Robert Stake's Countenance Model


Overview

This model was created in 1967 by Robert E. Stake, for the Center for Instructional Research and Curriculum Evaluation at the
University of Illinois. Stake notes that, "Formal evaluation of education is recognized by its dependence on checklists, structured
visitation by peers, controlled comparisons, and standardized testing of students. Some of these techniques have long histories of successful use. Unfortunately, when planning an evaluation, few educators consider even these four. The more common notion is to evaluate informally: to ask the opinion of the instructor, to ponder the logic of the program, or to consider the reputation of the advocates."
Stake notes educator's disdain for evaluation, due to sensitivity to criticism. He then proposed a model for carrying out curriculum
evaluation that focuses on description and judgment. Stake wrote that greater emphasis should be placed on description, and that judgment was actually the collection of data. Stake wrote about connections in education between antecedents, transactions and contingencies (outcomes). He also noted connections between intentions and observations, which he called congruence. Stake developed matrices for the notation of data for the evaluation. Data is collected through these matrices.

Which curriculum does the model evaluate: Planned, Enacted, and / or Experienced?

All three; this model uses antecedents, or prior knowledge of any discipline, so growth data is collected in all areas.

How is data collected? What data is collected? Is there an organizer?

The utilization of two matrices is the vehicle for which data is collected.

Where does student assessment fit in?

Stack mentions standardized assessment in the first few paragraphs of his paper, but his use of what he refers to as judgment is the component where student assessment fits in.

What are the Pros and Cons to the Evaluation model?

I think that it may be quite difficult to actually use the matrices Stack has developed for this model, but I believe that his (1967) thinking as to how education (and therefore curriculum) should be evaluated is still relevant.

Works Cited

1.) Mathison, S. Encyclopedia of Evaluation.
http://books.google.com/books?id=nmv5mSHlXKQC&pg=PA90&lpg=PA90&dq=robert+stakes+countenance+model&source=bl&ots=rTKw4o4LL2&sig=PvgVFg0QMG8qF4ezufj9hwQZEqQ&hl=en&ei=KW_rSYKvF5n4Mcz5nNkF&sa=X&oi=book_result&ct=result&resnum=2

2.) Stake, R. E. The Countenance of Educational Evaluation.
http://www.ed.uiuc.edu/CIRCE/Publications/Countenance.pdf

3.) Singla, P. K., Gupta, A. B. An Integrated Curriculum Evaluation Model for Technical Education Programmes.
http://www.cce.iisc.ernet.in/iche07/51.pdf