-3

Task Schedule

3-4

Project Personnel

3-4

Budget

4-5

Introduction
The purpose of this evaluation is to develop data and informative resources regarding
the viability and effectiveness of the DIP training program. Recommendations specific to
the marketability and continued funding of the DIP program will be determined, based
on the evaluative data generated.
Description of Program (DIP) Being Evaluated
The program being evaluated is the training program, Determining Instructional
Purposes (DIP) created by Far West Laboratory for Educational & Research
Development (FWL). This is a three unit instructional training program to assist
administrators and graduate students in planning of effective school programs. The
units are taught in workshops, facilitated by a coordinator familiar with the learning
materials, and vary in length of time commitment between 10 and 18 hours.
Evaluation Method
Determining recommendations for the continued funding of, decisions for marketing and
sales of and useful information for prospective clients who may purchase the DIP
training program package will be the impetus of this evaluation.
In order to determine these recommendations, the evaluator will develop an evaluation
framework with the stakeholders/client (FWL), deploy and monitor data collection
processes, produce an evaluation report based on the data results and report these
findings to the stakeholders/client (FWL).
As the DIP program is untested in the field, a pilot program will be created consisting of
coordinators and participants familiar with the administration of school programs. The
study of this pilot program will garner evaluative data source information based on
formative and summative surveys of program participants and coordinators. As detailed
in the Task Schedule, data collection in the form of surveys will be administered to pilot

program participants and coordinators via an online survey tool system, Qualtrics.
These surveys will be based on DIP program objectives and definitively demonstrate
the strengths and weaknesses of the instruction, creating an overall view of its
effectiveness, marketability and viability.
Task Schedule
This task schedule is based on a proposed six-month timeline for evaluation, starting on
January 5, 2015. As the start date of this evaluation may vary based on client needs,
the dates listed in this schedule could be adjusted to reflect that variable.
Step

Activity

Date

One

Meet with stakeholders/client (FWL) to determine goals and


objectives of DIP program and develop an Evaluation Plan.

January 5

Two

Submit detailed Evaluation Plan to stakeholders/client (FWL)


for approval. This will include an overview of the pilot
program, survey questions, methods and schedule.

January 26

Three

Identify, contact and contract DIP pilot program participants.

February 2

Four

Based on stakeholder feedback, finalize Evaluation Plan


and data collection methodology.

February 9

Five

Meet (virtually) with Pilot Program Coordinators to


disseminate DIP program training information and details
of Evaluation Plan.

February 23

Six

Deploy DIP Pilot Program to participants, including


pre-instruction assessment surveys.

March 2

Seven

Conduct formative evaluations (middle of unit 2) with Pilot


Program participants.

March 30

Eight

Meet (virtually) with stakeholders/clients (FWL) to update


on progress and formative data results.

April 6

Nine

Conduct post-instruction assessment surveys.

April 27

Ten

Meet (virtually) with Pilot Program Coordinators for qualitative, May 4


summative program analysis.

Eleven

Analyze data and create Evaluation Report.

May 11

Twelve

Present Evaluation Report and discuss findings and


recommendations with stakeholders/client (FWL).

June 1

Project Personnel
Evaluator: Shelly Richardson.
Shelly is a graduate of Boise State Universitys Master of Educational Technology
program with years of international evaluation experience. She is well respected in the
field of evaluation, is an objective professional with a vast understanding of survey
methods and a knack for making program recommendations based on logical,
informative data.
Pilot Program Coordinators: Cecil Graves, Marcie Taught, and William Carver.
Cecil, Marcie and Will are program administrators at the College of Education at
Esteemed University. Renowned for its innovative programming and training of
education administrative professionals, the graduate students at Esteemed University
are always eager to improve educational methods and willing to participate in projects
that may develop the field of education as a whole.
Evaluation Assistant:
Macon Daisy. Macon is a jack-of-all-trades, familiar with marketing and sales as well as
the uses of technology in the field of education. With his degrees in Communication and
Instructional Design, Macon is a valuable asset for this evaluation team. Macon has
interned with reputable design firms, established professional credibility and a passion
for success.
Budget or Fee
Staff
Evaluator

36 days @ $400/day

$14,400

Coordinators

20 days @ $250/day

$5,000

Evaluation
Assistant

15 days @ $160/day

$2,400
$21,800

$21,800

Travel
Two 2-day round-trip: Kansas City to Denver

$2200

Estimated mileage: 60 miles (56.5 cents/mile)

$34
$2234

$2234

Technology
Qualtrics Survey Software: two month usage

$600

Zoom Video Conferencing: two month usage

$250

Scanning

$50

$900

Supplies and Materials


Office Supplies and Photocopying

$300

Total Costs

$300

$25234