Save Link Assignment Summative and Formative Program Evaluation

Save Link Assignment Summative and Formative Program Evaluation

Save Link Assignment Summative and Formative Program Evaluation
The purpose in conducting program evaluations is to demonstrate benefits offered by programs. Program evaluations consist of either summative or formative types. Whereas summative evaluations assess a program’s operations and usefulness, formative evaluations explain the ways in which a program operates to improve the way in which it functions. In this assignment, you will write a paper in which you discuss the summative and formative types of evaluation and their appropriate applications to organizations.

WRITE THIS ESSAY FOR ME

Tell us about your assignment and we will find the best writer for your paper.

Get Help Now!

General Requirements:

Use the following information to ensure successful completion of the assignment:

Refer to the mission statement and program description from the existing organization that you used in the Module 2 assignment. Use these documents as examples for this assignment as well.
Instructors will be using a grading rubric to grade the assignments. It is recommended that learners review the rubric prior to beginning the assignment in order to become familiar with the assignment criteria and expectations for successful completion of the assignment.
Doctoral learners are required to use APA style for their writing assignments. The APA Style Guide is located in the Student Success Center.
This assignment requires that at least two additional scholarly research sources related to this topic, and at least one in-text citation from each source be included.
You are required to submit this assignment to Turnitin. Please refer to the directions in the Student Success Center.
Directions:

Write a paper (1,000-1,250 words) in which you discuss summative and formative types of program evaluation. Do the following in your paper:

Provide a research-based description of the purposes, audience members, types of information, and data collection sources for which summative and formative program evaluations are best suited.
Identify and defend the type of program evaluation that would best align with and assess the performance of the organization you referenced in the Module 2 assignment. Include specific examples from the organization’s mission statement and program description.
Discuss the theory and process involved in developing the methodological strategies for implementing this evaluation.

Summative and Formative Program Evaluation
1
Unsatisfactory
0.00% 2
Less Than Satisfactory
74.00% 3
Satisfactory
79.00% 4
Good
87.00% 5
Excellent
100.00%
70.0 %Content
15.0 %Description of the Best Applications for Summative and Formative Program Evaluation A description of the best applications for summative and formative program evaluation is either missing or not evident to the reader. A description of the best applications for summative and formative program evaluation is present, but incomplete or inaccurate. A description of the best applications for summative and formative program evaluation is present but cursory. The research used for support is outdated. A description of the best applications for summative and formative program evaluation is present and thorough. The description is moderately well supported though some sources of support are outdated. A description of the best applications for summative and formative program evaluation is present, thorough, and well-detailed. The description is well supported with current and/or seminal research.
25.0 %Identification and Defense of the Program Evaluation Type that Best Aligns to the Selected Example Organization An identification and defense of the program evaluation type that best aligns to the selected example organization is either missing or not evident to the reader. An identification and defense of the program evaluation type that best aligns to the selected example organization is present, but incomplete, illogical, or inaccurate. An identification and defense of the program evaluation type that best aligns to the selected example organization is present, but cursory. The research used for support is outdated. An identification and defense of the program evaluation type that best aligns to the selected example organization is present, logical, and thorough. The statement is moderately well supported though some sources of support are outdated. An identification and defense of the program evaluation type that best aligns to the selected example organization is present, logical, thorough, and well-detailed. The statement is well supported with current and/or seminal research.
25.0 %Discussion of the Theory and Process Involved in Developing the Strategies to Implement the Evaluation A discussion of the theory and process involved in developing the strategies to implement the evaluation is either missing or not evident to the reader. A discussion of the theory and process involved in developing the strategies to implement the evaluation is present, but incomplete or inaccurate. A discussion of the theory and process involved in developing the strategies to implement the evaluation is present, but cursory. The research used for support is outdated. A discussion of the theory and process involved in developing the strategies to implement the evaluation is present and thorough. The discussion is moderately well supported though some sources of support are outdated. A discussion of the theory and process involved in developing the strategies to implement the evaluation is present, thorough, and well-detailed. The discussion is well supported with current and/or seminal research.
5.0 %Two Additional Scholarly Research Sources With In-Text Citations. None of the required elements (two topic-related scholarly research sources and two in-text citations) are present. Not all required elements are present. One or more of the elements is missing and/or an included source(s) is not scholarly research or topic-related. All required elements are present. Scholarly research sources are topic-related, but the source and quality of one reference is questionable. All required elements are present. Scholarly research sources are topic-related, and obtained from reputable professional sources. All required elements are present. Scholarly research sources are topic-related and obtained from highly respected, professional, original sources.
20.0 %Organization and Effectiveness
7.0 %Thesis Development and Purpose Paper lacks any discernible overall purpose or organizing claim. Thesis and/or main claim are insufficiently developed and/or vague; purpose is not clear. Thesis and/or main claim are apparent and appropriate to purpose. Thesis and/or main claim are clear and forecast the development of the paper. It is descriptive and reflective of the arguments and appropriate to the purpose. Thesis and/or main claim are comprehensive. The essence of the paper is contained within the thesis. Thesis statement makes the purpose of the paper clear.
8.0 %Argument Logic and Construction Statement of purpose is not justified by the conclusion. The conclusion does not support the claim made. Argument is incoherent and uses noncredible sources. Sufficient justification of claims is lacking. Argument lacks consistent unity. There are obvious flaws in the logic. Some sources have questionable credibility. Argument is orderly, but may have a few inconsistencies. The argument presents minimal justification of claims. Argument logically, but not thoroughly, supports the purpose. Sources used are credible. Introduction and conclusion bracket the thesis. Argument shows logical progressions. Techniques of argumentation are evident. There is a smooth progression of claims from introduction to conclusion. Most sources are authoritative. Clear and convincing argument that presents a persuasive claim in a distinctive and compelling manner. All sources are authoritative.
5.0 %Mechanics of Writing (includes spelling, punctuation, grammar, language use) Surface errors are pervasive enough that they impede communication of meaning. Inappropriate word choice and/or sentence construction are used. Frequent and repetitive mechanical errors distract the reader. Inconsistencies in language choice (register), sentence structure, and/or word choice are present. Some mechanical errors or typos are present, but are not overly distracting to the reader. Correct sentence structure and audience-appropriate language are used. Prose is largely free of mechanical errors, although a few may be present. A variety of sentence structures and effective figures of speech are used. Writer is clearly in command of standard, written, academic English.
10.0 %Format
5.0 %Paper Format (Use of appropriate style for the major and assignment) Template is not used appropriately or documentation format is rarely followed correctly. Appropriate template is used, but some elements are missing or mistaken. A lack of control with formatting is apparent. Appropriate template is used. Formatting is correct, although some minor errors may be present. Appropriate template is fully used. There are virtually no errors in formatting style. All format elements are correct.
5.0 %Research Citations (In-text citations for paraphrasing and direct quotes, and reference page listing and formatting, as appropriate to assignment and style) No reference page is included. No citations are used. Reference page is present. Citations are inconsistently used. Reference page is included and lists sources used in the paper. Sources are appropriately documented, although some errors may be present. Reference page is present and fully inclusive of all cited sources. Documentation is appropriate and citation style is usually correct. In-text citations and a reference page are complete and correct. The documentation of cited sources is free of error.
100 %Total Weightage