Você está na página 1de 9

Running Head : CRITICAL THINKING QUESTIONS

Critical Thinking Questions: Week 4


Keith C. Quarles
EDU655: Trends & Issues Inst. Design & Tech. Online Learning (MRX1446A)
Instructor: Kris Jamsa
12-1-14

Running Head : CRITICAL THINKING QUESTIONS


2

Evaluation in Instructional Design: A Comparison of Evaluation Models


1. How could an entrepreneur use the CIPP model to develop a business plan?
Describe each of the four components and translate the steps to its utility in the
private sector.
As an entrepreneur, one is still held to some principles of marketing just as
corporations or partnerships. The value added which should be transferred to the
customer after a business/operations/marketing strategy promotes the processing of
inputs in order to produce a product/service depends on the choice of inputs, processing
methods/capabilities and quality/quantity of the output. Therefore, a business plan should
include details outlined by the CIPP Model in order to devise a strategy on how to
evaluate the proposed business/operations/marketing/strategy. Payne (1994) states,
hence, CIPP stands for context evaluation, input evaluation, process evaluation, and
product evaluation. (p.1) By following the basic guidelines of the CIPP the
entrepreneur can successfully market/sell a product/service while seeking ways to
improve the quality of inputs, processes and output from the transformation of resources
to a finished offering on a continual basis.
Context evaluation includes evaluation of the strategy behind the planning and the
planning process. Input evaluation is a costs/benefit assessments based of alternatives
combinations of resource utility, Process evaluation involves assessing the methods of
producing through research and development. Output evaluation is a check on the
true/actual value added by the change/innovation process. Was it really worth it? (Payne.
1994). The following table outlines how the four evaluation constructs of the CIPP
MODEL can be utilized by private business to perform critical business functions:

Running Head : CRITICAL THINKING QUESTIONS


3

CIPP Model Category

Business Function

Content Evaluation

Business/Marketing Strategy

Input evaluation

Define, attain and manage needed resources

Process evaluation

Procurement of means of productions and


creation of production model/method using
R&D

Output evaluation

Quality assurance, test marketing/marketing


Return on Investment Evaluation,

2. Using ideas presented in this chapter, construct your own evaluation model.
The name of the following evaluation model is Empirical Evaluation Progressions
(EEP). The six components of the model include the following breakdown of
evaluations. Problem Definition Evaluation which aids identifying the need for change.
Research Consistency Evaluation is designed to ensure the research is pertinent to the
problem. Strategic Alternatives Evaluation is an exploration of viable alternatives that
would suffice in solving the problem. Resource Allocation Evaluation is necessary to
ensure allocation of resources follow policy that optimizes the utility of the inputs.
Continual Improvement Evaluation is necessary to assess the commitment to continual
change after the implementation. Finally, Summative Worthiness Evaluation is a retroactive assessment of the attainment of objectives.

Chapter 12 Managing On-Site and Virtual Design Teams


My Leadership Style

Running Head : CRITICAL THINKING QUESTIONS


4

My leadership style is more of a coaching style than navigator or authoritative.


Normally I assess the skills, experience, and overall preparedness of learners relative to
the learning objectives/environment and plan activities to motivate learners to use ones
capabilities for a common cause. Then the element of charisma comes into play because
I must have a connection with the learners that bridges gaps in relations as a person
before I can coach them through a change in the program.
Team Building Natural leadership Skills
I think natural motivation is a product of natural leadership characteristics/traits. I
naturally possess to power to articulate ideas and concepts, logical thinking and a sense
of humor/compassion so I use my natural abilities to break down the meaning of
concepts, think through a proposition/problem and the outcomes of my self-study to
inform/empower learners which motivates learners to learn more as we trade feedback
and build working relationships. I project a sense of humor and compassion so that
learners will feel like they can relate on a human level and not feel like they are
important.

What aspects might you need to develop in order to improve your ability as a
project manager?

