The key role to success of educational management:

How to evaluate the adaptation of the educational

programs to the needs of the labor market?

Mohamed meri meri , Gaziantep University, Turkey

DE6C10 Mohamed meri meri – business

International Journal of Arts and Sciences' (IJAS), academic conference in

Freiburg, Germany, 29 November to 2 December 2016.

Abstract
The management of education plays a key role in all the educational
activities; it prepares the strategies and plans, provides all means and
resources, executes activities, evaluates the results, and develops the whole
of educative operation. The assessment and evaluation are integral parts of
the activities of management of education, of course, in cooperation with
the body teachers.
This important educational role of the management (Assessment and
Evaluation) is very decisive to succeed the operation of these activities of
education, or else this operation will be a failure.
The program evaluation is one of the most essential activities, because it
gives the legitimacy of the results and the official certificates to graduates
and students which is the most suitable way to assess and evaluate the
programs to properly complete the plans and realize the planned results or
to have good results according to the national or local development plans
requirements.
In order to succeed the activity of assessment and evaluation, it should be
practiced in common by (the educative management / teachers with
stakeholders (managers of public sector /private sector / NGOs and civil
society ) of the labor market) because they will benefit from the future
graduates and students in their businesses and organizations because they
only know the needs of Jobs ( knowledge's, skills and behaviors required )
by their open jobs and profiles , to adapt the qualifications of graduates
with the job profiles and real needs of Labor Market .
This Paper will present how to use the appropriate method and the
necessary techniques to engage the educative management in the activity
of assessment and evaluation and to apply the proposed approach. The
methodology focuses on analyzing the previous studies and researches
about the topic and discussing its results with presenting a lot of models
used by specialists, and providing a practical model that shows the
participatory assessment and evaluation between three parties
(stakeholders/educative management/ teachers).

Keywords: Program evaluation, educational management, labor market

needs.

1-Introduction
The subject of building bridges between assessment and evaluation is very
important at the level of educational development in general, and
specifically for the assessment and evaluation of education. Assessment /
evaluation, learning / teaching change, program / curriculum development,
Etc...(Theory and practice) are parts and parcels of education, all these
components can be experienced for benefiting of it when we will develop
education system.
But how to do it at the level of theory and practices? It is enough to
exploring topic by topic or working by using the integrated educational
management?
Educational development needs exploring the theories and practices of all
these components, especially the integrated educational management (
IEM )and the influences on the educational system or the key influences
on this IEM as: ( stakeholders and youth workers , community educators/
Students, and management of education) .
This paper proposes two parts, one theoretical shows the literature review
of the subject, the key elements of the evaluation of education (theory and
practice). The role of Program Evaluation with program action – logic
Model, and the initiative of some scholars to move from Program
Evaluation to program development using three comparative models, and
the Educational Management model to pass from Evaluation to
Development. The other part is practical which proposes The New
Perspective Educational Development with this plan, methodology, and
steps of application, the four Models of Evaluation of the Education used
by the educational institutions.
Also, we propose by this paper the Integrated Managerial Model of the
education (as practical model) designed and developed as part of our
university academic work at Gaziantep University in Turkey to promote a
development project for adapting the (Faculties / Institutes programs to the
needs of the regional and inter-regional labor market).
This practical model presents the collaboration required between the
(educational management, Teachers and Students, Stakeholders) for
developing and managing the educational system in each region or inter-
region on the national level.

