Description
Interpreting data is done differently depending on the design that you select as a researcher. The approach you take involves following certain steps and processes, such as data triangulation or field testing, to ensure the validity, credibility, and transferability of your study or project.
Overview
For this assessment, you will complete Part 4 of the Program Evaluation Plan Template by providing data types (program description, meeting minutes, interviews, and so on) and sources of data to answer the evaluation questions you developed for Part 3 of the template. Consider archived data that may be available as well. Once again, as you study the contents of the exercise, you may find you need to revise your logic model and/or your evaluation questions.
Instructions
Using the Program Evaluation Plan Template you began for Assessment 1 and continued using for Assessment 2, complete Part 4: Data Collection Plan.
In Part 4 of the Program Evaluation Plan Template, complete the Indicators Development Template. Refer to Exercise 5, starting on page 45 of the Kellogg Foundation’s Logic Model Development Guide [PDF] Download Logic Model Development Guide [PDF]as you complete the table. Also, review the Exercise 5 Checklist on page 47, and ensure that you can check “yes” for each item before finalizing your table.
Below the Indicators Development Template table in the Program Evaluation Plan Template, include several paragraphs that describe and explain the elements in your table.
Once you have determined the data necessary to conduct a program evaluation, consider whether there are ethical issues or risks to people from whom data will be collected (or the program’s participants). The Ethics and Risks section of the Program Evaluation Plan Template follows the Data Collection Plan in Part 4. Use this section to analyze legal and ethical issues that impact how data is collected and analyzed if the data collection were implemented as planned. Refer to your Assessing Impact text and other resources for information about the use of data and information sources in evaluation.
Additional Requirements
Template: Remember to use the Program Evaluation Plan Template to complete this assessment. Complete the Indicators Development Template table and include several paragraphs that describe and explain the elements in your table. Also complete the Ethics and Risk section. In addition, include the most accurate and updated program evaluation plan components based on feedback and iterative review of your project components
APA format: Be sure to use current APA style and format throughout your paper, including citations on your reference list. Refer to Evidence and APA for more information.
Portfolio prompt: You are required to save this learning activity to your ePortfolio.
Unformatted Attachment Preview
Program Evaluation Plan
for
National Park College
in
Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for
EDD-FPX8528 – Assessment and Evaluation in the Learning Organization
Prepared by
David A Braden
Capella University
3/6/24
Instructor: Dr. Tara McNealy
1
Table of Contents
INTRODUCTION…………………………………………………………………………………………………………. 3
PART 1: SITE AND PROGRAM DESCRIPTION …………………………………………………………. 3
PROGRAM EVALUATION SITE INFORMATION ………………………………………………………………… 3
DESCRIPTION OF THE PROGRAM ………………………………………………………………………………….. 4
PURPOSE OF THE PROGRAM…………………………………………………………………………………………. 4
STAKEHOLDERS AND PARTICIPANTS …………………………………………………………………………….. 5
PROGRAM GOALS/OBJECTIVES ……………………………………………………………………………………. 7
PART 2: EVALUABILITY ASSESSMENT AND LOGIC MODEL ……………………………… 12
PART 3: EVALUATION QUESTIONS ……………………………………………………………………….. 16
PART 4: DATA COLLECTION PLAN ……………………………………………………………………….. 19
PART 5: ORGANIZATIONAL CONTEXT …………………………………………………………………. 20
PART 6: DETAILED DESIGN STEPS ………………………………………………………………………… 20
PART 7: REVIEW OF THE LITERATURE ……………………………………………………………….. 20
PART 8: CONCLUSION …………………………………………………………………………………………….. 20
REFERENCES……………………………………………………………………………………………………………. 22
APPENDIX EVALUABILITY ASSESSMENT ……………………………………………………………. 25
2
Introduction
This plan aims to evaluate the First-Year Students Resource Amelioration Program,
one of National Park College’s leading programs (NPC) programs. It started five years ago to
provide a package of services that aims to support students with a personal, targeted approach
that enhances their academic progress and increases the likelihood that they will remain at the
college. The programs were developed to combat the increasing issue of retention. This paper
will display the site, program description, context, logic model, and data collection plan.
