According to Stufflebeam and Shinkfield (2007:5) evaluation can be referred to as “society’s most fundamental discipline”. The functions of evaluation in language programmes vary as they are to a very large extent determined by the aims, views and beliefs of the evaluator(s). To Goldie (2006:210), the evaluation process involves decisions on important issues related to evaluation criteria, performance standards and evaluation weightings. It is virtually impossible for these not to be affected by the personal views and values of the evaluator(s). Some evaluation programmes might be aimed at providing information on how different groups perceive the values of a programme or measuring the extent to which the objectives of the programme have been achieved and even proffering suggestions on possible ways for improving aspects of the programme for the overall success of the programme (Robinson, 2003:199).
According to Rea-Dickens and Kiely (2005:6) evaluation research can be seen from two angles: it is viewed as a study which performs the function of research which entails expanding the frontiers of knowledge, performing the function of assessing a programme to determine its worth and effectiveness in order to provide information that would facilitate decision making on the programme. It is also regarded as research that focuses on the evaluation process. Evaluation research usually focuses on the study of selected variables that are of interest to the researcher for the development and formulation of theory and policies respectively (Stufflebeam and Shinkfield, 2007:24). The uniqueness of this research can thus be said to be twofold:
1) It seeks to expand the frontiers of theoretical knowledge in the area of policy and evaluation practice and language education by examining not just the language but also paying close attention to the policies which guide the use and implementation of the language within the Nigerian context.
2) It equally seeks to evaluate an English Language teacher education programme at the foundation level of teacher training whose graduates are meant to teach in the Junior Secondary Schools but in reality many eventually teach in the primary schools which coincidentally is also the foundation level for ESL learners in Nigeria.
There is an increased demand for evaluation across the present-day landscape of education (Norris, 2009:12). This is due to the urgent need for accountability in educational programmes and the necessity to demonstrate support for improvement in practice to promote accurate understanding for the need and values of effective language programmes in modern-day society. Despite the
fact that most evaluation programmes are very often used as political tools in many communities and educational settings, they are in fact considered as educational tools which can contribute immensely to the understanding and improvement of educational programmes (Norris, 2009:7). This is because of their unique tendencies to provide strong and significant insights into the nature and structure of programmes. Yang (2009:77) aptly describes evaluation as the heart that not only connects but pumps blood to all other elements of a programme. In other words, for a programme to be “alive” and to achieve its full potential it must have an inbuilt evaluation plan which must be designed and utilised fully.
Evaluations serve internal and external interests as they tend to take on board the interests of primary and secondary stakeholders, informing both formative and summative purposes as well as empowering language teachers and learners in order to make language teaching and learning more effective. Evaluation programmes are used to shed light on the outcomes and processes of a language programme through different perspectives. They provide very useful information for the improvement of language teaching and learning within such programmes and thereby illuminate and ensure the value of language education within the society (Harris, 2009:56).
This evaluation research is formative in nature as it seeks to provide feedback in the form of the evaluation findings which will also be written in the form of a report for the major stakeholders of an on-going NCE programme. This will hopefully lead to the further improvement of the said programme. It aims to
identify and analyse the objectives of the language teacher education programme and also to examine the extent to which the objectives have been achieved. It is hoped that the findings of the research will be utilised properly to assist in the improvement and overall growth or advancement of the English Language teacher education programme at the NCE level.
Evaluation can be described as an activity that is very integral to the teaching and learning of language. While acknowledging the arguably political nature of evaluation programmes, Harris (2009:55) stresses a crucial need for evaluators to look beyond doing good research and take into serious consideration the different interpretations and uses for evaluation findings which should be communicated in ways to raise public awareness about the complexity of multiple factors affecting and which eventually shape educational effectiveness.
Evaluation programmes do not only raise the awareness of those involved but also tend to focus on the provision of answers to priority questions of a programme. As such, there is the potential for evaluation programmes to transform or change poor educational programmes into highly successful and effective ones. This is because such programmes help to verify or disprove claims as they usually highlight certain elements, characteristics, strengths and weaknesses in a programme that will otherwise have been missed or overlooked. This research examines the English teacher education programme as run or carried out or studied in two different Colleges of Education.
In order to build expertise in the area of language programme evaluation therefore, there is urgent need to encourage the publication of reports on the full process involved in the research (Ellis, 2009:239). Although evaluations which involve teacher education programmes are quite common, and many universities engage in regular evaluations of programmes at the departmental level, most of the evaluation programmes reported on very often are done by external evaluators. Many of such evaluation reports are hardly made public as most stakeholders usually insist that they be kept confidential. The researcher in this case has undertaken this research of her own volition and as such intends to publish the findings of the research to help expand the knowledge in this area.
According to Kiely (2009:99), learning, which is the primary aim of any language evaluation programme, can occur in three different contexts, namely research which involves theory building, policy building and professional practice which involves classroom and curriculum development. This study thus becomes relevant as it aims to create an evaluation model and as such seeks to expand the frontier of knowledge with its contribution to theory and practice. There should be an increase in collaborative activities to allow teachers and other stakeholders to be actively engaged and involved in the monitoring process. This is because, according to Peacock (2009:235), teachers’ feeling of ownership of an evaluation programme increases when they participate in the programme and share in the information gathered. It not only provides new and different perspectives on the phenomena or happenings in the programme, it also creates avenues for teachers to develop their careers as well as providing
them with the much needed inspiration and sense of fulfilment that comes with the achievement of something good.
In summary therefore, the importance of evaluation as discussed above cannot be over emphasised as it continues to perform vital functions which are crucial for the success and growth of any social organisation and programme. It is necessary that a programme’s goals, structure and process be assessed periodically through evaluation to ascertain not only the true state of the programme but to also ensure its constant and advanced improvement (Stufflebeam and Shinkfield, 2007:7).