2- Literature review
The assessment and evaluation of the education is part of the educating
system process. Some of scholars and practitioners treat this topic for
showing its interests in the educational operation in general, whereas
others proposed multiples topics which play different roles or efficient
effect to the education.
Gitlin & Smyth comment from Latin origin meaning: it is to strengthen or
to empower. it is now largely about the measurement of things, and in the
process can easily slip into becoming an end rather than a mean. (Gitlin,
A. and Smyth, J. (1989).
Most of the current interests in evaluation theory and practice can be
directly linked to the expansion of government programs during the 1930s
in the United States and the implementation of various initiatives during
the 1960s (Shadish. William (1998).
After the Second World War, we can note the activities of ( Kurt Lewin )
and the interests in ( groups, experiential learning and action research).
This approach involves a spiral of steps, each of which is composed of a
circle of planning, action and fact-finding about the result of the action. (
Lewin , K. and Grabbe, P. (1945).
But, from the 1960s, Assessment / Evaluation grew as an activity, and a
specialist field of employment with its own professional bodies, and as a
body of theory or practice.
Essentially, evaluation is either about proving something is working or
needed, or improving practice or a project. ( Rogers, A. and Smith, M. K.
(2006, Rubin, F. (1995).
So, the first initiative about the Evaluation arises out of our accountability
to funders and managers and crucially the people whom are working with.
The second is born of a wish to do what we do better. We look to
evaluation as an aid to strengthen our practice, organization and programs.
(Chelimsky E. (1997).
In practice, The Main objective of the educational evaluation operation
will be formative or summative, and envision one of two ends:
The (formative evaluation) is to enable people and institutions to make
judgments about the work undertaken; to identify their knowledge,
attitudes and skills, and to understand the changes that have occurred in
these; to increase their ability to assess their learning and performance, and
it is a way to detect problems and weaknesses in components in order to
revise them. In projects educational development with sufficient time and
funding, formative evaluation is conducted prior to the implementation of
the final program. Many projects begin with the best effort and conduct a
formative evaluation with implementation, correcting weaknesses and
errors as the project unfolds. (Cauley, Kathleen; McMillan, James (2010) .
However (summative evaluation) is to enable people and institutions to
demonstrate that they have fulfilled the objectives of the program or
project or to demonstrate they have achieved the standard requirements.
And summative evaluation is a process that concerns final evaluation to
ask if the project or program met its goals. In both types, educational
program can be evaluated, but typically the summative evaluation
concentrates on learner outcomes rather than only the program of
education. ( Anthony . Saba (2009 ) , (Nicholson . Walter ( 2001) .
So, evaluation of the education can be conducted as formative, summative,
or both.
Traditional tests and other evaluation methods commonly employed in
classrooms are used in both instances, but specific kinds of evaluation can
be used in formative evaluation. Tools such as: records, observations,
interviews, and other data will permit the use of qualitative analysis of
information for formative and summative evaluation.
Normally, we might employ two contrasting models, and can usefully
contrast the dominant or traditional model that tend to see the people
involved in a project as objects, with an alternative, dialogical approach
that views all those involved as subjects. This division has many affinities
to split between banking and dialogical models of education. (Freire .Paulo
(1972 ).
Also, Joanna Rowlamds discusses the traditional (banking) and the
alternative (dialogical) of the evaluation, and clarifies many characteristics
between banking and dialogical models of education. These characteristics
of the traditional (banking) approach are to evaluation:
1. A search for objectivity and a scientific approach through standardized
procedures. The values used in this approach often reflect the priorities of
the evaluator.
2. An over-reliance on quantitative measures, qualitative aspects, being
difficult to measure, and tend to be ignored.
 3. A high degree of managerial control whereby managers can influence
the questions being asked by other people who may be affected by the
findings of an evaluation and have little input either in shaping the
questions to be asked or reflecting on the findings.
4. Outsiders are usually contracted to be evaluator in the belief that his will
increase objectivity, and there may be a negative perception of them by
those being evaluated.
And the characteristics of the alternative (dialogical) are approach to
evaluation:
1. Evaluation is viewed as an integral part of the development or change
process and involves reflection-action. Subjectivity is recognized and
appreciated.
2. There is a focus on dialogue, enquiry rather than measurement, and a
tendency to use less formal methods like unstructured interviews and
participant observation.
3. It is approached as an empowering process rather than control by an
external body. There is recognition that different individuals and groups
will have different perceptions. Negotiation and consensus is valued
concerning the process of evaluation, and the conclusions reached, and
recommendations made.
4. The evaluator takes on the role of facilitator, rather than being an
objective and neutral outsider. Such evaluation may will be undertaken by
insiders / people directly involved in the project or program. (Rowlamds,
J. (1991).Coe
So, dialogical evaluation places the responsibility for evaluation squarely
on the educators and the other participants in the setting. (Jeffs and Smith
(2005).
The key part of evaluation is framing the questions we want to ask, and the
information we want to collect such that the answers provide us with the
indicators of change. Much of the talk and practice around indicators in
evaluation has been linked to rather crude measures of performance and
the need to justify funding (Rogers and Smith ( 2006) , ( Rogers, P. , A.
Petrosino , T. Hacsi and T. Huebner (2000) .
There are four possible areas that need indicators such as:
1- The number of people we are in contact with and working with. The
number we might expect and the balance between them will differ from
project to project (Jeffs and Smith( 2005) .
2- The nature of the opportunities we offer. We should expect to be asked
questions about the nature and range of opportunities we offer.
3- The quality of relationships available. Many of us talk about our work in
terms of ‘building relationships'. By this we often mean that we work both
through relationship, and for relationship. (Hirsch . B. J. ( 2005).
4- How well people work together and for others. Those communities where
a significant number of people are involved in organizing groups and
activities are healthier, have more positive experiences of education, are
more active economically, and have less crime. ( Putman, R. D. (2000) .
In recent years, informal educators have been put under great pressure to
provide (output indicators, qualitative criteria, objective success measures,
adequate assessment criteria). Those working with young people have
been encouraged to show how young people have developed personally
and socially through participation. There are also some basic practical
problems.
Here, we can explore four particular issues identified by project
evaluations: (Jeffs and Smith (2005).
1-The problem of multiple influences. The different things that influence
the way people behave can’t be easily broken down.
2-The problem of indirect impact. Those who may have been affected by
the work of informal educators are often not easily identified.
3-The problem of evidence. Change can rarely be monitored even on an
individual basis.
4-The problem of timescale. Change of the sort with which informal
educators are concerned does not happen overnight.
On the other hand, some specialists proposed the management of
evaluation, as (Everitt et al (1992) is to reflect critically on the
effectiveness of personal and professional practice. It is to contribute to the
development of good rather than correct practice.
Evaluation is not primarily about the counting and measuring of things. It
entails valuing which we have to develop as connoisseurs and critics, and
to ensure that this process of looking, thinking and acting is participative. (
Everitt, A. and Hardiker, P. (1996) .
Thus, the evaluation management is the systematic exploration and
judgment of working processes, experiences and outcomes. It pays special
attention to aims, values, perceptions, needs and resources. There are
several things that need to be said about this:
First, evaluation entails gathering, ordering and making judgments about
information in a methodical way. It is a research process.
Second, evaluation is something more than monitoring; Evaluation
involves making careful judgments about the worth, significance and
meaning of phenomenon.
Third, evaluation is very sophisticated. There is no simple way of making
good judgments. It involves developing criteria or standards that are both
meaningful and honor the work.
Fourth, evaluation operates at a number of levels. It is used to explore and
judge practice and programs.
Fifth, evaluation is the processes and any outcomes we can identify,
Appreciating and getting of flavor of these involves dialogue. This makes
the focus enquiry rather than measurement / although some measurement
might be involved (Rowlamds 1991).
For developing this evaluation management, there are three key
dimensions or distinctions and some of the theory associated:
1-Programme or practice evaluation. It is helpful to make a distinction
between program and project evaluation, and practice evaluation. Much of
the growth in evaluation has been driven by the former.
2-Programme and project evaluation. This evaluation is typically
concerned with making judgments about the effectiveness, efficiency and
sustainability of pieces of work. Here evaluation is essentially a
management tool.
3-Practice evaluation. This evaluation is directed at the enhancement of
work undertaken with particular individuals and groups, and to the
development of participants (including the informal educator).
3- The key elements of the Evaluation of
education (theory and practice)
To success the activity of assessment and Evaluation of the education , it
will be practiced in common work between (the educational management /
teachers with students / stakeholders ( managers of public sector ,private
sector , NGOs and civil society of the labor market) because the
stakeholders will benefit from the future graduates and students when they
integrate in the jobs of businesses and administrations, and they know the
needs of Jobs (knowledge's/experiences / skills / behaviors ) required by
their open jobs and their profiles, for adapting the qualifications of
graduates with the job profiles and real needs of Labor Market .

