Curriculum Evaluation

Curriculum evaluation is process that seeks to define, collating and analyze data to make an informed decision on the curriculum (Davis, 1980). Its purpose is to determine the effectiveness of a programme in achieving its intent, and to make the appropriate changes to it if necessary. Hence, this paper seeks to evaluate on the curriculum of Diploma of Adult and Continuing Education (DACE) Programme base on the three concepts of the intended, enacted and experienced curriculum. Firstly, the intent of the curriculum is identified as to encourage an independent, innovation thinking and self-direct adult educator to adopt the mindset of a reflective practitioner. It is follow by a discussion on the stakeholders top down approach in managing the

However, the CET sector progress faster than expected and ACTA could no longer meet the needs of the sector. It was revealed in a research that additional capabilities are require in meeting the sophisticated workplace training problems and gaps (Bound, Rushbrook and Sivalingam, 2013). In other words, this inferred that CBT approach alone was not adequate to meet these additional capabilities. In addition, the current Singapore Workforce Skills Qualification (WSQ) system, which comes under WDA, does not favour changes, innovation thinking and peer appraisal among the practitioners working within the CET sector. Hence, DACE was developed to address all these inadequacies (Bound et al,

It should be noted that the stakeholder group consist of numerous personnel from WDA. On the contrary, the programme is led by WDA and industry who closely guided by government policies even though it is described as being industry led. It intends is deliberate and focus on the skills development needs of the nation (Bound, 2013). Hence, according to Billet (2011), this is considers a top down approach as the programme is developed and authorize at national level and the role of the CET sector was just to implement what has been determined. In this approach, during the enacted curriculum, the adult educator simply executes what has been decided. The quality of learning outcomes is compromised as the administration and management of vocational education takes priority over the enacted curriculum (Jackson, 1993; Stevenson, 1995). Billet (2011) back this by stating that the teacher would convey what has been pre-determined content to the learners. This approach does not appear to compliment the aim of the programme to encourage independent and self-direct adult educator. Nevertheless, this is a nationwide programme and the government will protect and enhanced their interest over the curriculum (Smith and Lovat, 2003). A bottom up approach will be more