Running Head : CRITICAL THINKING QUESTIONS


5

As a project manager, I need to work more on including the team in early decision
making because I find myself trying to juggle two or three different aspects of the
planning phase such as research and developing a stance on issues. I think that if I
include others at the early stages it would help in developing content and pedagogy that
are aligned with the strategy for managing the project and the efforts of myself and the
learners.
Describe a fictitious situation where you as the project manager employ
communication tactics with a production staff as if they were an APM. What types
of issues arise? How do you then manage the error to get back on track?
I have a competent focus group which is assisting in the construction of a website
that is designed to sell Womens magazines. The collection of employees possesses the
skills to operate independently in some respects but only to collaborate in order to
develop a support system to assist in astronomical/burdensome tasks. A project manager
may need to employ multiple trams for large projects. The manager should be mainly
concerned with motivating, directing and informing the team. Managers are responsible
for ensuring that the team is on the same page as far as process requirements/assignments
and that they have the means and are prepared to collaborate through clear, precise
communication to and among team members ((Reiser and Dempsey, 2012). Thus,
teambuilding comes into play as managers seek to delegate responsibility to the staff and
manage the lines of communication. Consequently, if messages were ambiguous or
experienced some error in transmission/ translation drawbacks the progress of the project
would be in jeopardy. Hence, my main concern would be concise, clear communication
of vision/goals and processes/evaluations to members.

Running Head : CRITICAL THINKING QUESTIONS


6

I would also gather feedback and monitor the transcripts between members for
quality assurance/integrity. After I can assess the attributes of each members work
ethics, I would choose one of them to report directly to me and give that one the password
to see all the information. Thus, I would empower them all but give one power over the
others to have a means of controlling activity during day-to-day operations. I believe that
before something is formed it must have a mold and before something breaks it must
crack or split. Then too, a stitch in time saves nine. An Assistant Project Manager
(APM) would be valuable if I can designate one of the members to help organize and
evaluate processes necessary for implementing/controlling the innovative disruption.
Knowledge Management and Learning: Perfect Together
Choose one of the KM myths offered by the author and describe an example where
you have seen this mistake being made. What could have been done differently to
improve the outcome?
Knowledge Management (KM) may be a term that means many things to many
organizations. Some organizations claim the right to withhold information in the name of
knowledge management when actually knowledge management is the sharing of
knowledge in an organized manner with respect to the privacy of trade secrets (Reiser and
Dempsey, 2012). Organizations are ill-advised to think of KM like a glass ceiling
policy which is privy to top level leaders of a school/organization.
From my experience I have worked for a company who withheld the real reason
why lay-offs were necessary without giving the organization a chance to attack the
problem when it was first discovered to be a threat. I think the layoff could have been

Running Head : CRITICAL THINKING QUESTIONS


7

prevented if more information was disclosed to the staff so we could work


hard/brainstorm in order to find a solution/resolution.
Compare and contrast how Web 2.0 is being utilized for knowledge management in
large organizations constructing elaborate in-house systems versus grass-roots
knowledge sharing and collaboration. What are some costs and benefits to either
strategy? Where might one approach make more sense than another?

Web 2.0 vs. Knowledge Management


Web 2.0 is more often being explored as a viable option for managing
knowledge. In the 90s the ascent of KM began with the information economy
emergence. Especially with companies in the financial services and consulting industries
who realized employee intelligence was a valuable competitive advantage resource
(Greten, 2008) (p.1) Thus, KM in the 90s was beginning to take its place in the business
of managing knowledge.
Though KM was a field with potential to increase Organizational Learning
(OL), the design of the programs failed to account for trial and error in addition to the
technological learning curve. The KM systems turned into merely filing systems for
storing intellectual property (Reiser and Dempsey, 2012). Web 2.0 may change the idea
of just using knowledge management resources to store information. The difference with
Web 2.0 is that it can be used to pull information from the bottom up rather than
mandating top-down sharing ( Reiser and Dempsey, 2012). Thus, Knowledge
Management in the 90s may have been a prelude to Web 2.0 which empowers
workers/learners to have input through collaboration online. The new generation
collaborates on the job and employs technology in doing so (Reiser and Dempsey, 2012).

Running Head : CRITICAL THINKING QUESTIONS


8

Web 2.0 is not necessarily meant to replace the theory of KM but instead advance the
theory to include technology as a means of gathering/sharing valuable information from
members of all levels of the organization/school. .

References
Grethen, A. (2008). Web 2.0 vs. knowledge management. Retrieved from http://humanstrategies.blogspot.com/2008/10/web-20-vs-knowledge-management.html
Payne, D.A. (1994). Lecture two: Evaluation models. Retrieved from

Running Head : CRITICAL THINKING QUESTIONS


9

http: www.southalabama.edu/coe/bset/johnson/660lectures/Lect2.doc
Reiser, R. & Dempsey, J. (2012). Trends and issues in instructional design and technology
(3rd ed.). Boston, MA: Pearson