Part 3: Mandate Compliance

The third generation of evaluation represents a synthesis of the previous two approaches (goal-driven product approach and rich description process approach. Here, evaluation serves as a tool for assessing the extent to which curriculum innovations are implemented in practice, emphasizing the distinction between evaluation processes and outcomes. This perspective views evaluation not merely as a measurement of goal achievement but also as a process that can be both formative and summative. In essence, by focusing on decision-making processes, evaluation generates data that informs future planning and decision-making endeavors.

One significant aspect of this generation of evaluation is its increasing emphasis on compliance with mandates. Many educational programs, while administered locally, require accreditation from external bodies, necessitating adherence to both internal and external quality assurance standards (such as those governing training courses like CELTA). However, this focus on compliance often leads to a disproportionate amount of time being spent on bureaucratic tasks rather than on actual teaching or teacher education. Consequently, there is a growing tendency for professionals to prioritize documenting compliance as a valuable skill, potentially overshadowing other aspects of their roles.

Moreover, there is a risk that adherence to mandates may become conflated with good practice, resulting in a situation where trainers make fewer professional decisions and perceive their primary task as simply complying with regulations. This can stifle innovation and limit the ability to address longstanding design issues within educational programs. Thus, while the third generation of evaluation aims to incorporate aspects of both process and outcome assessment, its emphasis on compliance underscores the need for a balanced approach that does not compromise the core objectives of education and professional development.