Abstract
In order to answer the question whether there are alternatives to the Tylerian (objectives) model of evaluation, a group of 14 men met for a conference at Churchill College, Cambridge, in December 1972. The aim of the conference was to explore “nontraditional modes of curriculum evaluation” and to set out guidelines for future developments in this field. Participants, who included Robert Stake from the United States, and David Hamilton, Malcolm Parlett, and Barry MacDonald from the United Kingdom, were chosen because of their known reservations about established evaluation practices or because they had suggested or experimented with new approaches.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Access this chapter
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
Preview
Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.
References
Cronbach, L.J. 1963. Course improvement through evaluation. Teachers College Record, 64 (8), 672–683.
Hamilton, D.F., and Delamont, S. 1974. Classroom research: A cautionary tale. Research in Education, 11 (May), 1–16.
Hamilton, D. et al. (eds.). 1977. Beyond the numbers game. London: MacMillan Education.
Hastings, J.T. 1966. Curriculum evaluation: The why of the outcomes. Journal of Educational Measurement, 3 (1), 27–32.
House, E.R. 1972. The conscience of educational evaluation. Teachers College Record, 72 (3), 405–414.
MacDonald, B. 1971. The evaluation of the Humanities Curriculum Project: A holistic approach. Theory into Practice, 10 (3), 163–167.
MacDonald, B. 1973. Humanities curriculum project. In Evaluation in curriculum devel opment: Twelve case studies (Schools Council Research Studies). Macmillan Education.
Parlett, M.R. 1972. Evaluating innovations in teaching. In H.J. Butcher and E. Rudd (eds.), Contemporary problems in research in higher education. New York: McGraw-Hill.
Parlett, M.R., and Hamilton, D. 1977. Evaluation in illumination: A new approach to the study of innovative programmes.” In D. Hamilton et al. (eds.), Beyond the numbers game. London: MacMillan Education.
Scriven, M. 1967. The methodology of evaluation. In R.W. Tyler, R.M. Gagne, and M. Scriven, Perspectives of curriculum evaluation (American Educational Research Association Monograph on Curriculum Evaluation no. 1 ). Chicago: Rand McNally.
Stake, R.E. 1974. Responsive evaluation. New Trends in Evaluation, 35 (January), 41–73 ( Institute of Education, University of Goteborg ).
Stufflebeam, D.L., and Guba, E. 1968. Evaluation: The process of stimulating, aiding and abetting insightful action. Address to the Second National Symposium for Professors of Educational Research, 21 November, at Boulder, Colorado. Evaluation Center, College of Education, Ohio State University.
Stufflebeam, D.L., et al. (Phi Delta Kappa National Study Committee on Evaluation). 1971. Educational evaluation and decision making. Itasca, I11.: Peacock.
Suchman, E. A. 1967. Evaluative research. New York: Russell Sage Foundation.
Tawney, David (ed). 1976. Curriculum evaluation today. London: MacMillan Education.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 1985 Kluwer-Nijhoff Publishing
About this chapter
Cite this chapter
Stufflebeam, D.L., Shinkfield, A.J. (1985). Illuminative Evaluation: The Holistic Approach. In: Systematic Evaluation. Evaluation in Education and Human Services, vol 8. Springer, Dordrecht. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-009-5656-8_9
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-009-5656-8_9
Publisher Name: Springer, Dordrecht
Print ISBN: 978-94-010-8995-1
Online ISBN: 978-94-009-5656-8
eBook Packages: Springer Book Archive