Social Construction of Reality - Bad Request

according to page number, section, part and title of the law. See Appendix N for an
example of the analysis workbook. It is important to note the contexts in which
evaluation is framed shift throughout the document. These shifts are important insofar as
they encompass a variety of evaluation modes, for instance external vs. internal, tasks-
such as analysis, reporting, and information dissemination- and topics: reading
improvement programming, comprehensive school reform, language instruction for
limited English proficient and immigrant students, 21 st century schools, and parent
involvement policy and programming, to name a few.
An analysis of the Missouri School Improvement Program (MSIP) Cycle 4
revealed that program evaluation is treated in a centralized manner (Appendix J). Unlike
the recursive mentioning and mandating present throughout NCLB, MSIP Cycle 4
localizes program evaluation within one section where it calls for several activities: (a)
biennial review of goals and objectives (b) report on the effectiveness of each program
and service (c) documentation of action to “ensure that these programs efficiently achieve
their goals.” Moreover, each district is mandated to have a board- approved procedural
plan that “coordinates the evaluation of all programs and services.” There are four
elements that must be present within any school district’s evaluation plan:
1. Program goals and objectives for the programs and services offered;
2. Evaluation criteria and procedures for the programs and services offered;
3. Designated responsible persons for the programs/services;
4. List of programs due for evaluation and timelines for reporting the results of
the evaluations to the board (MSIP, 4 th cycle).
64