home

Evaluation Report Outline (Simplified)
Based on Fitzpatrick, Sanders, and Worthen 2004, pp 382-8. For use with [|dept chair case study].

Introduction
//Define purpose, audience, decision-makers// Purpose: Reconcile diminished resources with required product--i.e. student needs Decision-makers: dept chair, faculty, deans, provosts/vps, controllers, presidential, board of regents

Focus of evaluation
//Define problem(s) (i.e. decision making to be served), list questions or objectives// Too many courses, too few professors, not right courses and right time More efficient scheduling? How much demand for programs in dept? Alternative delivery methods? Can we serve more students online than trad? Can other financial resources be saved and reallocated? would reorganize departmental requirements help?

Evaluation Activities
//Interviews, collect data, gather documentation// course availability and scheduling identify alternative human resources collect data on demand enrollment data, class fills up fast focus groups, online surveys faculty meetings cost-analysis: adjunct vs. grad vs. full time ratio of adjunct to full-time vs limitations (for accreditation) physical resource cost analysis (see above) HR to determine availability of adjuncts gathering best practices

Evaluation Results
//Summary & interpretation of findings// we can increase efficiency of scheduling alternative delivery methods that maximize student faculty ratio use of grad students, adjuncts reorganize departmental requirements

Conclusions & Recommendations
//Criteria for effectiveness, strengths & weaknesses (see problem), opportunities, alternative strategies, etc.//