Paradigms of

Curriculum
Evaluation
RITA B. RUSCOE, Philippine Normal University
What is a
paradigm?
PARADIGMS OF EVALUATION

▪Functional (Technical)
▪Transactional ( Naturalistic)
▪Critical
 • Evaluative focus is on whether a program
is producing knowledgeable students or
skilled workers as efficiently as possible
Functional
(Technical)
•Program outcomes are usually measured
against pre-stated goals which link to
institutional objectives.
Paradigm
•Evaluations is value free and objective;
"hard", quantitative, comparative data as
bases
 Model’s assumption:
• there is a concrete truth to uncover
about the worth of the curriculum

Functional • evaluation will provide either a correct

answer to a curriculum problem or a
revelation as to whether or not a
Paradigm program should continue in its present
form.

Models of evaluation which belong to this

paradigm include Tyler (1949), Kirkpatrick
(1967), Scriven's early work as described by
Popham (1988), Stenhouse's (1970)
Stufflebeam (1971) and Provus (1971).
 • Have the preset goals of the curriculum
been met?
• Is the course effective and which parts
are most effective?

Functional • What are the defects or deficiencies of

this course?

Paradigm • Has the program produced learners with

the correct, assessable skills for working
within industry and society at the
present time?
• Is the educational institution and the
program team doing what they have been
funded to do?
Transactional
(Naturalistic) ▪ There are variety of experiences
Paradigm and values underlying the different
perceptions of students and
teachers of a program; unexpected
and evolving aspects of teaching
and learning on the programme are
revealed
▪ Evaluation is occurring in a unique
context of people and their beliefs
and actions
 Transactional
Paradigm
▪ Formative transactional evaluation results in changes to planned
programmes while they are occurring.
▪ Focus is on whether or not the current, expressed needs of
stakeholders have been met and whether the negotiated learning
events have met with participant satisfaction
▪ Models of evaluation which fit into this paradigm are Stake's (1975)
responsive model, Parlett and Hamilton's (1972) illuminative model,
and interactive ethnographic models These models acknowledge
pluralistic values, shades of truth depending on the observer and the
interpreter, and the subjectivity of any judgements.
 Transactional
Paradigm

How does this program or

learning event appear to
different stakeholders?
Should the objectives or process of
this program be changed to better
How could this program be suit the participants?
improved to promote better
learning or experiences for the
How does the context of this program
participants?
effect the learning?"
Transactional
Paradigm

An evaluative event is
useful to the audience
only if they can
understand it, make it
part of their learning
experiences and apply it
to their advantage.
 Evaluation involves dialogue, collaboration
and praxis.

Critical • Learning communities are self-evaluating

and critically reflecting entities which
(Emancipatory) are empowered to set their own
standards.
Paradigm • The group of practitioners are
empowered, by learning about and
carrying out evaluatory practice, to
continue by themselves
 Critical evaluators are likely to consider the
organisational and societal context of their practice,
the historical, political and social context, in order
to work towards changing the context and
monitoring the results of their attempts to change.
Critical They may move towards critically evaluating and

(Emancipatory)
improving the organizational systems within which
curriculum occurs.

Paradigm They will be very likely to question the present

goals of the curriculum and the present needs of
participants.
Education as a social good for the future as well as
the present is likely to become a concern.
Curriculum evaluation and improvement is a prime
educational process.
 Program stakeholders ideally initiate and direct the
evaluation process, choose the evaluation criteria,
collect and interpret the data and use evaluation
cyclically to improve curriculum

Critical A group of professional teachers may also be

(Emancipatory) regarded as engaged in informal evaluation and praxis
continually and a critical model of evaluation merely
Paradigm formalises this ongoing process of consultation with
stakeholders (Kemmis and Hughes:1979).

Kemmis and Hughes' (1979) model of evaluation as

self-reflection in a critical community,Marshall and
Peter's (1985) work and Model of curriculum evaluation
(Melrose: 1994)
 What anxieties are there
for students in this
practical test and how
can we minimize them?

Critical What is going on in our

(Emancipatory) theory and practice as

laboratory teachers?

Paradigm
, What can be improved in the
organizational systems of
record keeping and reporting of
student achievements?
Which Paradigm
will you use?
Reference

▪ Melrose, Mary (1996). Encouraging transactional and critical models of

curriculum evaluation. Different Approaches: Theory and Practice in Higher
Education. Proceedings HERDSA Conference 1996. Perth, Western Australia,
8-12 July. http://www.herdsa.org.au/confs/1996/melrose.html
ASYNCHRONOUS
DISCUSSION

▪ Study the different Curriculum Evaluation Models

▪ Select one and do a research on a particular model and how
it was used in the evaluation of a particular curriculum.
▪ Be ready to share with the group