Part 1: Site and Program Description
Program Evaluation Site Information
National Park College (NPC), an institution of higher learning located within the lively
Hot Springs community, models the ideal of available education and skill development. In terms
of its role, NPC is a public institution responsible for serving the diverse students who participate
in its various educational programs. With an enrollment of 2,340 students, NPC is a pivotal
entity in the local educational landscape, fostering academic excellence and personal
development. Having an excellent student-oriented ratio of 14 to 1 (National Park College,
2021), the College guarantees individual attention and support to its learners, creating a
favorable atmosphere for learning and success. The college’s education requires integrating
liberal arts and employment education training, allowing students to choose from the wide range
of available courses and concentrate on their professional future.
NPC shares my belief in diversity and inclusivism, where students of different races,
ethnicities, and socio-economic statuses feel very much at home in the College. NPC exerts some
efforts to possess diversity; however, strengthening it through eliminating various student
disparities is an indispensable task, which means graduation and retention rate among American
3
Indian or Alaska Native, Asian, Black, Hispanic, and White students. NPC’s organizational
structure comprises several sections and units, each important in the College’s mission to ensure
quality education and student success (De & Arguello, 2020). As a means of collaboration, the
different departments of NPC are mobilized to design a system that enables students’ academic
and career attainment.
Description of the Program
The program to be reviewed, the First-Year Students Resource Amelioration Program,
has operated at NPC over the past five years. According to Caballero (2020), it deals with the
challenging problem of decreased first enrollment year retention rate by leveraging existing
support systems on campus. Such a holistic approach is presented by a package of services
encompassing an array of opportunities for newcomers with different needs (De & Arguello,
2020). The program comprises academic advising, which includes person-centered, targeted, and
comprehensive tutoring services, senior mentorship, and enhanced access to campus
facilities. The NPC intends to do that via these ventures, by which it hopes to develop a
favorable climate that will encourage students to succeed and persist in addition to being
reassured (Haverila et al., 2020). Through the years, the program has overcome this evolution,
taking into account altered student populations and institutional focus, often to respond to needs
more efficiently.
Purpose of the Program
The First-Year Student Resource Enhancement Program at National Park College (NPC)
is highlighted by concrete data and evidence that first-year students often face multiple obstacles.
Additionally, the efficacy of tailored interventions and their value in addressing those obstacles
become evident through the same evidence. There is a troubling trend indicated by retention data
4
of NPC from the analysis done over the past five years that shows the graduating rates of firstyear students are decreasing. Conversely, the first-year retention rate in 2019 was 68%, and by
2023 it had lowered to 62% (De & Arguello, 2020). Based on this, there was a downward trend
of about 6% during the mentioned period. There is a definite downward trend in the college
persistence rate, which is especially pronounced in the case of historically underrepresented
students. Minority students from African, Hispanic, and low-income communities tend to have a
lower retention rate than their peers.
Notably, the qualitative input from the program members reporting their experience
reinforces the program’s significant role in their academic lives. Consistently, surveys and focus
group discussions carried out with program participants reveal that participants receive
preference for tailor-made resources and support that lead to increased satisfaction and improved
academic performance (Cardona et al., 2023). In a recent survey, 87% of participants responded
on ways they were kept on their education journey, and 72% of them were noted to progress
better in their grades and mastery level of the concepts after engaging with services from the
program (Haverila et al., 2020). Here, we come across a crucial feature in this program: it is
organized around NPC’s long-term goal of fostering student success by tracking the fate of
students after graduation. Examining post-graduation surveys and employment data highlights
the link between program participation and students’ lifelong success in academia and
profession. The graduates who joined the program indicated a 15% higher rate of finding fulltime employment six months after their graduation than the students who did not go through the
program, hence showing the program’s impact on career readiness and employability (Shafiq et
al., 2022).
