Course Improvement through Evaluation

Abstract

The national interest in improving education has generated several highly important projects attempting to improve curricula, particularly at the secondary-school level. In conferences of directors of course content improvement programs sponsored by the National Science Foundation, questions about evaluation are frequently raised.¹ Those who inquire about evaluation have various motives, ranging from sheer scientific curiosity about classroom events to a desire to assure a sponsor that money has been well spent. While the curriculum developers sincerely wish to use the skills of evaluation specialists, I am not certain that they have a clear picture of what evaluation can do and should try to do. And, on the other hand, I am becoming convinced that some techniques and habits of thought of the evaluation specialist are ill-suited to current curriculum studies. To serve these studies, what philosophy and methods of evaluation are required? And, particularly, how must we depart from the familiar doctrines and rituals of the testing game?