3-1- The Role of Program Evaluation:

Program evaluation enables administrators to determine the merits of

existing programs and the need for new ones. It can lead to revision,
deletion, or creation of educational programs. This review examines
general information on program evaluation, including evaluation design,
components, methodology, and bibliographic materials. (Barraclough,
Terry ( 1973 ) .
Taylor-Powell. Ellen , Henert .Ellen present some resource for teaching
and training about logic models. This logic model is at the center of
University of Wisconsin -Extension Program Development. It displays the
sequence of actions that describes what the program is and will do, how
investments link to results. it includes (9) core components in this program
action after defying the priorities ( adapted ) :
1- Assessment Needs: What are the characteristics, needs, priorities of
target population? What are potential barriers/facilitators? What is most
appropriate to do?
2-Situation analysis: the originating problem or issue set within a complex
of socio- political, environmental and economic circumstances. The
situation is the beginning point of logic model development.
3-Input: resources, contributions, investments that go into the program.
4-Process evaluation: How is program implemented? Are activities
delivered as intended? Fidelity of implementation? Are participants being
reached as intended? What are participant reactions?
5-Output: activities, services, events, products that reach people who
participate or who are targeted.
6-Outcomes: results or changes for individuals, groups, communities,
organizations, communities, or systems
7-Assumptions: the beliefs we have about the program, the people
involved, and the context and the way we think the program will work.
8-External Factors: the environment in which the program exists includes
a variety of external factors that interact with and influence the program
action.
9-Impact of evaluation: to what extent can changes be attributed to the
program? What are the net effects? What are final consequences? Is
program worth resources it costs?
In (UW-Extension), we use the logic model in planning, implementation,
evaluation and communication. it is equally useful for describing group
work, team work, community-based collaborative and other complex
organizational processes as we seek to promote results-based performance.
Taylor-Powell. Ellen , Henert .Ellen ( 2008).
Figure – 1 Source: Taylor-Powell. Ellen , Henert .Ellen ( 2008 )