Stakeholders and Participants
5
The effectiveness of the program evaluation is determined by how smoothly it integrates
the program’s stakeholders to map out and determine the outcome. The stakeholders who
collaborate at the National Park College (NPC) during the First-Year Student Resource
Enhancement Program (FYSRP) have diverse perspectives; each group member has their
strengths and weaknesses (Ko et al., 2023). However, NPC administrators have a significant
stake in supervising the concrete execution of the plan and financing it. They have the core of
strategic visions and decision-making, directing the program pathway and its sustainability and
all contributing to their input as evaluators.
Staff and faculty directly elevate students’ lives (support services) and are physically with
them daily. As inception figure, providers have a unique inside glimpse into the program’s assets
and deficits, which is valuable feedback to the implementation and effectiveness of the program,
as explained by Caballero (2020). They have extraordinary cognizance that leads to good
intellectual ideas and identifies program execution dynamics and areas for modification. Besides,
the program’s primary beneficiaries are the first-year students, who receive the most from this
licensed venture through academics, support, and retention interventions. The voices of these
users are so imperious that they could gauge the program’s appropriateness and effectiveness,
sensing the subjective meaning users attribute a proper value to it and understanding its
practicality.
Parents and guardians are tasked with supporting students at all stages of their
educational journey, offering moral support and encouragement. Their testimonies on how the
program has altered their kids’ schooling reveal an in-depth insight that supports the evaluation
process. Besides this, educationists can get perspectives that may originate from family members
on how, in different environments outside the classroom, students may face challenges, leading
6
to a whole picture of the program’s effectiveness (Levesque, 2018). Partners from the community
also collaborate with the NPC, strengthening the array of student resources that a single
educational program cannot solely present as it calls for external expertise and support. Through
their inclusion, the program extends its financial network and evolves result-oriented
partnerships that nurture the betterment of the students and the whole community.
Besides these critical communities, other participants in the evaluation process may
include evaluators and researchers who form an external team to investigate the program’s
effectiveness. According to McCulloh (2022), their knowledge of assessment instruments and
data analytics adds statistics and objectivity to the assessment process. Thus, the results can best
serve as an instructional tool. Members of different stakeholder groups are also present in the
evaluation process, which makes the assessment complete and covers all angles to collect
different views and input (McCulloh, 2022). Collaborative dialogue and engagement foster a
sense of ownership and shared responsibility for the program’s success, driving continuous
improvement and innovation.
Program Goals/Objectives
The Resource Enhancement Program for the First-year Students at National Park College
(NPC) focuses on the main objective: to work out long-existing problems that prevent wellattended and wanted tri-nations of first-year students. However, the program’s goals were
intentionally strategized to face up to and tackle significant academic unpreparedness, social
uncertainty, and financial insufficiency in our targeted young population, as Nieuwoudt and
Pedler (2023) explained.
The program’s primary goal is to elevate academic year retention rates by boosting the
number of first-year students who enroll for the next semester instead of leaving College for
7
good. Data on retention revealed a worrying picture of declining retention rates among first-year
students at NPC, showing the critical need for action to prevent student failures and retention
(Norvilitis et al., 2022). Such a program aims to improve the support offered to students when
they start their academic journey. This may decrease the number of students that drop out and
help reduce the intermittency of the same students.
In addition to promoting peer mentorship, the program aims to elevate academic results
among first-year students. Year by year, the student body experiences a prominent improvement
in academic success. Because their academic achievements impact student retention and success,
the program offers various services targeted at the educational field. These include academic
advising, tutoring services, and study skills workshops, which help them overcome academic
challenges and do well in their courses.
