Braxton County

Evaluation Plan

March 2017

FRIT 7237

Muno Abubakar
Katrina Barnett
Baziel Pearce
 Section 4: Project evaluation: The Great Southern University will coordinate with Braxton

County mathematics teachers. During June 2015 through January 2016, Great Southern will

conduct qualitative and quantitative research capturing the use of real life experiences in the

mathematics classroom. Below are pertinent questions that will be examined.

P1: Were the initial experience and follow up activities implemented as planned?

P2: What is the quality of the initial program activities?

P3: Who are the program participants and how were they recruited?

P4: What is the quality of follow up and support activities?

Implementation Plan
The implementation of the initial experience and follow up activities is provided in the table

below. During the evaluation phase of the project, there is room to include, what if any

modifications were made, and why they may have been necessary. The data sources for assessing

implementation also assess the quality of each topic and activity. The quality of activities will be

based on the data collected and placed into one of five categories: very poor, poor, ok, good, and

very good.

Planned Experience/Activity and Date Data Source

Topic- Introductions & New Standards, June Teacher, GSU faculty, and consultant interviews
25th and survey

Activity: Teachers visit local businesses and Pre-project survey

industries to identify Mathematics in context, Teacher surveys and interviews
June 26th

Problem-based learning and Instructional End of day survey from teachers

Design; Identification/review of Mathematics in
context, June 27th

Instructional Technology, Idea Sharing, Teacher interviews and surveys, GSU faculty
Problem-based Learning module creation, June survey
28th
Problem-based Learning Module creation, Teacher interviews, samples of the modules that
Planning for implementation and Evaluation were created and student work samples,
(Action Research), June 29th classroom observations

Refinement of Problem-based learning modules Teacher interviews, samples of electronic

through electronic communication*, July 2-20 communication, classroom observations

Mid-Implementation Meeting*, Fall 2015 The Great Southern faculty, consultant and
teacher interviews, surveys, student work
samples, and pre-project survey

Teachers conduct self-evaluation of module Self-evaluation

implementation*, Fall 2015

Project Debrief Meeting in Braxton County*,
Fall 2015 or Early 2016
*Denotes follow up activities related to P4.
The Great Southern faculty, consultant and
teacher interviews, surveys, pre and post-project
surveys, and student work samples, CRCT
scores/student achievement data, PBL parts of
the wiki

P3: Program Participants-

Math Teachers and Administrators from Braxton County Schools

School/Grade Level Male Female Email Paper Recruited in

Taught Response Mailing person
Response

Elementary School

6th Grade

7th Grade

8th Grade

High School

Administrator
 Data sources and final outcomes related to the objectives and goals will be used for the

summative evaluation. Ongoing activities will be measured and analyzed in order to determine

the effectiveness of the program.

Objective Indicator Data Source

1. Create PBL Modules draw on  PBL modules- Will be submitted by teachers on a

Modules based on content and recurring basis until they accurately align with NSSM
local businesses processes from standards.
and industries local businesses  Expert review- There will be a rubric designed by all
and industries stakeholders to be used to monitor the implementation
of relevant PBL modules.

2. Create PBL Module content,  GSU faculty interviews, completed PBL module,
Modules tasks, and student work samples
addressing NSSM assessments are  Activity: Teachers will visit local business and
aligned with industries to identify Mathematics in context.
appropriate NSSM  Mid-implementation meeting

3. Integrate PBL modules  Teacher work samples, classroom observations, wiki

technology into contain activities page, CRCT Scores
PBL experiences that effectively use  Problem- based learning and Instructional Design:
technology Identification/review of mathematics in context.

4. Implement Record of  Pre and Post-Project Surveys, classroom observations,

and evaluate PBL implementation student work samples, wiki page, CRCT Scores
Modules Record of self-  Expert review- There will be a rubric designed by all
evaluation stakeholders to be used to monitor the implementation
of relevant PBL modules.

Evaluation Questions Objective Indicator Data

Source
O1: To what extent were teachers Create PBL Modules Modules focus on content Module
able to develop PBL modules that based on local businesses and procedures from local Evaluation
were connected to local business and industries businesses and industries Rubric
and industries, aligned with
NSSM, and incorporated
appropriate uses of technology?
O1: To what extent were teachers Create PBL Modules Module content, tasks and Module
able to develop PBL Modules that addressing NSSM assessments are aligned Evaluation
were connected to local business with appropriate NSSM Rubric; NSSM
 and industries, aligned with Standards
NSSM, and incorporated
appropriate uses of technology?
O1: To what extent were teachers Integrate technology into PBL modules contain Module
able to develop PBL modules that PBL experiences activities that effectively Evaluation
were connected to local business incorporate technology Rubric
and industries, aligned with
NSSM, and incorporated
appropriate uses of technology?
O2: To what extent were teachers Implement and evaluate Record of implementation Focus Group
able to implement and evaluate PBL Modules Record of Self-Evaluation Participant
those modules? Surveys

DATA COLLECTION SCHEDULE

Evaluation Plan Form

Project Director: Carlos Hedges, Ph.D.
Title of Project Proposal: New State Standards for Mathematics and Problem-based Learning
Data set Date of collection Instruments already developed? Data collected by:

PBL modules June 27-July 20 No- ongoing during school year Teachers, GSU staff, and other
experts (business consultants).

Pre/post Fall 2015 and Yes- in October 2011 Teacher participants

surveys Spring 2016

Classroom 2015-2016 school Yes- Observation template that GSU faculty and local business
Observations year includes PBL activities aligned consultants
with standards.

Wiki-page 2015-16 year No- ongoing during school year Teacher participants

Expert Review June 28th Yes- Distributed on June 28 Local Business Consultants

GSU Faculty June 25th Yes GSU faculty/ Braxton County staff
Interviews

CRCT Scores Prior school year Yes Braxton County staff

Self- Spring 2016 Yes- distributed In June Teacher participants

Evaluations