3-2- From Program Evaluation to program Development

Program / Curriculum is defined as a plan or program for all of the

experiences which the learner encounters under the direction of the
institution. In practice, the curriculum / program consists of a number of
plans, in a written form and of varying scope, which delineate the desired
learning experiences. The Program, therefore, may be a unit, a course, a
sequence of courses, the institution, entire program of studies and may
take place outside of the classroom or institution. Evaluation is defined as
the process of delineating, obtaining, and providing useful information for
judging decision alternatives. The primary decision alternatives to
consider based upon the evaluation results are:
1) to maintain the program/ curriculum as is;
2) to modify the program / curriculum;
3) to eliminate the program / curriculum. ( Oliva . Peter.F ( 1988 ).
In addition, there are many models available for program / curriculum
evaluation and program development. The work is considered seminal in
the area of program / curriculum theory and development. While many
models for program evaluation exist, the CIPP (Context, Input, Process,
Product) model is one of the most widely used. (Tyler, Ralph . W. (1949)
,( Elon University) , Summer (2007).
 The CIPP evaluation model is known as a very useful approach to
educational evaluation. CIPP approach is developed by ( Stufflebeam D).
provides a systematic way of looking at many different aspects of the
curriculum development process. There is a risk, however, that it may be
directed only by experts or outsiders, and for this reason it is vital to
identify ways in which various stakeholders can be meaningfully involved
such as below .( Stufflebeam, Daniel . L. (2007).

Figure – 2 Source: .( Stufflebeam, Daniel . L. (2007).

Some specialists note that the CIPP Model is not cited as a model used for
Program development, but as a model used for program/curriculum
evaluation.
Scholars have the opinion that a well-conceived and designed Program
/curriculum evaluation model should serves as an excellent model for
Program development. A model that is useful for making important
decisions concerning the value and worth of the Program should be
equally useful in the development of a Program.
Because, there are certain benefits realized from using the same model for
Program development and evaluation. More specifically, when the
framework for the Program evaluation is grounded in the program
development, interpretation of the evaluation results can be directly linked
to specific Program components. Therefore, using the CIPP Model of
Program evaluation for Program development is very feasible approach.
The following table is intended to bridge the gap between the applications
of the CIPP Model for Program evaluation and after adaptation to use it
for the Program development such as:

CIPP Use for Program Development Use for Curriculum

Model
Component
Context To define the operating context
within which the Program will be
delivered. Determine the
specific characteristics of the
learners. Most importantly, it
helps to establish a rationale for
the determination of the Program
objectives.
Input To identify and assess the
capabilities, strategies, and
designs available for
implementing the program as
related to the program’s
objectives. Determine what
internal resources are needed to
Evaluation
To define the environment
relevant to the Program,
describing the actual and
intended conditions of the
program, identifying unmet
needs, and diagnosing barriers
that prevent needs from being
met.
To determine to what extent
available resources were used to
achieve the Program objectives.
 enable achievement of the
objectives and to search for
external resources when required.
Also, the input phase considers
the cost to implement the
Program.
Process To identify the procedural design
that will be used to implement
the Program. The Program
objectives are translated in
specific activities that constitute
the instructional design.
Products To define the measurable
outcomes of the Program both
during and at the completion of
instruction. These outcomes are
directly related to the Program
objectives.
Table 1-adapted.source :( Stufflebeam, Daniel. L. (2007) .
To identify deficiencies in the
procedural design or in the
implementation of the Program,
i.e., what actually took place
during instruction. To provide
information necessary to make
modifications to the
implementation strategies used
during instruction. To maintain
procedural documentation.
To compare actual outcomes
against a standard of what is
acceptable to make judgments
to continue, terminate, modify,
or refocus an activity.