Moreover, the program will try to develop a feeling of belonging among first-year
students by improving the quality of campus life through initiatives aimed at quality student
interactions and engagement, as explained by Pendakur (2023). Research reveals that being
socially connected gives students feelings of belonging at a higher level of contentment,
retention, and academic accomplishments. Additionally, the program intends to provide chances
for the students to link with both their peers and campus services, both faculty and academy
members, so that the students could get a sense of control, acceptance, and support in the
community, as well as be empowered enough to move forward with success.
Consequently, the objective identification of the problems that are a significant player in
the first-year student’s life at NPC, including inadequate academic preparation, social isolation,
and ineffective financial management, was informed by research on the nature of the
challenges. Needs were recognized due to an extensive needs assessment process that gathered
8
relevant feedback from students, staff, stakeholders, and administrators (Thomas et al., 2021). It
should be mentioned that, incredibly, the successful development of the program objectives was
facilitated by a team of NPC program developers and administrators who contributed their
professional experience, analytical skills, and understanding of the educational needs of firstyear students.
Your Role in (or Connection With) the Program
As Senior Vice President for Operations, Servitas Management Group, LLC, I would
give the President and National Park College (NPC) officials suggestions on operational aspects
becoming more specific in student housing. My direct role with NPC mainly revolves around
housing initiatives; however, my connection with NPC transcends housing to include other
student-focused and student-centered efforts that enhance student retention and success.
My responsibilities in operational management make me a suitable candidate for NPC. I am
responsible for thoroughly running program goals assessments using logistic and administrative
aspects. I might not be a part of the day-to-day implementation of the First-Year Student
Resource Enhancement Program. However, as a team, the insights into processes and systems
can still help with strategic decisions in the evaluation.
I have devoted my volunteer service to the program evaluation of NPC because of my
aim of helping NPC achieve its mission of student success and building a more vibrant academic
atmosphere. I can utilize my competence in operational management to formulate evaluations
sufficiently aligned with NPC’s mission and proffer ideas for closing gaps. Besides, working
jointly with the NPC global team ensures combined efforts toward program assessment, which
assists in communicating and liaising with different parties involved. I can facilitate Servitas
9
Management Group LLC’s and NPC’s interlock, whereby they will align and pursue common
goals: participating in interventions leading to student success.
Need for the Evaluation
The essence is to thoroughly bring to light the context of the problem with student
retention and success at National Park College (NPC), under which the need for program
evaluation is essential; despite the influence of multiple programs to challenge first-year
students, retention rates still have a wide gap, provided that these same existing issues continue
to demand attention. According to Nieuwoudt and Pedler (2023), evaluation of the program is
crucial and has multiple values. It supports data-driven, evidence-based decision-making
processes by identifying those working best with minor inputs and those that give little or no
results. Data and the meta-analysis of the program’s output and impacts are methodically
appraised through the evaluation. This facilitates the identification of pros, cons, and areas that
are lacking, thereby ensuring that valid strategic decisions are made.
Further, it is the assessment that functions as a core instrument in the domain of fund
allocation. NPC will achieve this by analyzing the program’s effectiveness and the cost-benefit of
student retention and success (Al Hassani et al., 2022). As a result, it will be using its financial
resources more reasonably by targeting strategies that have the most significant impact. Because
of this, each scarce resource is utilized at its total capacity, and the College gets to enjoy the
optimum position to attend to its needs. Moreover, NPC’s self-evaluation process creates an
environment that emphasizes the culture of self-improvement. Through repeated assessment of
the program impact, collecting data, and stakeholders’ views, NPC will develop and
policymaker-recommended iterative improvements to the program, which will remain relevant
and responsive to current student needs and institutional requirements. This constant feedback
10
loop creates a developmental mode that fosters flexibility, thus enabling NPC to keep track of the
various dynamics and challenges that arise in the higher learning field quickly and promptly
(Boyd et al., 2022).
