At the beginning of this course, I rated myself as a novice evaluator according to the AEA Evaluator Competencies. That has not really changed in terms of overall placement, but my understanding of what that actually means has changed quite a bit. At the start, I associated evaluation mostly with assessment and data use at the classroom level. I was comfortable working with student data, adjusting instruction, and communicating results, but I did not have experience designing evaluations or thinking about systems in a structured way. After completing the self-assessment again, I would now place myself at a 3 out of 6. I am still developing, but I now understand how evaluation works beyond the classroom and have some experience actually doing parts of it.
Looking at my results, the pattern is pretty clear. My strengths are still in interpersonal competence and reflective practice, and those stayed high. My growth areas are still methodology and planning/management, but those areas did improve. The difference now is that I can explain why.
Interpersonal competence remains my strongest area. I rated myself high across that domain, with several items at a 6, including building relationships, listening to different perspectives, and communicating effectively. That lines up directly with my experience as a special education teacher. Working through IEP meetings, collaborating with general education teachers, and communicating with families requires constant interaction, clarification, and sometimes conflict resolution. That did not change because of this course. If anything, the course just confirmed that those skills transfer directly into evaluation work. The group work with Team Nile also reinforced this. Coordinating tasks, aligning ideas, and working through different perspectives is a skill I have honed over time, and I rated myself a 6 in teaming with others as a result.
Reflective practice is another area that stayed strong. I rated myself at a 4 across items related to using evidence, reflecting on practice, and identifying areas for growth. That is consistent with how I already operate in the classroom. I regularly adjust lessons, modify materials, and reflect on what worked, what did not, and what I would do differently. In this course, that showed up in how I approached instrument design. For example, when working on the Likert survey, I revised items to improve clarity and removed negatively worded questions that could confuse respondents. That process of iterating, getting feedback, and making adjustments is something I already do, it was just applied in a different context through this course.
The largest learning curve for me was in methodology. At the start of the course, I rated myself around a 2 in this area because I had no experience designing evaluations, selecting methods, or writing evaluation questions. Now, many of those items are in the 3 to 4 range. For example, I rated myself a 4 in identifying evaluation purposes and determining evaluation questions, and a 3 in designing evaluations and selecting methods. The work done in this course paved the way for my understanding and application.
At the beginning, I didn't know where to start, but I started anyway. Now I know and understand the process. Writing the evaluation proposal forced me to think about alignment between evaluation questions, data sources, and methods. Building the Likert survey and interview protocol is where my understanding sharpened. I now feel I can apply such instruments in my teaching/professional development context. Throughout the process I had to make decisions about what to ask, how to ask it, and what kind of data it would produce. The data analysis portion also contributed to this. I rated myself a 2 in analyzing data because I only dabbled in qualitative analysis. However, I feel much more confident in the quantitative side of a mixed methods approach. I know what that process looks like and how the pieces fit together, and am ready to apply them in my future endeavors.
Planning and management showed slight growth. Most of my ratings in this domain are still at a 2 or 3, which feels accurate. I have experience managing my own classroom and deadlines, but managing a full evaluation plan with timelines, resources, and multiple stakeholders is different. The group work gave me some exposure to this, especially in terms of coordinating tasks and meeting deadlines, but I have not independently managed a real evaluation from start to finish. One interesting result here was that I rated myself a 6 in teaming with others but much lower in planning and managing evaluation processes. That gap makes sense. I can contribute effectively within a team, but I am not yet leading or structuring the entire process. The key is “yet” as I am now better equipped to initiate an evaluation process at my school.
One thing that became clear is that evaluation isn’t really about the results as much as I thought. I used to think you look at the data and decide if something worked. The design of the evaluation and the interpretation of data is just as important as the data collected. Everything has to align so the results are actually valid and reliable.
Based on these results, I would still describe myself as a developing evaluator. I am no longer at the point where everything is unfamiliar, but I am also not at the point where I could independently design and run a full evaluation on my own. My strengths are still in working with people, communicating, and reflecting on practice. My growth areas are still in the technical and structural side of evaluation.
Moving forward, the next steps are pretty clear. I need more experience actually applying methodology and managing evaluation processes. That could look like continuing to build and refine instruments, working with data in a more structured way, and being involved in evaluation work as a member of the instructional leadership team at my school. I plan to start applying the evaluative thinking I have learned by looking more closely at how programs and interventions are evaluated at my school level, not just how students perform on state and district assessments. I would like to evaluate professional development sessions given throughout the year and make meaningful recommendations, so that teachers gain better skills, and students are positively impacted by the increased effectiveness of the trainings.
Overall, this self-assessment confirmed some things and clarified others. My strengths did not really change, but my understanding of evaluation has. I now possess a clearer picture of what evaluators actually do and where I fit within that. I am still developing, but I am no longer at the starting line.
Comments
Post a Comment