Learning Through CyberApprenticeship (LTCA): Robust Evaluation Predicated on Stakeholder Engagement.

San Diego State University's (SDSU) Learning through Cyber Apprenticeship program, awarded in 1999 under the Preparing Tomorrow's Teacher's to Use Technology (PT3) initiative, was built on a simple but challenging premise: to establish and develop a system through which preservice teachers enrolled in EdTec 470 (1) work directly with technologically skilled teachers (TMTs) in the field to create projects (activities, lessons, units) for classroom implementation that depict best practices in technology use. Over the grant's nearly four years, project staff have necessarily engaged with a wide range of external and internal stakeholders--a challenging task, given their varying (and occasionally contradictory) needs, interests, and expectations. This article turns to theory and the author's own experiences to explore ways to ensure that stakeholders are fully integrated into assessment processes. The obligation is two-fold. The evaluator must, of course, be cognizant of his or her professional obligations, as specified in the Program Evaluation Standards (1994). As important, however, is her or her awareness of the ways stakeholders (a) are defined in the literature--and how that definition has changed over time; (b) may be differentiated by level of investment and stake in the program; (c) are influenced by the authorizing, sociopolitical environment in which they operate; (d) are affected by the phase of the study itself (divergent, convergent); (e) and respond to different techniques for connecting with them. Specific examples of this evaluator's own journey--and her perceptions of success at building and maintaining stakeholder interest--are also provided. ********** As Mohan, Bernstein, and Whitsett (2002) aptly pointed out, program or project evaluators face enormous challenges. One difficulty is rightfully determining stakeholders and how best to serve their varying (and occasionally contradictory) information needs. Evaluators who believe that they are duty bound to provide illuminating results upon which stakeholders can act (Patton, 1997; Russ-eft & Preskill, 2001; Worthen, Sanders, & Fitzpatrick, 1997) tend to design studies premised on continuous stakeholder input into core processes and frameworks or approaches that call for multifaceted data collection. Such a vision of evaluation is especially important in technology-infusion initiatives such as Preparing Tomorrow's Teachers to Use Technology (PT3; see: http://www.ed.gov/programs/teachtech/index.html). The PT3 initiative is one of several contributors to the atmosphere of renewal that currently characterizes preservice education. Nationally, accrediting agencies such as the National Council for Accreditation of Teacher Education are advocating for and endorsing preparation programs that are technology-infused (2001), learner-centered and performance-based (2003); at the state level, legislative reform has increased the rigor of university-level preservice programs and, by extension, the criteria or standards by which credentials are awarded. (2) At the local level, curricular revisions (funded with both private and public moneys) promote mentoring/modeling, experiential learning, use of technology, and community-building. (3) Since 1999, U. S. Department of Education PT3 staff have awarded more than 400 grants (http://www.pt3.org). Currently, the initiative is authorized under Title II of the No Child Left Behind Act (NCLB), which attends (in part) to the preparation, training, and recruiting of high quality teachers and administrators. Its purpose is succinctly described in Part B/Section 221 of that legislation: ... to carry out programs that prepare prospective teachers to use advanced technology to prepare all students to meet challenging state and local academic content and student academic achievement standards; and to improve the ability of institutions of higher education to carry out such programs. …