Catherine Holthaus

EdTech 505
Week 5 Assignment

c. Apply Gap Analysis to the program/project detailed in exercise in previous
assignments.


Since selecting Accelerated Math as the focus of my evaluation project and learning
about Gap analysis, I know it was the right choice. Visualize a three-legged stool and
imagine it without one of the legs. How useful would it be? It would be virtually
impossible to bear weight without an incredible balancing act. This scenario is
repeated over and over in organizations where Gap analysis is not engaged prior to
the implementation of a new program.

Using a three-legged stool as a visual reference, picture the first leg as the Needs
Analysis. In reviewing the history of how the selection of the Accelerated Math
program transpired five years ago, the need was minimally defined. Math scores
were lower than what was expected and a supplemental program was suggested
during a staff meeting. During the same staff meeting, the decision was made to
purchase Accelerated Math. The next leg of the stool, are the Goals and Objectives to
be attained. To my knowledge, no objectives or goals were ever clearly defined. As
stated earlier, the decision to purchase Accelerated Math was made during a weekly
staff meeting with little to no research being conducted. It was recognized that math
scores needed to improve according to results from the annual standardized test
results but this was never clearly documented. As a collaborative group, we went
from identifying the need directly to the selection of a program. The third leg, the
bridge was not constructed and the Gap analysis stool was obviously missing a leg.

Currently, the school has had this program for five years and is unable to
statistically document any student improvement directly related to Accelerated
Math. As there were no objectives or goals established initially, it is impossible to
determine whether or not they have been met. Clearly an evaluation of the
Accelerated Math program needs to be conducted. I am confident the evaluation will
document student improvement in direct relation to the program. I also believe it
will show the need to maintain better records on student achievement associated
with programs within in the school along with the need for staff training on how to
better utilize the program.








d. Explain Figure 3.1 Program Cycle in terms of the program detailed in previous
assignments.



The philosophy at the school where I teach is to provide a quality education to
prepare students for the workforce. If at any point this is not occurring, the issue
will be addressed and changes implemented. Five years ago, it was determined that
students in grades K-6 were not achieving acceptable math scores on standardized
assessments. It was decided the school needed a supplemental math program
applicable to all grade levels to address this need. The planning process was brief
and conducted quickly at a weekly staff meeting. Accelerated Math was suggested
and was consequently purchased. Since experiencing positive return from the
Accelerated Reading program, it was assumed the Accelerated Math program results
would be similar. After purchasing the program, it was downloaded to the teachers
computers, scanners were installed, and the teachers were given a printed users
Needs Analysis-
Where we are now
currently
Low math scores
No historical data on
impact of Acclerated
Math program
Supplemental math
program needed
Used consistently
throughout grades K-6
Bridge -
Improve program
Accelerated Math
program
Goals and Objectives-
Where we want to be

Increase math scores in
grades K-6
Maintain historical
impact of Acclerated
Math program on
student progress
Increase student
retention
Provide remedial math
exercises to support
those in need
Train staff on
incorporating
Acclerated Math into
daily schedule
Philosophy
and Goals
Needs
Assessment
Program
Planning
Implement
ation and
Formative
Evaluation
Summative
Evaluation
manual. A teacher from a neighboring community conducted a brief training on how
they incorporated it into the class, but that was the extent of any training received.
The teachers in grades K-6 all have access to Accelerated Math however it is used
for different purposes in each grade. The lower grades do not use it due to lack of
networking capability. A formative evaluation has never been conducted. Currently,
the school is unable to determine the overall effectiveness of the program. Each
consecutive year it has been decided to continue to renew the program strictly on
teacher feedback. No formal summative evaluation has completed either. A
summative evaluation would document whether the return in student retention and
success is worth the investment.

e.

I selected the Community Sustainability Evaluation Toolbox,
http://evaluationtoolbox.net.au/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=
16&Itemid=20, website to compare to Figure 3.1. The biggest difference noted
between the two sources was that the website divided the process by the formative
and summative evaluations. It is obvious the formative evaluation is a major part of
the program cycle. Figure 3.1 displays the evaluations as being back to back. Both
sources are useful however Figure 3.1 is more concise and easier to follow.