Countenance Evaluation Model

Robert E. Stakes the Countenance Model of Evaluation in Education Evaluation is an important aspect of program cultivation to come up with improvement plan to achieve competitiveness, depending on the judgment of the one who evaluates, or the evaluators. Education being complex is associated with contingencies with consideration to congruence (intentions and observations).This take adequate scrutiny, rendering both embody measurement and estimation of outcomes since education is a crucial part of society and economy, and its greater effectiveness per unit cost is of high consideration, especially on a given resource constraint, is desirable (Mathison, 2005, p. 90). The so-called Countenance Model of Evaluation, formulated by Robert E. Stake, is a model focal point on the qualitative influences to the traditional quantitative designs, with judgment being maintained as the major function of the one who evaluates.The heart of this model is on the decisions that be come up with duri ng the paygrade. There are three important phases of program development where this model revolves antecedent, transaction, and outcome. In the antecedent phase, the consideration is the environmental factors that might travel program outcomes. The effectiveness of the program during implementation is being considered by in the transaction phase on the other hand. When the program has already achieved completion, its effects are being examined in the outcome phase.The evaluation procedure must take into account both judgment and explanations, both relying on quantitative and qualitative observations. The description may either be absolute or comparative (Snyder, Acker-Hocevar, and Snyder, 2008, pp. 167-168). The strength of this model is that it allows thorough evaluation since it requires the evaluator to give a description of the situations (events, activities, conditions, etcetera ) before, during, and after the program implementation (Snyder, Acker-Hocevar, and Snyder, 2008 , p. 168). It is really a helpful feature of this model that it offers flexibility in operation.The approach is holistic in nature, rather than atomistic, with distributively part being emphasized. Factors are all given attention, with the importance of each factor imposed and selected to gain sensitivity (Burgess, Galloway, and Morrison, 1993, p. 36). References Burgess, Robert G. , Sheila Galloway, and Marlene Morrison. (1993). Implementing In-service Education and Training. Retrieved September 18, 2008, from http//books. google. com/books? id=t949AAAAIAAJ&pg=PA36&dq=countenance+evaluation+model+in+education&as_brr=3&sig=ACfU3U1p1htWqqCorrsxmE_4op-nJA40mAMathison, Sandra. (2005). Encyclopedia of Evaluation. Retrieved September 18, 2008, from http//books. google. com/books? id=sCibBf4Ni1QC&pg=PA167&dq=countenance+evaluation+model&as_brr=3&sig=ACfU3U3JfsrxoDJqDLQ-djt_50iTpK99vQPPA167,M1 Snyder, Karolyn J. , Michelle Acker-Hocevar, and Kristen M. Snyder. (2008). Living on the Edge o f Chaos booster cable Schools into the Global Age. Retrieved September 18, 2008, from http//books. google. com/books? id=nmv5mSHlXKQC&pg=PA90&dq=countenance+evaluation+model&as_brr=3&sig=ACfU3U2pfiSKzcKZz7laTIzdLnRjUjd31Q