In Week 2 Complete The Following Tasks For Your Course Proje

In Week 2 Complete The Following Tasks For Your Course Project

In Week 2, complete the following tasks for your course project: Based on the type of program evaluation selected, determine three to five program criteria that you will use for your program evaluation. Provide a rationale for the criteria selected. Related to your program evaluation, identify one possible ethical issue. Discuss the ethical issue comprehensively and discuss its potential impact on the program evaluation process and stakeholders. Discuss practices, you as the program evaluator, can conduct to address the ethical issue and reduce the probability of the issue occurring or having a negative effect on stakeholders. Program evaluated was Georgia Schools Punishment System Submission Details: Address the issues in a Microsoft Word document using correct APA format.

Paper For Above instruction

The evaluation of the Georgia Schools Punishment System necessitates a thorough understanding of applicable program criteria and ethical considerations. To effectively assess the system, it is crucial to identify specific criteria that measure the program's effectiveness, fairness, transparency, and impact on student well-being. This paper delineates three to five pertinent evaluation criteria, provides a rationale for their selection, identifies a significant ethical issue, and offers strategies to address this issue responsibly.

Program Criteria and Rationale

The first criterion is "Equity in Disciplinary Actions," which assesses whether disciplinary measures are applied fairly across different demographic groups, including race, socioeconomic status, and disability status. The rationale for this criterion stems from concerns about systemic biases that may disproportionately target marginalized students, thereby impacting their educational opportunities (Skiba et al., 2011). Ensuring fairness and equity is essential for promoting a just disciplinary system.

Second, "Recidivism Rate" measures whether the disciplinary system effectively reduces repeat offenses. A low recidivism rate indicates that the disciplinary interventions are successful in modifying student behavior and maintaining a safe school environment (Losen et al., 2015). This criterion helps evaluate the system’s effectiveness in fostering behavioral improvements.

The third criterion, "Student and Parent Satisfaction," gauges perceptions of fairness and transparency among stakeholders. When students and parents perceive disciplinary processes as just and transparent, they are more likely to cooperate and support school policies (Skiba et al., 2008). This criterion reflects the community’s trust and the program's societal legitimacy.

Additional criteria might include "Impact on Academic Performance" to determine if disciplinary procedures interfere with educational attainment, and "Resource Allocation Efficiency" to evaluate the cost-effectiveness of disciplinary interventions.

Ethical Issue Identification

A prominent ethical issue associated with the evaluation of the Georgia Schools Punishment System involves potential biases influencing disciplinary decisions. Specifically, research indicates that disciplinary actions may disproportionately affect minority students, raising concerns about racial profiling and fairness (Ferguson, 2010). This bias can skew evaluation results, perpetuate systemic inequalities, and erode trust among affected communities.

Impact on Evaluation and Stakeholders

This ethical issue can significantly impact the evaluation process by compromising data integrity, leading to misleading conclusions regarding program effectiveness. For stakeholders, such biases undermine confidence in the disciplinary system, perpetuate inequalities, and may exacerbate tensions between schools and communities. If unaddressed, bias can also damage the legitimacy of the evaluation, hinder policy improvement efforts, and result in continued disparities (Skiba et al., 2014).

Practices to Address Ethical Challenges

As an evaluator, implementing practices to mitigate bias and uphold ethical standards is paramount. First, employing diverse and culturally competent evaluation teams can provide multiple perspectives and reduce individual biases. Training evaluators on cultural competency and anti-bias strategies enhances awareness of potential prejudices (Gordon & Ford, 2013).

Second, utilizing objective data sources, such as disciplinary records stratified by demographic factors, helps identify disparities and monitor equity issues transparently. Regularly reviewing data for evidence of bias facilitates early intervention. Third, involving community stakeholders—including students, parents, and advocates—in the evaluation process fosters transparency and accountability, ensuring diverse viewpoints are considered (Losen et al., 2015).

Finally, establishing clear ethical guidelines aligned with professional standards—such as confidentiality, fairness, and non-discrimination—is essential. This involves ongoing ethical training and emphasizing the importance of integrity and impartiality in evaluation practices.

Conclusion

Evaluating the Georgia Schools Punishment System requires careful selection of program criteria that reflect fairness, effectiveness, and stakeholder trust. Addressing the ethical issues—particularly racial bias—necessitates proactive strategies including diverse evaluation teams, robust data analysis, stakeholder involvement, and adherence to ethical standards. Implementing these practices not only enhances the validity of the evaluation but also promotes a more equitable and transparent disciplinary system that aligns with educational justice.

References

• Ferguson, A. A. (2010). Bad Boys: Public Schools in the Making of Black Masculinity. University of Michigan Press.
• Gordon, M., & Ford, D. (2013). Culturally responsive evaluation: Methodological considerations. New Directions for Evaluation, 2013(137), 27-36.
• Losen, D. J., Skiba, R. J., & Peterson, R. L. (2015). Lost Opportunities: The Disparate Impact of Zero Tolerance and Exclusionary Policies for Minority Youth. The Civil Rights Project/Proyecto Derechos Civiles.
• Skiba, R. J., Poloni-Staudinger, L., Simmons, A., Frazier, S., Chung, C., & Rausch, M. (2014). Racial disparities in exclusions: Challenging race-based explanations. The Journal of Applied Developmental Psychology, 35(2), 103-114.
• Skiba, R. J., Poloni-Staudinger, L., Simmons, A. B., Frazier, S., Chung, C., & Rausch, M. (2008). Are Zero Tolerance Policies Effective in the Schools? The Journal of Educational Research, 101(1), 42-52.