Blog

Academic Program Evaluation

Due 7/11/2025

The first assignment is to evaluate an academic program of your choice. This report may be on a program identified by the CIMA student (Curriculum, Instruction, and Technology Master of Science in Education).

The plan should include:

1. Program description

2. Program documentation and review

3. Review of literature related to the program

4. Methods used to evaluate the program, including the development of an evaluation rubric document

Academic Program Evaluation

Assignment 1 should be approximately ten pages in length with 10 references with in the past 5-10 years that have open access.

1. What is the program description?,

2. How is the program documented and reviewed?,

3. What does the literature say about this program?,

4. What methods will be used for evaluation?,

5. How will the evaluation rubric be developed?

Academic Program Evaluation

---

Comprehensive General Answer:

1. Program Description

The program under evaluation is a Master of Science in Education in Curriculum, Instruction, and Technology (CIMA). This program is designed to equip educators with advanced knowledge and skills in instructional design, curriculum development, and technology integration within educational settings. Its core objectives include improving instructional effectiveness, enhancing digital literacy, and promoting research-based teaching practices. The program typically spans two years, incorporating coursework in curriculum theory, educational technology, instructional strategies, and assessment methods.

2. Program Documentation and Review

Program documentation involves collecting official documents such as the curriculum guide, course syllabi, program handbooks, and accreditation reports. These documents detail the program’s learning outcomes, course offerings, instructional methods, and assessment tools. The review process examines these documents to ensure alignment with national educational standards, institutional goals, and student needs. Feedback from students, faculty, alumni, and external reviewers is often gathered through surveys, interviews, and focus groups to further assess program effectiveness.

3. Review of Literature Related to the Program

Recent literature highlights the increasing importance of integrating technology in educational programs to enhance teaching and learning. Studies emphasize that curriculum and instruction programs must address digital competencies, instructional design frameworks, and evidence-based teaching methods. Research also shows the value of collaborative learning, culturally responsive pedagogy, and continuous professional development within such programs. Scholars recommend that programs continuously adapt to emerging technologies and educational trends to remain relevant and effective.

4. Methods Used to Evaluate the Program

The program evaluation will employ a mixed-methods approach, combining both qualitative and quantitative data collection techniques:

• Surveys to gather data from students and faculty regarding program satisfaction, perceived effectiveness, and areas for improvement.

• Interviews and Focus Groups for in-depth qualitative insights from faculty, alumni, and current students.

• Document Analysis of course materials, syllabi, and program assessments.

• Benchmarking against similar programs at peer institutions to compare program outcomes and structures.

• Pre/Post Assessments to measure student growth and learning achievements throughout the program.

5. Development of Evaluation Rubric

Academic Program Evaluation

The evaluation rubric will be designed collaboratively with input from faculty, administrators, and external experts. Key criteria will include:

• Curriculum Relevance: Alignment with current educational needs and standards.

• Instructional Quality: Effectiveness of teaching methods and materials.

• Technology Integration: Degree to which technology is effectively used.

• Student Outcomes: Graduate success, academic performance, and skill development.

• Stakeholder Satisfaction: Feedback from students, alumni, and employers.

Each criterion will have descriptors ranging from “Exemplary” to “Needs Improvement,” ensuring clarity in evaluation results.