evaluation of educational programs class

DANG! This one seems awesome. It has a good mix of Master's and Ph D students, and the coteaching professors have a nice balance. One has an evaluation background and the other has a curriculum background -- hopefully the curriculum prof will keep it grounded in practical application. But they both seem awesome, and the class has a good vibe -- very informal, yet very focused on the course content. The back-and-forth between the professors is complementary -- I would love to coteach someday with someone and pull it off like they do.

And we practiced by evaluating chocolate chip cookies! The way to win students over is definitely delicious food that pertains to the content :)

Notable moments from the class:

• It seems like several people have had experience with scripted curriculum. I always knew that these existed and was horrified by them, but I was disgusted anew today. If it came down between not having a teaching gig at all and working at a school with a scripted curriculum, I would probably rather be unemployed.
• I'm interested in evaluating higher education programs for preservice teachers, as I would eventually like to teach undergrad preservice teachers. At the same time, I dislike the notion of merit pay or judging teachers solely on their students' performance. I didn't realize (until this class) that evaluating higher ed programs for preservice teachers could possibly be doing just that -- judging the teacher on the student's performance. Hmm. I will have to think critically and carefully about what goes in to the preservice teacher program evaluations, and the purpose of them -- would my evaluation lead to improving the programs? Would it simply judge them? Would it unfairly judge the professors?
• This last part can't be explored in one post, or even in one lifetime: What is the purpose of schooling? (similar to the ideas I began exploring in my "what is a graduate education?" post, but this is the historical perspective)
• Initially (and still in many institutions today), it was the "Old Humanist" perspective. Education is in place to teach traditional academics. This probably falls in line most closely with the banking method of teaching -- you are an empty mind who has come to me, the all-knowing teacher, to be filled with knowledge.
• Then it moved to the social efficiency model, which had economic connections. You should be educated so that you can best perform your job. The professors didn't mention when this idea was popular, but I'm betting that it was around the time cars were invented and Ford's assembly-line model became popularized. You are educated just enough to be economically valuable, and (I'm hypothesizing), you are taught how to be a good member of society: how to shut up, sit down, and not think independently.
• Next was the developmentalist, "child centered" focus. I didn't quite catch this -- I think it means to educate the student according to their level of development. 
• And the social Meliorist/social reconstructionist view: schools should be focused on the betterment of society. Apparently this was popular until the 1930s, and then was viewed as socialist and quickly became very unpopular.

I feel that, today, many of the professional development resources I've encountered push for the social efficiency model, and I never really thought much about their motives. (I would consider my teaching style somewhere between the social efficiency and social Meliorist models.) All of the PD that pushes for "21st century skills" is all about the social efficiency: how will these students need to behave in the workplace, and how can we best prepare them for it? Teamwork, collaboration, technology skills, ability to adapt to new technologies, creativity, ingenuity -- these are all highly praised by the "21st century skills" PD people. And it's making me realize that I've never attended a corporate professional development workshop on how to create a classroom of students who will help the world become a better place.

Luckily, the school that I taught at WAS focused on the importance of the social Meliorist model (although we never use those terms), and we had a few PD sessions done by external and internal people on how our curricula can improve society. Go us!