INSTRUCTIONS TO REVIEWER:
Your evaluation will provide the Educational Approval Program (EAP) with advice about the program. Because program quality is key to the EAP approval process, we ask you to be thorough and detailed in your written evaluation. To prepare your report, please provide a written response to each of the following questions on a separate sheet referencing the question number. Do not simply answer “yes” or “no,” but provide your reasoning why the program materials do or do not meet quality standards. You may make comments and suggestions beyond merely answering the twelve questions if you think that such information/insight will help the EAP make an informed judgment concerning this program’s viability and quality.
1. Are the program’s educational objectives consistent with the school’s purpose/philosophy and mission statement?
2. Does the program reflect present-day practice, meet current industry/occupational standards and prepare students for entry-level positions?
3. Are the content, length and instructional strategies of the program consistent in quality with similar programs in Wisconsin public schools and/or with other approved EAP programs?
4. Does the program have comprehensive course outlines, syllabi, teaching guides, texts?
5. Are the learning outcomes clearly presented for the scope and sequence of the program?
6. Does each course/program segment have an outcome-based syllabus which identifies:
1] competencies, learner outcomes and performance standards;
2] learning activities (how competencies/outcomes will be met);
3] available resources; and,
4] assessment methods to evaluate achievement of competencies/outcomes?
7. Are performance standards clearly stated and are evaluation methods such as written and practical hands-on tests, classroom observations, etc., used to assess knowledge and skills for the student?
8. Are students given regular feedback on their knowledge, skills and progress?
9. Are educational resources such as supplies, textbooks, manuals, computers, software, and individual aids accessible, sufficient, relevant, current and unbiased?
10. Are classrooms, laboratories, shops, intern or clinical sites appropriate?
11. Are equipment and tools provided for the program adequate and relevant to training needs?
12. Would you recommend approval of the program as currently presented? If not, what changes must be made?