Abstract
According to the Joint Committee on Standards for Educational Evaluation (2011), program evaluation as a method of research is a means of systematically evaluating an object or educational program. As straightforward and succinct as that definition is, you will find that evaluation research borrows heavily from other methods of research. Evaluation research has at its root the assumption that the value, quality, and effectiveness of an educational program can be appraised through a variety of data sources. As educators, we find ourselves making evaluations daily, and in a variety of contexts. The evaluations we make according to Fitzpatrick, Sanders, and Worthen (2011) fall along a continuum between formal evaluation and informal evaluation.
Keywords
Program Evaluation Evaluation Report Evaluation Research Summative Evaluation School BoardPreview
Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.
References
- American Educational Research Association. (2011). Codeof ethics of the American Educational Research Association. Retrieved from http://www.aera.net/uploadedFiles/About_AERA/Ethical_Standards/CodeOfEthics%281%29.pdf.Google Scholar
- Fitzpatrick, J. L., Sanders, J. R., & Worthen, B. R. (2011). Program evaluation: Alternative approaches and practical guidelines. Upper Saddle River, NJ: Pearson Education.Google Scholar
- Greene, J. C. (2005). Mixed methods. In S. Mathison (Ed.), Encyclopedia of evaluation (pp. 397–298). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.Google Scholar
- Joint Committee on Standards for Educational Evaluation. (2011). The program evaluation standards. Newbury Park, CA: Sage.Google Scholar
- McNeil, K., Newman, I., & Steinhauser, J. (2005). How to be involved in program evaluation. Lanham, MD: Scarecrow Education.Google Scholar
- Sanders, J. R. (2000). Evaluating school programs: An educator’s guide. Thousand Oaks, CA: Corwin Press.Google Scholar
- Scriven, M. (1991). Beyond formative and summative evaluation. In G. W. McLaughlin & D. C. Phillips (Eds.), Evaluation and education: A quarter century (pp. 19–64). Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar