1 / 9

EVALUATION THEORY AND MODEL

EVALUATION THEORY AND MODEL. Theory and model should have symbiotic relationship with practice Theory connotes a body of knowledge that organizes, categorizes, describes, predicts, explains, and otherwise aids in understanding and controlling a topic

thompsonmartin
Download Presentation

EVALUATION THEORY AND MODEL

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. EVALUATION THEORY AND MODEL • Theory and model should have symbiotic relationship with practice • Theory connotes a body of knowledge that organizes, categorizes, describes, predicts, explains, and otherwise aids in understanding and controlling a topic • Model is an extension of theory which includes the "how to" components

  2. There are more then fifty recognized program evaluation models are found in the literature • House (1978):System analysis, behavioral objectives, decision-making, goal-free, art criticism, accreditation, adversary, and transaction. • Guba and Lincoln (1989). 4 generations characterized by different methodologies: (a) measurement oriented, (b) description oriented, (c) judgment oriented, and (d) negotiation oriented,

  3. Stufflebeam and Shinkfield (1985) classified evaluation models into three broad types • Pseudo-evaluation • Quasi-evaluation • True evaluation

  4. In sum, Stufflebeam and Shinkfield (1985) and Guba and Lincoln (1989) advocate the use of formal, systematic, and comprehensive approaches of program evaluation.

  5. Evaluation Standards • The Joint Committee on Standards for Educational Evaluation (1981) developed four categories of standards • utility standards • feasibility standards • propriety standards • accuracy standards.

  6. Utility Standards • to ensure that an evaluation will serve the practical information needs of given audiences • the standards include audience identification, evaluator credibility, information scope and selection, valuational interpretation, report clarity, report dissemination, report timeliness, and evaluation impact.

  7. Feasibility Standards • to ensure that an evaluation will be realistic, prudent, diplomatic, and frugal • Considerations involved are practical procedures, political viability, and cost effectiveness.

  8. Propriety Standards • to ensure that an evaluation will be conducted legally, ethically, and with due regard for the welfare of those involved in the evaluation, as well as those affected by its results • these standards are formal obligation, conflict of interest, full and frank disclosure, the public's right to know, rights of human subjects, human interactions, balanced reporting, and fiscal responsibility.

  9. Accuracy Standards • to ensure that an evaluation will reveal and convey technically adequate information about the features of the object being studied that determine its worth or merit • these standards are object identification, context analysis, described purposes and procedures, defensible information sources, valid measurement, reliable measurement, systematic data control, analysis of quantitative information, analysis of qualitative information, justified conclusions, and objective reporting.

More Related