EIDT Advanced Instructional Design

6110

Evaluation Plan

Evaluation Process
The evaluation of the module will include both assessments, formative and summative
and the students success in using the module to create, edit, and upload an Ezvid and the
students opinions of the module content and presentation. The process of evaluation is detailed
in Figure 1.

Figure 1. The evaluation process.

As noted in Figure 1, the first form of evaluation occurs after the learner has completed
the material associated with the first objective . The formative and summative assessments of
student progress all occur during the module. After the completion of the module students are
asked to complete an evaluation.

Alignment to the Five Levels of Evaluation

In Table 1, I present the alignment of my planned evaluation to those published in
Simonson (2007).

Table 1
Alignment to the Five Levels of Evaluations

Level Planned Evaluations

1 Learner Reactions The module evaluation tool will capture the
learner reactions to the module. This will be

Laureate Education, Inc. Page

1
EIDT Advanced Instructional Design
6110

completed at the end of the module using

Survey Monkey and will include questions
related to the time required to complete the
module, the content, the materials, and the
formative and summative assessments.
2 Learning Progress The two formative and one summative
assessment are designed to monitor students
progress and also control the movement from
objective to objective during the module
training.
3 Transfer This will be difficult to assess given the time
constraints. The module evaluation tool will
have additional questions pertaining to the
perceived usefulness of the new software tool,
including any plans to record any screencasting
videos. Ideally, this would be a separate
evaluation offered after I could be sure that
transfer had occurred, though the timing of
transfer is difficult to estimate. Learners could
be asked to complete a second evaluation the
next time they recorded a video using Ezvid,
but compliance may be compromised by the
delay.
4 Results Were this training offered in a work setting,
evaluation of the results could be based on
increased productivity. For example, were this
module offered to faculty at a small college,
college administrators could determine whether
there was an increase in the use of videos after
completion of the module.
5 Return on Investment This would require someone to have invested
as well as information on the results. If the
module was created on behalf of the
administration at the small college referred to
in level 4, the costs associated with its creation,
as well as costs related to the use of learners
time, could be measured against the results .

Alignment of Unit Goals to the evaluation process

In Table 2, I present the unit goals and the evaluations associated with those goals

Table 2
Alignment to Unit Goals

Unit Goal Evaluation

Laureate Education, Inc. Page

2
EIDT Advanced Instructional Design
6110

Learners will access the web-based Ezvid
instruction with relative ease and reading
textual material will be readily accessible.
Learners will use the Ezvid program to record,
organize, and upload their screencast videos
effectively and successfully.
Learners will feel confident in their ability to
apply the learned knowledge and skills
obtained from the Ezvid instruction to create,
edit, and share their own recorded videos.
This goal will be evaluated using the module
evaluation tool. This tool will have several
questions related to the ease of use of the web-
based module and the availability of the
learning resources.
To evaluate this, I have designed the formative
and summative assessments of student progress
associated with the instructional objectives.
This goal will also be evaluated using the
module evaluation tool. In this tool, I will ask a
question about the learners confidence in their
ability to create additional videos.

Evaluation Tools and Materials

I used my previous experience with course design to create the checklist, template, and
rubrics used in the two formative assessments and the summative one, respectively. I used my
knowledge of Survey Monkey and my familiarity with student evaluations, both as student and
designer/instructor to create the evaluation tool.

Summary of modifications:
As I did not submit the Evaluation Plan in EDUC 6100 and I am not able to access it
through our Wiki site, I had to completely redo the evaluation plan and all materials associated
with it. From what I remember the checklist was not specific to objective 1 and had to be redone
and the objective 2 template and objective 3 rubric were not included. We were not required to
create a learner evaluation tool.

Reference List:

Gagne, Robert M., Wager, Walter W., Golas, Katharine C., & Keller, John M. (2005). Principles
of instructional design (5th ed.). Belmont, CA: Wadsworth.
Morrison, G. R., Ross, S. M., Kalman, H. K., & Kemp, J. E. (2013). Designing effective
instruction (7th ed.). Hoboken, NJ: John Wiley & Sons, Inc. Morton, M. (n.d.).
Piskurich, George (2006). Rapid Instructional Design (2nd ed.) San Francisco, CA: Pfeiffer.
Simonson, M. (2007). Evaluation and distance education: Five steps. Quarterly Review of
Distance Education. 8(3), 191194.

Original Plan:

Ezvid Instruction prepared in EDUC 6100 by the ID Solutions Group

Link to Survey Monkey: https://www.surveymonkey.com/r/JV6MPG2

Laureate Education, Inc. Page

3