The SURE Model for Evaluation of Complex Processes and Tool for Implementation Uranchimeg Tudevdagva 1* Mongolian University of Science and Technology 1 Ulaanbaatar, Mongolia uranchimeg@must.edu.mn Wolfram Hardt 2 Technische Universitaet Chemnitz 2 Chemnitz, Germany wolfram.hardt@informatik.tu- chemnitz.de Bayar-Erdene Lkhagvasuren 1 Mongolian University of Science and Technology 1 Ulaanbaatar, Mongolia l_bayarerdene@yahoo.com Abstract—This paper describes general principles of structure oriented evaluation (SURE) model for complex processes and beta version of tool for this model. Originally SURE model was developed for evaluation of e-learning. An e-learning is the one of clear example of complex processes. An e-learning process includes many different groups with distinguished expectations and roles. The evaluation of such us complex process need clear and traceable model. The SURE model includes all necessary elements of evaluation. In the SURE model these elements are divided into eight steps which evaluation team has to follow using this model. One of the advantages of the SURE model is logical goal structure for evaluation. Next contribution of this model into evaluation theory is adapted data processing part for evaluation goal structure. This effect opens opportunity to evaluation team and users of this model to understand essential step of evaluation: calculation of collected data. The last section of paper shows the evaluation example by tool of SURE model. Keywords—logical structure; complex system; system evaluation; evaluation model; SURE model. I. THE INTODUCTION In an era of new technological developments, e-learning has become a central issue in future developments of education systems. E-learning is widely being used in conventional, continuing and adult education and corporate training because of its flexibility, richness, resource-sharing, and cost- effectiveness. United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization (UNESCO) statistics show that over 455 million people around the world had received education and training through the Internet in 2008 [7]. By survey of Babson Survey Research Group over 70% of universities in USA were providing e-learning courses, and more than 6.1 million university students were taking at least one e-learning course during the fall 2010 term, which accounted for over 31% of the total number of university students in USA [28]. The need of e-learning in education and training is confirmed also by the E-learning investment report: Corporate training is a $200 billion industry, of which $26 million is represented by e-learning. In Europe, 51% of companies delivered one training session via e-learning to more than 50% of their employees. Corporations in Spain and the U. K. lead the way with 56% and 53% of learners, respectively, suing e- learning. Part of the reason for global growth of e-learning is the increasing of wireless connectivity. For example, South Korea, which has one of the highest-rated education systems, aims to have wireless networks in all schools by 2015, when all curriculum materials will be available in digital form [11]. In this context, the call for adapted educational standards, corresponding quality evaluation and process management of e-learning tools is becoming even louder. Educational evaluation has a long historical tradition, but evaluation for e- learning is still being developed as a new branch of educational evaluation. The rapid development of computer and mobile technology has become the main motivation to change the teaching and learning methodology in e-learning. Therefore, relating with teaching and learning methodologies evaluation models and methods are required to be updated. Many researchers and scientists developed different approaches and models for educational evaluation. R. Tyler [39], [40], D. Kirkpatrick [13] - [16], M. Scriven [30] - [32], M. Alkin [1] - [3], J. Messick [10], [11], D. Stufflebeam [33], [34] and J. Phillips [25] - [27] are pioneers in educational evaluation theory. Other researchers such us M. Patton [23], [24], U. D. Ehlers [9] - [10], B. Khan [16] - [18], F. Colace [6], [7], P. Lam [20], V. Ruhe [29], E. Taylor-Powell and E. Henert [35] extended and continued this research. However, no approach for evaluation of e-learning could reach a general acceptance until now. For a corresponding overview we refer to the report of Swedish National Agency for Higher Education [7]. This report contains an excellent survey on the European view on e-learning and quality assessment. Concise further overviews on quality research in e- learning are given by D. Ehlers [9], V. Ruhe and D. Zumbo [29]. For some additional or special aspects we refer to B. Khan [16], D. Kirkpatrick [13], D. Stufflebeam [33], P. Zaharias and A. Poulymenakou [41], E. Taylor-Powell and E. Henert [35]. Educators can use different evaluation models or methods. The main condition is that the evaluation process should be transparent and traceable for involved groups of the e-learning process.