3-3- The Educational Management: from Evaluation to Development

Educational management, also sometimes known as educational

administration, is commonly associated with elementary secondary
schools as well as institutes of higher learning like colleges and
universities. Educational management professionals can also be found
working in governmental agencies, private companies, and not profit
organizations. Those working in educational management might act as
policy-makers, researchers, or consultants to assist, evaluate and develop
ways to enrich and enhance the educational system at all levels.
So, educational management is both a field of academic study and a
collective group of professionals that includes principals, teachers and
other education professionals.
The core of educational management in practice varies slightly from
country to country. but, in general it includes these components :( Public
policy and education, education economics, education legislation,
management of educational organizations, evaluation of educational
systems).
 For implementing the educational management, every educational
institution needs Job skills, and the leadership skills are a must in this
field.
Professionals working in education management must also have good
decision-making and problem-solving skills; they should also be good
communicators and be comfortable working with teachers, parents, and
children /Students, as well as other community members. ( Grand Canyon
University (2015 ) .
In addition, The educational evaluation purpose and importance are:
teacher evaluation; classroom/ self-evaluation; and project / program
evaluation for attempting to figure out what role evaluation plays in
effecting positive change and /or reform as is shown below the figure.
(Lunsford ,Karen and , Walleghen .Pamela Van) .

Stakeholders Imput
MOD, MOHE, HEC
Change International Trends
. to Global Findings and
Educational
Landscape Benchmarking
Context

Develop an overall
innovative /capacity Vision / Mission
building strategy

Strategic Alignment / Continuous Improvement

Policy Planing Teacher Development Programs

Performance
indicators/ Strategic Plan Management
Benchmarking

Input Process Products

Advanced Self-Directed, Enhanced
Quality Strategy, Facilitated Programs, Research,
Program Evaluation, Area for
Indicators (Evaluation Cycle), Improvement

External Evaluation

Outcomes Evaluation (Research)

Figure-3 Adapted ,Source:Lunsford,Karen,Walleghen.Pamela Van

4- Finding :
4-1- The New Perspective of Educational Development:

UNESCO and another organization interested in education development

design and presenting new education development plan, this plan forms
the link between the long term goals of the education service in
conjunction with the long term national goals expressed in the sustainable
development plan and the requirement for each government department to
have a 3 Year Strategic Plan which is fully budgeted. The Education
Development Plan, together with the Sustainable Development Plan, will
provide the long term vision that successive 3 Year Strategic Plans will
deliver through more detailed, resource linked planning.
The Components of the Education Development Plan and their associated
Strategic Objectives represent the areas that are crucial for improving
quality and raising standards across all levels of education. The
achievement of these objectives depends on not only the professionalism,
dedication and practice of education professionals and staff, but on the
partnerships and involvement of parents and the wider community. ( IIEP
– UNESCO( 2015 ) .

4-2- The Educational Development Plan:

The Educational Development Plan shows the main components of
educational development process and how they operate in an iterative way.
The seven components are further described in the following Figure.
1- Educational System Analysis

2- Policy Priorities and

Strategies
4- Costing and
Consultations

3- Programs design Financing

5- Action Plan

6- Implementation and
arrangements
7- Monitoring and
Evaluation

Figure -4, Source: IIEP – UNESCO (2015).

4-3- Methodology Used to Develop the Educational Development Plan:

The Education Development Plan was formulated within concept of the

strategic management cycle and adopted a participatory approach. The
strategic management cycle adopted from the National Education Sector
Plan and is similar to many other planning cycles.
The cycle was followed through the stages of Evaluation, Feedback,
Analysis Appraisal, and Planning; with the stages of Operationalization,
Implementation and Monitoring & Review coming later.
Thus, An Education Sector Assessment was completed during the
evaluation stage, which was informed by a variety of existing reports as
well as collecting, and evaluating existing education data and evidence.
Feedback and analysis was performed through the dissemination of
evaluation data to internal and external stakeholders and through the
formation of an Education Development Plan Steering Committee, which
consisted of existing and former senior education specialists and which
determined the findings that would be disseminated.
Appraisal and Evaluation was conducted through a staged consultation
process, initially with internal stakeholders and then with external
stakeholders this determined the over-arching framework that would
inform the planning stage.
Planning was conducted by the EDP Steering Committee, which agreed
the high level planning architecture, informed through consultation. The
Evaluation stage achieved by stakeholders.
( www.gov.ms/.../2011/04/...2012-20-Education-Development-Plan-
draft.pdf)

4-4- Models of Evaluation of the Education:

