Skip to main content

Deep Dark Deficits of the Adversary Evaluation Model

  • Chapter
Evaluation Models

Part of the book series: Evaluation in Education and Human Services ((EEHS,volume 6))

  • 887 Accesses

Abstract

As a spectator attraction, competition is hard to beat. Whether it’s a courtroom drama or a sporting event, we thrill as the contest totters in favor of one side, then the other. Perhaps it’s the uncertainty of the outcome that fascinates us. But whatever the appeal, it’s quite clear that ancient folks, like present-day ones, got genuinely excited by competitive events. The athletic contests of antiquity, whether Greek, Roman, or Mayan, were capable of drawing standing-room-only audiences.

Adapted from a paper presented as part of a symposium. “The Adversary Evaluation Model: A Second Look.” Annual Meeting of the American Educational Research Association, New York, April 4-8, 1977.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

eBook
USD 16.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD 16.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Notes

  1. Adapted from a paper presented as part of a symposium. “The Adversary Evaluation Model: A Second Look.” Annual Meeting of the American Educational Research Association, New York, April 4–8, 1977.

    Google Scholar 

  2. Northwest Regional Educational Laboratory. 3-on-2 Evaluation Report, 1976–77. vols. I, II, and III. Portland, Oregon: January 1977.

    Google Scholar 

  3. For example, see Wolf, Robert L “Trial by jury: A new evaluation method.” Phi Delta Kappan, no. 3,57 (November 1975), 185–87; Owens, Thomas. “Educational evaluation by adversary proceeding.” In: Ernest House (ed.), School evaluation: The politics and process. Berkeley, California: McCutchan, 1973; Levine, Murray. “Scientific method and the adversary model.” American Psychologist, September 1974, 666-77; or Kourilsky, Marilyn. “An adversary model for educational evaluation.” Evaluation Comment, no. 2, 4 (1974).

    Google Scholar 

  4. Lipson, Leon. “Technical issues and adversary process.” Letter to the editor, Science, 194 (1976), 890.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  5. Lipson, 1976, p. 890.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Authors

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 1983 Kluwer-Nijhoff Publishing

About this chapter

Cite this chapter

Popham, W.J., Carlson, D. (1983). Deep Dark Deficits of the Adversary Evaluation Model. In: Evaluation Models. Evaluation in Education and Human Services, vol 6. Springer, Dordrecht. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-009-6669-7_12

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-009-6669-7_12

  • Publisher Name: Springer, Dordrecht

  • Print ISBN: 978-94-009-6671-0

  • Online ISBN: 978-94-009-6669-7

  • eBook Packages: Springer Book Archive

Publish with us

Policies and ethics