AEA PD Online – Evaluation Plan
Evaluation of Courses, Instructors, and the Program
Iowa Code requires a system of evaluation for all credit bearing opportunities.
Each participant should complete a course evaluation. The evaluation form aligns
the course evaluation with the learning goals/targets of the course. This system
allows AEA PD Online and district representatives to collect both quantitative and
qualitative data to support and verify professional development efforts. Individual
and cumulative data will be reviewed. Directions for accessing the evaluation by
participants, accessing the evaluation results by the instructor, and a copy of the
evaluation form are enclosed with the instructor’s digital packet.

The Statewide System will conduct the following forms of ongoing evaluation:
1. At the conclusion of each course, participants will complete an online survey,
evaluating the effectiveness of the course, instructor, and program.
2. Annually, instructors will examine their courses in alignment with online
teaching and course standards. A rubric will be provided to aid instructors.
3. Periodically, the license renewal coordinator will conduct virtual walkthrough
observations of online courses.

Evaluation will be conducted to assure the level of competency of the online
teaching and course standards. Special focus will be applied in the following
• Rigor - Do courses move beyond the lowest levels of Bloom’s taxonomy?
• Engagement & Collaboration - What level does the course require students to
actively participate and interact with other participants, and does that interaction
lead to deeper learning and meeting of course objectives?
• Support & Help - Is the level of support and help for students adequate to help
them achieve their learning goals?
Data from these evaluations will be used by the advisory council to make further
policy and programming decisions.

Evaluation of Trainings and Other Online Professional Development Resources
In addition, AEA PD Online regularly evaluates the effectiveness and quality of its self-paced online trainings, modules, and other resources. AEA PD Online will use the following forms of ongoing evaluation:

1. At the conclusion of each training, participants have the option of completing an online survey evaluating the effectiveness, clarity, and applicability of the content.
2. AEA PD Online support personnel will record anecdotal feedback offered from participants to be shared with instructional designers for quality control improvements.
3. Periodically, the license renewal coordinator will survey school personnel (such as principals and head nurses) to determine the impact of trainings on a school’s employees.

Evaluation of Statewide Employees
AEA PD Online evaluates its employees consistent with personnel evaluation of the host AEA. This requires the same evaluation procedures and timelines (pre-conference, professional development plan, etc.). Supervisory positions (such as the Project Manager) are evaluated using the Iowa Standards for School Leaders, while appropriate positions are evaluated using the Iowa Teaching Standards for AEA Employees.

The Project Manager conducts evaluations of all statewide staff. A supervisor is appointed for the Project Manager by the Chief Administrators (in agreement with the host AEA).

Additional Data, Including Needs Assessments
AEA PD Online also collects statistical data on its professional development offerings. This includes the number of participants, the completion rate, and the types of credit sought. These data will be disaggregated among differing AEA regions and districts to examine consistency, as well as the levels of communication about offerings.

Annually, AEA PD Online will survey stakeholders for needs assessment. This will include a list of professional development/human resource topics (around 100 total), to be evaluated using the following likert scale:

1. "Make it this year" - Choose the top 5 (and only your top 5) for this category as the most urgent.
2. "Make it in the next 2-3 years" - Choose roughly 10-15 of the next most important/urgent.
3. "Strong Priority" - Out of those that aren't the top needs, these would be the ones that would be worth it for the state to invest resources to build.
4. "Moderate Priority" - These would be trainings that there would be SOME benefit to investing resources to build.
5. "Not a Priority" - These would be trainings that, "if we had them, great! But no need to invest energy or resources into them at this time."

Stakeholders include:
• Online Council and Advisory Council Members
• AEA Joint Directors (Media, Instructional, and Special Education Services)
• AEA Chief Administrators
• AEA/LEA Business Officials
• AEA/LEA Human Resource Officers
• Other AEA Consultants and Employees
• LEA Superintendents and Principals, and other Directors (such as Curriculum, Transportation or Technology)
• LEA Teachers and Counselors
• LEA Nurses
• LEA Support Staff Employees
• Department of Education Consultants

The data are disaggregated among stakeholder types, and are considered by the Online Council. The council will then meet yearly to set its prioritized goals for the upcoming year, based both on the stakeholder data, current legislative mandated requirements, and an inventory of readiness and available resources within the system for various projects. The number of prioritized areas are weighed against the available personnel resources to complete the projects.

Projects are then evaluated for their progress towards completion by the Project Manager. The Online Council conducts a mid-year review on progress towards goals, as well as a review at the end of the year.

Course Evaluation
Below is the online participant evaluation for the course. Each question, unless
otherwise denoted, asks participants to rate on the following scale: completely,
generally, somewhat, not at all.

Why were you taking this course (check all that apply)?
• Relicensure
• Networking with Educators
• District/School Initiative
• Content Knowledge
• Research Based Strategies
• Materials/Activities

Was this course worthwhile?

Were the learning goals/targets clearly specified at the beginning of the course?

How well were the goals/targets met? (Each learning goal from the course
proposal is listed separately here)

Were the course requirements clearly specified?

Were the activities carefully planned and organized?

To what level was interaction with other participants an important part of the

Did your interaction with others lead to deeper learning in the course?

Did the instructor use rigorous instructional strategies in the course, including
strategies that developed participant creativity, analysis, and application (i.e.
higher levels of Bloom’s Taxonomy)?

Did the instructor demonstrate expertise in the content area?

Was the level of support and technical help adequate for you to meet your
learning goals (including the availability of the instructor)?

What was the level of effectiveness of the technology used in the course
(including Moodle)?

During the course, were you able to apply your learning to your own teaching?

Will you be able to apply what you have learned in your classroom?

(Free Response Question) If you were to take this course again, what would you
as the student do differently? What would you want your instructor to do

Observation of AEA Online Professional Development Course

Course Dates:
Dates Observed:
Students Enrolled:

Drake Credit:

Overview of Course:
Required Materials/Text:
Target Audience:

Learner Support and Resources:
Summary of observation

Online Organization and Design:
Summary of observation

Instructional Design and Delivery:
Summary of observation

Assessment and Evaluation of Student Learning:
Summary of observation

Innovative Teaching with Technology:
Summary of observation

Additional Comments: