Compose a 1250 words assignment on formative, summative, and confirmative evaluation: similarities and differences. Needs to be plagiarism free! Education has always been a concern of society because its impact is unquestionable and a lot of designs are being developed and tested to develop a better educational system to go even further in the learning system today. An instructional design is a systematic process in which instructional materials are designed, developed, and delivered while evaluation design is finding out what the design is capable of or what it lacks. There are three types of evaluation of instructional design, namely. formative, summative, and confirmative evaluation. These designs similarly evaluate the effectiveness of such instructional design but still vary in some degrees of each usage. Formative evaluation is more diagnosis focused. It focuses on the program while it is being developed or while the process is ongoing that provides information for improvement (Van Tiem et al., 2000, p. 157)
While summative evaluation focuses on the outcome or the effectiveness of the program. It is used to measure the effectiveness of a performance intervention or evaluates if the interventions during the process have resulted in an effective outcome (Van Tiem et al., 2000, p. 157). Summative evaluation as the name suggests summarizes the result after the whole process was made by assessing whether the object can be said to have caused the outcome. determining the overall impact of the causal factor beyond only the immediate target outcomes. and, estimating the relative costs associated with the object (Trochim, 2006).
On the contrary, confirmative evaluation, unlike the first two focuses on determining the adequacy of competence of the learners. .Confirmative Evaluation is applied to analyze long-term performance by collecting, examining, and interpreting data and information in order to determine the continuing competence of learners or the continuing effectiveness of instructional materials (Van Tiem et al., 2000, p.157-158).