In addition, a broad-based evaluation showcases NPC’s dedication to accountability and
transparency, which are fundamental in the dynamics that lead to student success. This is
accomplished through a rigorous assessment of program effectiveness and then sharing the
evaluation findings with all stakeholders. This way, the NPC enhances accountability, increases
the stakeholders’ confidence, and emphasizes the significance of data-driven decision-making in
the institution’s quest for excellence.
Collaboration
Collaboration is the key objective of effective program implementation. Some points of
contact for key stakeholders, such as administrators, educators, and other staff and students,
should be held at various stages of the evaluation cycle, from data collection to interpretation and
analysis, as explained by Addison and Williams (2023). More minor dialogues will be organized
with the participants to determine what elements are better, the causes of the issues, and parts
that could be improved. Moreover, working and focus groups can be held, at which time it is
ideal to receive feedback once the findings are validated. The measurement of support for the
evaluation study at NPC is expected to be high, considering the institution’s dedication to
continuous improvement and informed decision-making. Dialogue and meaningful interaction
with stakeholders and discussion with them will encourage a sense of participation and
belonging.
Permissions
The process of accessing and archiving data or records at National Park College (NPC)
will be a collaborative effort that includes the Office of Institutional Research and Effectiveness
11
(IR&E). The data standardization office is responsible for storing institutional data and ensuring
ease of access to pertinent data to evaluate the programs. Also, since NPC has multiple
departments and divisions, working with any of them might entail trying to secure approval from
the head of the division or administrator to make sure that the procedures are following the
institution’s policies and instructions. Through gaining approval, the research team can enter vital
data and information for a deep analysis of the efficiency and impact of the program in the MNC,
leading to student retention and accomplishment.
Part 2: Evaluability Assessment and Logic Model
Quality of Program Design
The analysis shows that the program aims and objectives are realistic and reasonable and
have also attained consensus from the stakeholders. On the other hand, SMART KPIs and goalbased indicators are beneficial tools for illustrating that the strategic management of the program
is constructed for evaluation (Haverila et al., 2020). Besides, the existence of a rational and
transparent linkage of the program purpose and objectives, as well as internal components like
documentation, execution, management, monitoring, and evaluation, also acts as another factor.
Verifiability of Results
The outcome of the activity using the collected data will further be measurable as the
conduct of a crisis management plan has been implemented. These include baselines, program
reports, meeting minutes, MOU agreements, review papers, independent evaluation reports,
presentations, financial documents, baseline data, and research studies (Ko et al., 2023). This is
further made possible by frequent data collection processes against established indicators;
therefore, an improved way of measuring performance is evident.
Feasibility, credibility, and usefulness as one of the evaluation tools.
12
The findings also reveal that such a study design is doable and credible and may generate
practical applications. The evaluation planning was done during the program cycle, and the
program aspects had already been confirmed before. A political context and organizational
culture conducive to evaluation are essential prerequisites (Levesque, 2018). Stakeholders being
present at various levels and having support play an important part. Nevertheless, the assessment
needs to give information to the point of ample flexibility of the budget for the evaluation, too.
Program Information, Data, and Documentation:
There would be a benefit to the FYSRP evaluation process when the available condition
is not affected by the levels at which the information, data, and documentation are revealed.
Even though the implementation of the project design makes it possible to monitor the results
and verify them with the performances of the existing collection systems, there is still the scope
for bringing some amendments and conducting a more comprehensive data gathering to make
the evaluation strong (National Park College, 2021)
Information, Data, and Documentation Needed for Strengthening Evaluation:
Long-term outcomes data: The available data will perhaps cover the baselines, progress
reports, and monitoring, but what comes after needs more analysis. An outcome data that can
proffer the program’s sustainability after progress reports and monitoring is necessary.
Budget information: It is important to note that budget revisions would help ensure
budgetary transparency. However, additional details on the budget fund allocation targeted
towards the monitoring process will better answer the resource sufficiency question (Norvilitis et
al., 2022).
Stakeholder perspectives: While assessment results show that an abundance of
stakeholder support is provided, other information, such as customer or user surveys, interviews,
13
or focus groups, could be collected to learn additional stakeholder perspectives and experiences
with the program (Nieuwoudt et al., 2023).
Transition to Logic Model Development: The evaluability assessment from which the
literature review was conducted is the basis for developing the logic model for the FYSRP. This
aims to depict the program’s resources, activities, outputs, and both short-term and long-term
intended outcomes and impact. The depiction of these components produced that the logic model
is a graphical presentation of the program process and the concrete ways to achieve the
determined goals. This model shall be used as the pillar upon which notable containment can be
accomplished.
RESOURCES
ACTIVITIES
OUTPUTS
SHORT- &
LONG-TERM
OUTCOMES
To accomplish our set To address our
We expect that,
We hope that if
of activities, we will
problem or asset, once completed,
completed, these
need the following:
we will achieve
these activities will activities will lead
the following
produce the
to the following
activities:
following evidence changes in 1–3,
or service delivery: then 4–6 years:
1-3 Years:
• Personnel
• Deliver
• Increased
trained in
academic
student
• Improved
program
advising
engagement
first-year
delivery and
sessions.
in academic
student
assessment
support
retention
• Conduct
services
rates
• Academic
tutoring
support
sessions
• Higher
• Enhanced
materials
utilization
academic
• Facilitate
of campus
performance
• Budget
senior
facilities by
among
allocation for
mentorship
first-year
participants
program
programs
students
4-6 Years:
implementation
• Enhance
• Increased
access to
graduation
campus
rates
facilities
• Higher
levels of
student
14
IMPACT
We hope that, if
completed, these
activities will lead
to the following
changes in 7–10
years:
• Long-term
improvement
in NPC’s
retention and
graduation
rates
• Tremendous
academic
success and
satisfaction
among
students
• Establishment
of a culture of
academic
success and
support
RESOURCES
ACTIVITIES
OUTPUTS
SHORT- &
LONG-TERM
OUTCOMES
satisfaction
and
engagement
IMPACT
•
•
Improved
reputation
and
attractiveness
of NPC to
prospective
students
Explanation
The paradigm Model for FYSRP at National Park College is geared up with an array of
methods, expected outputs, short- and long-term outcomes, and an assessment plan, which is the
program’s base. The program implementation resources we require include training for the staff
who will execute the program, academic support materials, and a section of the budget allocated
for the program’s execution. The orientation involves helping in college classes, conducting
tutorials, holding senior mentorship sessions, and providing avenues to campus facilities. These
programs are anticipated to generate outcomes of the sort: higher level use of student services by
first-year students and increased student activity on campus facilities by first-year
students. During the first period (1-3 years), the student retention rate of first-year students will
be soothed, and their academic performances will be enhanced, too. The medium-range term (4-6
years) agenda is improving learning outcomes through a higher graduation rate and, therefore,
greater student satisfaction and engagement (McCulloh, 2022).
The last aspect of the logic model is a case of long-term impacts (7-10 years), such as an
increase in NPC’s retention and graduation rates, academic excellence and student satisfaction
among the students that NPC is helping, a culture of academic excellence and support, and
improved reputation and popularity of the university among the upcoming potential
15
students. Through that stepwise presentation of resources into activities and then output
progressing to the outcome, that is, visualization of the FYSRP logic model, the viewer gets a
clear view of how the FYSRP plans to achieve its objectives over time. It becomes the paper of
program planning and tracks record that helps complete analysis and ensures the usage of the
system approach for measuring the strength of the instructional strategy and its effect on the
student’s success rate at the National Park College (Pendakur, 2023).
Part 3: Evaluation Questions
Evaluation Planning Template
Evaluation
Audience
Evaluation Question
Focus Area
Student
NPC
Retention
Administrators How effective are the current
retention strategies in retaining
first-year students?
