Illuminative Model - Overview
Focus on multiple audience perspectives and program process.
The aims are to study the both how the system operates and what it feels like to be a member of that classroom; whether it is from the teacher or student’s perspective.

In this regard, I would think this model evaluates all aspects of the curriculum: how does it operate; how it is affected by various elements in the school community; what is the feeling of the people involved; how students intellectual tasks and academic experiences are most affected. It seems to lean towards the enacted and the experienced curriculum rather than the planned, but that has a place here as well.
There is definitely an evaluator as the process is three steps, involving the observer having time to discover the day-to-day operations of the classroom and the curriculum. In essence, the observer notices several issues and then picks out what he or she deems to be the most in need of careful examination and this becomes the basis of the evaluation. Called “progressive focusing”…coming from many to only several areas of evaluation.

Observation, interviews, questionnaires, tests, and program documentation are the primary means of data collecting…each method is used at different times in the process. For example, observation is key in the opening of the evaluation.

Successful or failing students; newly appointed teachers; curriculum directors or people who created the curriculum are prime candidates for interviews…try to capture the exactitude of the discussions, as well as the student-teacher interaction.

Does not use quantitative data from questionnaires and tests ALONE…uses all methods to come to a consensus.

Student Assessment
Student assessment would fit in on a natural level, since the Illuminative model would take into account all aspects of the classroom; teacher-student interaction, material, and student assessment would all have to be valid aspects of an Illuminative model researcher’s tools.

Pros and Cons
I see the Pros being that an Illuminative follower will record exactly what happens and will often be a willing participant in the events, almost like a news reporter going undercover to see what is really happening in the classroom. This goes back to what I was saying before about who is really insuring the curriculum is being taught. I like this aspect of it. I also like the fact that it seems from my research that the majority of people being interviewed or questioned are school staff and students: the primary stakeholders in curriculum.

The Cons I see being the fact that the after the initial round of observation, the researcher is to determine the primary areas of concern. What if that researcher is wrong? In the example given, there is a team of observers participating in the course, so you may be able to alleviate that fairly easily. Another negative is the fact that this model seems to rely on subterfuge and deception…that may not be the case in reality, but the research seems to imply that to be successful, the Illuminative model needs to be somewhat secretive.