Interactive Model Of Program Planning Caffarella
Khudadad Chachar: Associate Professor: PhD Sindh Agriculture University Tandojam, Hyderabad Pakistan Discerning the context: as an instructor I need to understand when developing a curriculum whether it will be delivered on campus, in a facilitated clinical course, a preceptored clinical course or via distance. This influences how the course is designed and who my contacts are. The needs of the people and organization are dependent on the environment in which the course will be delivered. Building a solid base of support: I am in constant contact with mentors and preceptors in our clinical facilities to ensure student success.
I ask for feedback regarding how the students are progressing, what is working in the course and if there are any changes that should be considered or implemented. Our entire program also works closely with our provincial and national regulatory boards to ensure the program is meeting expectations and striving to improve. Both of these situations help to build and sustain collaborative partnerships. Identifying program ideas: occasionally instructors are asked to help brainstorm how a new 'competency' set forth by our national regulatory body can be met.
This past year has been a good example: the new competency was 'applied research and investigation' for our second year students. Groups of instructors involved had to interpret what this entailed and create a plan for this component of our program. Most of our mandates for the program are based on national competency profiles or occasionally stakeholder needs assessments.
Interactive Model Of Program Planning Caffarella Daffron
Model Building in Planning Programs: Blending Theory and Practice1 Rosemary S. The Interactive Model of program planning.
How they are delivered are up to the individual programs. Sorting and prioritizing program ideas: my focus as an educator is on 'education' so I couldn't think of any specifics for this step (yet). I do however have to sort and prioritize projects, curriculum development, and curriculum delivery based on priority for delivery. Developing program objectives: I have been heavily involved in writing program 'Learning Outcomes' (that's what SIAST refers to objectives as) and course descriptions. As an instructor we are often given a 'national competency' and then are required to design/write the learning outcomes, learning steps, curriculum and evaluation tools that will assist the learner to achieve competence. I have also taken a few courses designed specifically on writing learning outcomes/objectives. Designing instructional plans: this is the 'meat and potatoes' of my career.
As an instructor I need to design how content will be delivered to achieve the learning outcomes. What are the learning steps involved? Do they require lectures and readings, discussions, 'hands on' labs, demonstrations, experiential activities, etc. How will the material be assessed. Multiple choice exams, written research paper, mentor evaluations, oral questioning, guided learning activities/questions, labs, etc.? Devising transfer of learning plans: This is done in two different stages in my program. Year one students apply theory and knowledge in labs and to case studies.
- Start studying Caffarella Program Planning for Adults. Program Planning Interactive Model. Caffarella presents the model as a circle where all 12 steps point.
- Chapters 1-3 lay the groundwork for the rest of the guide by introducing the 12-component Interactive Model of Program Planning. Caffarella, Rosemary S.
Year two students apply theory and knowledge on a daily basis in a clinical setting overseen by facilitators, mentors and/or preceptors. Year two generally have task sheets and assignments designed to assist the learner to transfer their knowledge into skills. Formulating evaluation plans: Year two clinical students use formative and summative evaluations which are based on written assignments, oral questions, performance and exams.
Year one didactic students are generally evaluated by written multiple choice exams and laboratory work (performance and case studies). I have also employed a few other evaluation tools unique to the course being delivered but am generally restricted by my program as to the types of final evaluation tools used. Making recommendations and communicating results: each course delivered has a learner course evaluation and an instructor course evaluation done.
Results are collated by SIAST and then given to the primary instructor. These course evaluations must be given at the next staff meeting and instructors are expected to make changes to delivery as needed. These evaluations are also a requirement of our accreditation standards.
This how-to guide and resource book is designed to help in planning educational and training programs for adults in settings from the corporate sector to educational organizations. Chapters 1-3 lay the groundwork for the rest of the guide by introducing the 12-component Interactive Model of Program Planning.
Chapter 1 describes adult programs and discusses planners, sponsors, purposes, outcomes, and program planning models. Chapter 2 presents an overview of the model, basic assumptions on which it rests, its sources, and users. Chapter 3 addresses using the model: identifying personal beliefs about program planning, developing upfront parameters, determining which model components and tasks to use, and using technology in program planning. Chapters 4 through 15 each explain one model component and give practical tips and ideas related to concrete tasks within the component. These are the model components: discern the context; build a solid base of support; identify program ideas; sort and prioritize program ideas; develop program objectives; design instructional plans; devise transfer-of-learning plans; formulate evaluation plans; make recommendations and communicate results; select formats, schedules, and staff needs; prepare budgets and marketing plans; and coordinate facilities and on-site events.
Types Of Program Planning Models
Each chapter concludes with highlights and application exercises. Chapter 16 revisits the model. Appendixes include 301 references and an index. Contains 9 figures, 40 exercises, and 73 exhibits.) (YLB).