Evaluation approaches

Evaluation approaches

1. Method

   • Emphasis is placed in the proposed research designs and considerations in order for evaluation to be effective.
     • Tyler
       • Campbell
         • Suchman
           • Cook
             • Emphasises the importance of the context in which evaluation happens; recognizes the importance of stakeholders; wrote extensively on sampling to address the issues and alternatives to random selection in social contexts.
             • Boruch
               • Rossi
                 • Chen
                   • Weiss
                     • Cronbach
                       • Proposes "enlightment" as a means for assuring external validity; domains of evaluation (UTOS)
                   • compensating the limitations of experimental and quasi-experimental designs.
                 • reconciling internal and external validity.
                   • Theory-driven evaluation as a means for:
               • Randomized controlled experiment enthusiast; direct continuation of Campbell's experimentation influence. Advocated for systematic study of all programs.
           • Emphasises the need of considering administrator's needs during evaluation.
         • Proposes alternative research designs that take into consideration the difficulty for conducting pure experiments (randomization) in social contexts.
       • Regards evaluation as a means for hypothesis testing; believes that norm evaluation is not always useful and proposes reference evaluation as an alternative for certain contexts.

2. Valuing

   • Emphasis is placed no longer on the ways in which data regarding education should be gathered, but on how to draw conclusions from said data.
     • Scriven
       • Eisner
         • Wolf & Owens
           • Stake
             • MacDonald
               • House
                 • Guba & Lincoln
                 • Establishes "ethical fallacies" for evaluation (conflicts of interest). Evaluation should be "right", "fair" and "just".
               • Takes into account the voices and values of stakeholders (in this case, those being evaluated) regarding peformance levels
             • It is up tu evaluators to decide what performance levels should be.
           • Adversary evaluation; they propose that evaluation should not only focus on measuring what people know, but what they don't know.
         • States that not everything can be measured (particularly things that matter), but must be taken into account. Proposes a process wherein one compares (draws upon experience) observations (critical description) with certain criteria / frame of reference (expectation)
       • Proposes diagnostic, formative and summative assessment as different kinds of evaluation that act as links on the same chain or process.

3. Use

   • Emphasis is placed on the characteristics that evaluation should have in order to serve specific purposes.
     • Stufflebeam
       • Provus
         • Wholey
           • Patton
             • Alkin
               • Cousins
                 • Preskill
                   • King
                     • Owen
                       • Fetterman
                         • Proposes and seeks the internalization and institutionalization of self-evaluation processes and practices
                       • Sustains that the line between evaluation and consulting is blurring; seeks the co-creation of prescriptions between evaluator and organization (for organizational development)
                     • Interactive evaluation practice (IEP); procedure for fostering participation and obtaining use; emphasis on interpersonal relationships.
                   • Creating transformational learning within an organization through the evaluation process.
                 • Participatory evaluation as a possible solution to the utilization problem.
               • Placed on the branch as an extension of Patton, though rejecting the engagement of evaluators as valuing agents.
             • Utilization Focused Evaluation (UFE), implies the identification of users and their commitment, engagement, and decision-making.
           • Evaluation as an asset for management and policymaking. Introduces the idea of "sequential purchase of information".
         • Discrepancy Evaluation (continuous process designed to assist program administrators)
       • CIPP model; cyclical process for providing continual information that is useful for decision.making.