Who should be involved in curriculum evaluation?

Objectivity versus subjectivity

Traditionally, evaluation has been governed by the need for objectivity. Subjective evaluation, relying on
the emotional responses of individuals, has not been thought to be acceptable. Most forms of evaluation
tend to be undertaken by outside agencies, to achieve impartiality. The value of some forms of subjective
evaluation has no been recogni!ed, for education and training is designed to meet human needs, and
these are by their very nature subjective. "n addition, learning itself involves the hole person, including
the feelings, for e#ample through learner satisfaction.
Subjectivity may at times limit the effectiveness of the evaluation, hoever. $eople ho are intimately
involved ith any process sometimes find it hard to stand back and see hat is actually going on. %or this
reason, training programmes have been evaluated both internally by the participants and e#ternally by
outsiders.

"nternal evaluation
"nternal evaluations have been conducted by those most directly connected ith the curriculum such as
teachers, learners, policy makers and education e#perts &e.g. from the Ministry of 'ducation or (griculture
or from academic institutions). This ensures that the evaluation has credibility since those contributing to it
ill have a first*hand orking knoledge of the programme. Such evaluation is mainly formative, done
continuously through the programme.

"n practice, most teachers and trainers are evaluating their ork all the time, especially if they are
reflecting critically on hat they are doing. They often do it almost unconsciously, or informally, hen
observing or talking ith learners. "f this kind of evaluation is carried out in a conscious ay it ill be
much more effective. +earners also can be active evaluators. "t is sometimes difficult to involve the
learners in the evaluation process, partly because of teacher*learner relationships and partly because of
the perspectives held by the learners about the purposes of the evaluation. +earners often feel that they
themselves are the subject of the evaluation rather than the curriculum. ,eing involved in the evaluation
puts the learners on an e-ual basis ith the teachers and enables them to see learning for hat it is. "t is
an important part of the learning process. Through it, the learners may see ho much progress they have
made, hat measures of achievement they can use for themselves, and ho much further they have to
go before they reach their on goals. Such internal evaluation ill become a motivating force in the
learning process.

'#ternal evaluation
Most forms of summative evaluation are undertaken by e#ternal agencies, such as e#amination boards,
or independent evaluators. (n e#ternal evaluator is likely to have a higher degree of independence and
objectivity, and ill often possess a ider e#perience of other courses and programmes. This is helpful
since it is possible to obtain a broader vie of the effectiveness of the curriculum.

'#ternal evaluators are usually brought in from outside the situation in hich the curriculum is being
developed. "f so, then it ill be important that they should take into consideration a ide range of vies
about the purpose of the programme from those ho have been concerned ith its development rather
than make their judgements on their on. '#ternal evaluation is nearly alays based on assessments
associated ith e#aminations and tests given to the learners. "n these cases, the e#aminer has the poer
over the learners since the e#aminer decides hat ill be assessed and ho. Such assessment does not
need to be a one*ay process, hoever. Teachers and trainers may assess the learners. e-ually, the
learners may assess their teachers and trainers. (gain, learners can assess themselves and their peers.
The idea of peer and self*assessment is becoming more popular.

"n a $/0 approach, if e are to involve other stakeholders in the development of the curriculum, then e
need to involve these same stakeholders in the assessment and evaluation of the programme itself.
Those ho have developed the curriculum ill need to kno ho ell it is orking. 1egular revie
meetings of the stakeholders ill be useful in formative evaluations. and their involvement in the
summative evaluations ill also be necessary. $articipation in assessment and evaluation is thus a
valuable tool to enhance the effectiveness of programmes of education and training. "t is essential if
participatory methods are employed to develop the curriculum.

http://www.cglrc.cgiar.org/icraf/toolkit/Who_should_be_involved_in_curriculum_evaluation_.htm