Johnson R. Bruke and Larry Christensen .B present and develop four

Models of evaluation of education using the mnemonic (MJAC ) . (
Johnson R.Bruke , Larry Christensen .B( 2015 ) .
These four models may be helpful in leading the theory and the practice of
evaluation as mention Payne .David . A (1994 ) .Payne, David .A. (1994).
These four models explained as:
1. Management Models: The basic idea of the management approach is
that the evaluator’s job is to provide information to management to help
them in making decisions about programs, products, etc. The evaluator’s
job is to serve managers (or whoever the key decision makers are).
Patton’s motto recommends that evaluators work closely with primary
intended users so that their needs will be met. This requires focusing on
stakeholders’ key questions, issues, and intended users and involving
intended users in the interpretation of the findings, and then disseminating
those findings so that they can be used. Ultimately, evaluations should,
according to Patton, be judged by their utility and actual use. ( Patton,
M.Q. (1997).
2. Judicial Models : This model is assumed here that the potential for
evaluation bias by a single evaluator cannot be ruled out, and, therefore,
each side should have a separate evaluator to make their case. For
example, one evaluator can examine and present the evidence for
terminating a program and another evaluator can examine and present the
evidence for continuing the program. A hearing of some sort is conducted
where each evaluator makes his or her case regarding the evaluated. This
approach sets up a system of checks and balances by ensuring that all sides
be heard including alternative explanations for the data. Some judge or
arbiter who considers the arguments and the evidence and then renders a
decision makes the ultimate decision.
By showing the positive and negative aspects of a program, considering
alternative interpretations of the data, and examining the strengths and
weaknesses of the evaluation report (meta- evaluation), the adversary or
judicial approach seems to have some potential. (Blaine R. Worthen,
James R. Sanders, and Jody L. Fitzpatrick,(1997 ) .
 3. Anthropological Models: This Model includes under this heading the
qualitative approaches to program evaluation. Qualitative research tends to
be exploratory, collect many descriptive data, and takes an inductive
approach to understanding the world (looking at specifics and then trying
to come up with conclusions or generalizations about what is observed).
In this approach the evaluator enters the field and observes what is going
on in the program. Participant and nonparticipant observations are
commonly used. Additional data are also regularly collected (focus
groups, interviews, questionnaires, and secondary or extant data),
especially for the purpose of triangulation. So, Qualitative methods tend to
be useful for describing program implementation, studying process,
studying participation, getting program participants’ views or opinions
about program impact, and identifying program strengths and weaknesses.
( Patton. Michael Quinn (1987 ) .
4. Consumer Models: This approach is based on the consumer product
metaphor. Evaluators can obtain some useful evaluation ideas from the
field of consumer product evaluation (which is exemplified by the
magazine Consumer Reports). The consumer approach is primarily
summative. When you read Consumer Reports, your goal is to learn if a
product is good or not and how well it stacks up against similar products
and whether you want to purchase it.
The consumer approach also holds some promise for developing lists of
programs that work, which can be used by policy makers and others when
developing or selecting programs for specific problems. ( Scriven .
Michael ( 2015 ) .

5- practical Model Proposed :The Integrated

Management of education:
We have designed and developed a (practical model) as part of our
university academic work at Gaziantep University in Turkey to propose a
development project for adapting the (Faculties / Institutes programs to the
needs of the regional and inter-regional labor market).
This Model presents the collaboration between the (Educational
management, Teachers and Students, and Stakeholders) for developing
and managing the education system in each region or inter- region or at the
national level.
For using this Model, every educational institution is required to formulate
(Teamwork /Committees) for (studying the indicators analysis of the
situation, setting plan, providing means and tools, implementing the
programs of work, monitoring, evaluating and improving).
 (MERI MODEL)
For Socio-Economic Integration to labor market and society at the
regional /national level in Turkey

Universities (OSSEI) OSSEI Committee Stakeholders

Regional/Inter-regional
Office of support the Data's suppliers' / products
/National
Socio-economic integration
Approving: beneficiaries'
- Regional level: University
- Labor market needs
- Interregional level: Inter-university - Public: Education, Social, Economic,
- Curriculum Content
- National level: HEC/ YOK , Municipalities, Organizations, Agencies, ...
- Profiles of Jobs
- Private: Enterprises, Companies, crafts
- Competencies of graduates
and liberal professions, ...
- Civil Society: NGO, associations,
foundations.

