#blended language program evaluation

This chapter primarily delved deeper into the interpretive argument approach to evaluated blended language programs. It commences by briefly touching on the key challenges to (language) program evaluation, which are understanding the sociopolitical context, attaining stakeholder engagement, understanding what constitutes achievement in the program, understanding what kinds of evidence is required to back up claims, and how evaluation can be used outside of the immediate context.

Something that was a bit of a breakthrough for me, reading this chapter, was understanding how the interpretive argument approach matches up with developmental evaluation's suitability to emergent and continuous goals. It also aligns nicely with the cyclical action research methodology. I liked in particular the quote about developmental research aiming to foster a curiosity and love of learning, rather than being judgemental and stifling continuous improvement. Basically summative and formative approaches to evaluation are based on external stakeholder accountability and are suitable when the program is short in duration, well established, has a clear end point etc.

The chapter also goes into further detail regarding micro, meso and macro levels of evaluation. Although I previously interpreted these as static categories, I now understand the are relational and context based. So in an international context, International is macro, National is meso and institutional is micro. It also again touched on the considerations of appropriateness, purpose, multimodality and sustainability. They then used these variables to make little tables to show how you can do evaluations at all different levels.

Finally, the chapter goes on to explain the stages of evaluation. Planning involves identifying stakeholders, considerations, focal questions and levels of evaluation. Gathering evidence includes ethical considerations, collecting empirical or analytical evidence, keeping in line with the level and the question. Presenting the argument entails involving stakeholders to articulate the argument, and finally appraising involved assessing the strength of claims, the clarity and coherence of the argument, and the plausibility of inferences and assumptions. Rebuttals are also examined.