Use
Formative: To inform
adjustments to retention
strategies based on
evaluation findings.
Faculty
Stakeholders
Academic
Success
First-year
students
What impact does
participation in FYSRP have
on academic performance?
Administrators
Faculty
Explanation
16
Summative: To assess the
effectiveness of the program
in achieving educational
outcomes.
The Evaluation Planning Template is a tool that provides a structure for the assessment
processes to improve the programs and services available to first-year students at National Park
College (NPC). This framework includes the priority topic areas, mentions of the target age
group, the formulation of guided questions, and the application of information for formative and
summative purposes, respectively. As the FYSRP is multi-faceted, and its goals are multidimensional, it is needed as both a formative and summative evaluation tool. Through the
constructive way, the process goes on with the project being occasionally reviewed for the
feedback to be provided and the corrections made accordingly; this way, the program’s objectives
will be met to the greatest extent, and the needs of the stakeholders will be satisfied (Caballero,
2020). Concurrently, the summative assessment outlines the program’s achievements together
with the knowledge of its weaknesses and strengths, ultimately demonstrating its performance
and prospects of improvement. Inherent to this sort of evaluation strategy is that it will contribute
significantly to the development of transformational outcomes and accountability in NPC.
The scope of the evaluation looks at the core features of the outcome, output, and
operation of the FYSRP, i.e., context, implementation, and result, respectively. Contextual issues
such as student demography, institutional culture, and program gestation period help create a
platform for the apprehension of the program environment (Cardona et al., 2023). They could be
part of analyzing influential variables. Implementation revolves around examining the fidelity of
the program delivery, which includes resource availability and utilization, as well as considering
program guidelines and stakeholder communication. Finally, outcome evaluation is usually done
to examine FYSRP’s achievements in student retention, academic success, and college
engagement. To guarantee statewide evaluation coverage, audiences of the selected audience
groups include NPC administrators, faculty members, first-year students, parents/guardians, and
17
community members. Stakeholders with different perceptions and motives to the evaluation
processes bring their perspectives and interests such that the FYSRP impact and relevance are
comprehensively examined and assessed.
The questions for evaluation have more of a situational or context-based manner,
considering the needs and interests of each stakeholder group. Similarly, it should do so in a way
that aligns with the overall program’s objectives. To pursue the formative goals, the questions
aim to identify strengths, weaknesses, and areas where improvements are necessary for the
implementation and outcomes. For example, program effectiveness could be explored by
understanding the advisory role in academics, using tutoring services, and finding the students’
satisfaction with various program elements. The answers to these critical questions enable the
active commitment of the population to the program and the creation of an environment where
the recommendations can be subject to modification and improvements. While summative
evaluation questions seek to understand the program’s broad influence and the extent to which it
delivers its intended results, formative evaluation questions are interested in the reasons behind
the program’s apparent failures or weaknesses. Questions are related to measuring different
aspects such as retention rate, improvement in academic performance, student involvement, and
campus engagement over time. Besides, to dig deep into the issue, summative evaluation
questions aim to uncover whether the first year of the FYSRP contributed to students’ success
beyond the ongoing academic term (Shafiq et al., 2021).
Identifying the most significant questions to be prioritized for evaluation aims at the
program’s goals, customer interests, and prepositions that can elaborate on decisions. Therefore,
issues associated with the main focus of our organization, for instance, student support or
engagement, would be put under the magnifying glass to determine the impact on attaining the
18
objectives of the FYSRP (De & Arguello, 2020). Issues that clarify the grey areas of uncertainty
or broader program difficulties will be primarily targeted as it will prevent a poor decisionmaking process based on a failure to take them into account.
In conclusion, the Evaluation Planning Template creates a guided and systematized
process for an in-depth evaluation of the FYSRP at NPC. We do this using formative and
summative evaluation methods, focusing on key focus areas and involving indivi