Organization Adopt Staff Academic balance Priorities

Culture Management competencies:
- Leadership System qualification - Professional competencies And
-Teamwork
- Methods - teaching staff
- Motivation and orientation Main
- Communications - student project monitoring
- Mechanisms -assistant staffs Objectives
- Behavior

Strategic and Executive Plan Providing: Graduates Qualification New Balance:

-Social Integration: Regional /Inter-regional / Curriculum
Developing Curriculum
National - Tools content
(Moving from theory to practice by
- Economic integration: Regional / Inter-regional / - Resources =
using case studies, ...
National Profiles of jobs and
candidates

Student Project: internship office: Results Evaluation and Feedback

Preparing Personal and - Regional And - Social Integration:
Professional Project -National Indicators Satisfaction: Yes, No
- Economic Integration:
Yes, No

Human Development Indicators : (Employment , Revenue Development

,Health ,Education quality , Economic growth, Schooling And
enrollment, Women Empowerment , Equality of Chance,
Criminality , Political freedom , Immigration ,cultural and social Continuous improvement
conflicts ,...)

Figure-5, MERI MODEL, Meri ,Mohamed meri,2015).

6- Conclusion
Most of Scholars and researchers or practitioners focused on the topics of
curriculum / programs Evaluation or on the Evaluation of Education
process; however, some of them treat the subjects of the evaluation of the
education management. Assessment / Evaluation, learning / teaching
change, program / curriculum development, improving of the Educational
management Etc...(Theory and practice) are parts and parcels of education,
all these components can be experienced for benefiting of it when we will
develop education system.
Designing and Developing the Models of program of education or the
educational development is not enough to explore topic by topic of the
education system, but it is time to encourage researchers and practitioners
to use the IEM (integrated educational management) .This IEM
needs innovative models for Improving the education system, and
exploring the theories and practices of all these components, especially
involving the influencers on the educational system or the key influencers
on this IEM as: (stakeholders and youth workers, community educators/
students, and management of education).
We propose by this paper the Integrated Managerial Model of the
education (as a practical Model) designed and developed as part of our
university academic work at Gaziantep University in Turkey to promote a
development project for adapting the (Faculties / Institutes programs to the
needs of the regional and inter-regional labor market).
This Practical Model presents the collaboration required between the
(Educational management, Teachers and Students, Stakeholders) for
developing and managing the educational system in each region or inter-
region or at the national level.

Recommendations
1- It is necessary to review all the components of education system at the
regional, inter-regional and national level in every country for adapting the
contents of these components with the needs of labour market.
2- Scholars and practitioners should move in their theoretical and practical
work from programs evaluation or educational development to the
integrated education management, which cover all the sub-system of the
education.
3- Stakeholders and others beneficiaries of the outcomes of education
system must be invited to support all the initiatives focusing on enhancing
the intersection between education components and the labour market
needs.
4- Integrated education management by its practical Model is one of the
new approaches for improving the education system in all its components.

References
1-.Anthony. Saba, Dawley. Lisa ( 2009): Evaluation Plan, Course: Edtech 512 -
Online , Course Design, 10/03/2009 , Copyright © Anthony Saba .
2- Barraclough, Terry ( 1973 ) : Program Evaluation. Educational Management
Review Series Number 21, National Inst. of Education (DHEW), Washington,
DC, ERIC Clearinghouse on Educational Management, Eugene, OR.
3- Blaine R. Worthen, James R. Sanders, and Jody L. Fitzpatrick (1997 ) :
Program evaluation: alternative approaches and practical guidelines , White
Plains, NY: Longman Publishers, The American Journal of Evaluation , Volume
20, Issue 3, Autumn 1999, Pages 599–601) .
4- Cauley, Kathleen; McMillan, James (2010): Formative assessment techniques
to support student motivation and achievement. The Clearing House: A Journal
of Educational Strategies, Issues and Ideas 83 (1,( 1–6 ) .
-Chelimsky E. (1997) Thoughts for a new evaluation society. Evaluation 3(1):
97-118 ) .
5-Elon University ( 2007 ) : Curriculum Development Judith Howard Department
of Education Elon University Summer 2007.
6- Everitt, A. and Hardiker, P. (1996) Evaluating for Good Practice, London:
Macmillan. 223 + x pages. Chapters examine purposes; facts, truth and values;
measuring performance; a critical approach to evaluation; designing critical
evaluation; generating evidence; and making judgements and effecting change).
7-Freire .Paulo (1972 ) : dialogue, praxis and education, YMCA George
Williams College .,
8- Freire, P. (1995) Pedagogy of Hope. Reliving Pedagogy of the Oppressed,
New York: Continuum.
9- Gitlin, A. and Smyth, J. (1989): Teacher Evaluation. Critical education and
transformative alternatives, Lewes: Falmer Press .
10- Grand Canyon University ( 2015 ): What Is Educational Management?,
College of Education, Program Information, Web site, 2015 .
11- Hirsch, B. J. (2005) A Place to Call Home. After-school programs for urban
youth, New York: Teachers College Press. A rigorous and insightful evaluation
of the work of six inner city boys and girls clubs that concludes that the most
important thing they can and do offer is relationships (both with peers and with
the workers) and a ‘second home.
12- IIEP – UNESCO ( 2015 ) : Guidelines for Education Sect r Plan Appraisal,
IIEP’s printshop, Paris ) , IIEP - UNESCO: Guidelines for Education Sector Plan
Preparation, the Global Partnership for Education , 900 19th Street, N.W., Suite
600, Washington DC, 20006, USA , IIEP’s print shop , © UNESCO 2015 ,
www.globalpartnership.org.
13-Jeffs and Smith, M. K. (2005): Informal Education. Conversation, democracy
and learning 3e, Nottingham: Educational Heretics Press .
14- Johnson R. Bruke , Larry Christensen .B ( 2015 ): Educational Research
Methods , UK Edition ,USA .
15- Lewin , K. and Grabbe, P. (1945) : Conduct, knowledge and acceptance of
new values’ Journal of Social Issues 2.
16- Lunsford ,Karen and , Walleghen .Pamela Van : Evaluating "Evaluation":
Purposes, Texts and Contexts”,Team Fitzgerald and Team Evans , EIT European
Institute of Innovation and Technology , Budapest – Hungary ,web news.
17- Meri . Mohamed Meri ( 2015 ): MERI MODEL - For Socio-Economic
Integration to labor market and society at the regional /national level in Turkey ,
Gaziantep University .
18-Nicholson . Walter ( 2001 ) : Design Issues in the Summative Evaluations ,
Results of this meeting are summarized in Walter Nicholson , HRDC paper,
March 28, 2001 .
19- Oliva . Peter.F ( 1988 ) : Developing the Curriculum , Glenview, 111, Scott
Foresman/ Little, Brown , College Division .
20- Patton, M.Q. (1997) : Utilization-focused evaluation: The new century text.
Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
21- Patton. Michael Quinn (1987 ) : How to Use Qualitative Methods in
Evaluation ?, Utilization – focused Evaluation , Aian Paul , MN, Sage
Publication .
22- Payne, David .A. (1994): Designing educational project and program
evaluations: A practical overview based on research and experience. Boston:
Kluwer Academic Publishers).
23- Putman, R. D. (2000) : Bowling Alone: The collapse and revival of American
community, New York: Simon and Schuster ).
24- Rogers, A. and Smith, M. K. (2006): Evaluation- Learning what matters,
London: Rank Foundation/YMCA George Williams College. Available as a pdf:
www.ymca.org.uk/rank/conference/evaluation_learning_what_matters.pdf.
25- Rogers, P. , A. Petrosino , T. Hacsi and T. Huebner (2000) :`Program Theory
Evaluation: Practice, Promise and Problems', in P. Rogers , A. Petrosino , T.
Hacsiand T.
26-Rowlamds, J. (1991) :How Do We Know It Is Working? The Evaluation of
Social Development Projects’, in Smith, M.K. (2001) Evaluation: Theory and
Practice, The Encyclopaedia of Informal Education
wysig://page.46/http://www.infed.org/biblio/b-eval/htm 21st August 2001.C
27-Rubin, F. (1995) : A Basic Guide to Evaluation for Development Workers,
Oxford: Oxfam
28- Scriven . Michael ( 2015 ) : KEY EVALUATION CHECKLIST (KEC),
Claremont Graduate University , & The Evaluation Center, Western Michigan
University,Draft , Edition 100 .
29-Shadish. William (1998) : Some Evaluation Questions , Memphis State
University, Evaluation Theory is Who We Are. American Journal of Evaluation,
19, 1, 1-19 .
30- Stufflebeam, Daniel . L. (2007): CIPP evaluation model checklist (2nd ed.).
Retrieved from ,
http://www.wmich.edu/evalctr/archive_checklists/cippchecklist_mar07.pdf
31- Taylor-Powell. Ellen , Henert .Ellen ( 2008 ) : Developing a logic model:
Teaching and training guide , HANDOUT – University of Wisconsin-Extension,
Cooperative Extension, Program Development and Evaluation.
32-Tyler, Ralph . W. (1949) : Basic principles of curriculum and instruction.
Chicago: University of Chicago Press .
33-( www.gov.ms/.../2011/04/...2012-20-Education-Development-Plan-draft.pdf)
.