EVAL 6000: Foundations of Evaluation Dr. Chris L. S. Coryn & Carl D. Westine October 7, 2010.

Slides:



Advertisements
Similar presentations
The Assumptions of a Culture-centered Perspective:
Advertisements

Performance Assessment
Analyzing Student Work
EVAL 6000: Foundations of Evaluation Dr. Chris L. S. Coryn Kristin A. Hobson Fall 2012.
TASK: The comparison between basic and applied research.
Terri Wyrosdick Larry Lipscomb Kermelle Hensley.  Program evaluation is research designed to assess the implementation and effects of a program.  Its.
EVAL 6000: Foundations of Evaluation Dr. Chris L. S. Coryn Kristin A. Hobson Fall 2011.
EVAL 6000: Foundations of Evaluation Dr. Chris L. S. Coryn & Carl D. Westine October 14, 2010.
Designing Scoring Rubrics. What is a Rubric? Guidelines by which a product is judged Guidelines by which a product is judged Explain the standards for.
Bell's Theory of Art Bell’s requirements for constructing a Theory of Art The ability to think clearly. The possession of an artistic sensibility. (the.
EVAL 6000: Foundations of Evaluation Dr. Chris L. S. Coryn Kristin A. Hobson Fall 2012.
Modes of Enquiry A Comparison of the Qualitative and Quantitative Approaches.
EVAL 6000: Foundations of Evaluation Dr. Chris L. S. Coryn Kristin A. Hobson Fall 2011.
EVAL 6000: Foundations of Evaluation Dr. Chris L. S. Coryn Nick Saxton Fall 2014.
EVAL 6000: Foundations of Evaluation Dr. Chris L. S. Coryn Kristin A. Hobson Fall 2012.
Research Philosophy Lecture 11th.
Public Budget As Decision- Making Process  Decision - Making Models:  Incremental Change Model  Satisfying Model  Ideal Rational Model  Stages of.
Public Budget As Decision-Making Process
EVAL 6000: Foundations of Evaluation Dr. Chris L. S. Coryn Kristin A. Hobson Fall 2011.
EVAL 6000: Foundations of Evaluation Dr. Chris L. S. Coryn Kristin A. Hobson Fall 2011.
EVAL 6000: Foundations of Evaluation Dr. Chris L. S. Coryn Kristin A. Hobson Fall 2011.
EVAL 6000: Foundations of Evaluation Dr. Chris L. S. Coryn Kristin A. Hobson Fall 2011.
Postmodern Approaches ©2013 Brooks/Cole Cengage Learning.
Chapter 4 Understanding research philosophies and approaches
ISYS 3015 Research Methods ISYS3015 Analytical Methods for Information systems professionals Week 2 Lecture 1: The Research Process.
PPA 502 – Program Evaluation
Amirkabir University of Technology, Computer Engineering Faculty, Intelligent Systems Laboratory,Requirements Engineering Course, Dr. Abdollahzadeh 1 Goal.
PPA 503 – The Public Policy Making Process
Teaching, Learning, and Assessment Learning Outcomes Are formulated by the academic staff, preferably involving student representatives in the.
The Software Product Life Cycle. Views of the Software Product Life Cycle  Management  Software engineering  Engineering design  Architectural design.
EVAL 6000: Foundations of Evaluation Dr. Chris L. S. Coryn & Carl D. Westine September 23, 2010.
Educational Research: Action Research in Schools
Qualitative Research Methods
EVAL 6000: Foundations of Evaluation Dr. Chris L. S. Coryn Nick Saxton Fall 2014.
Participant-Oriented Evaluation Prepared by: Daniel Wagner Jahmih Aglahmie Kathleen Samulski Joshua Rychlicki.
Soo Young Rieh School of Information University of Michigan Information Ethics Roundtable Misinformation and Disinformation April 3-4, 2009 University.
Several Evaluations Theories and Methods Reference: Foundation of Program Evaluation by Sadish, Cook, and Leviton (1991)
Multimodality and Activity Theory Methodological issues in their combination Dr. Mohammed Alhuthali Taif University, Saudi Arabia
Writing a Research Proposal
RSBM Business School Research in the real world: the users dilemma Dr Gill Green.
PRIMARY/SECONDARY SOURCE HISTORY LABS SOCIAL STUDIES CRITICAL THINKING LABS.
Working with Qualitative Data Christine Maidl Pribbenow Wisconsin Center for Education Research
EVAL 6000: Foundations of Evaluation Dr. Chris L. S. Coryn & Carl D. Westine September 9, 2010.
Research !!.  Philosophy The foundation of human knowledge A search for a general understanding of values and reality by chiefly speculative rather thanobservational.
Program Evaluation EDL 832 Jeffrey Oescher, Instructor 6 June 2013.
Developing Critical Thinking in Students
Prepared by Dr. Hazem Abu-Orf Urban Planning of Arabic Cities Urban Planning, its theory & Development.
1 Duschl, R & Osborne, J ”Supporting and Promoting Argumentation Discourse in Science Education” in Studies in Science Education, 38, Ingeborg.
CHAPTER 14 Action-Oriented Research and Action Research.
Prepared by Prof.Dr Nefissa A. kader Vice Dean of education and Student Affairs Faculty of Nursing – Cairo university.
EVAL 6000: Foundations of Evaluation Dr. Chris L. S. Coryn Nick Saxton Fall 2014.
Inquiry-based Learning Linking Teaching with Learning.
CT 854: Assessment and Evaluation in Science & Mathematics
Randy Y. Hirokawa and Abran J. Salazar Task-Group Communication and Decision-Making Performance.
Qualitative Research January 19, Selecting A Topic Trying to be original while balancing need to be realistic—so you can master a reasonable amount.
EVAL 6000: Foundations of Evaluation Dr. Chris L. S. Coryn Nick Saxton Fall 2014.
Paper III Qualitative research methodology. Objective 1.3 To what extent can findings be generalized from qualitative studies.
Chapter 8: Participant-Oriented Evaluation Approaches
MA3C0207 丁筱雯.  Qualitative research is uniquely suited to discovery and exploration.  A research proposal consists of two sections: WHAT the researcher.
Developing a Framework In Support of a Community of Practice in ABI Jason Newberry, Research Director Tanya Darisi, Senior Researcher
Puzzling about what Evaluation is and might be Thomas D. Cook Stockholm, October, 2015.
Research for Nurses: Methods and Interpretation Chapter 1 What is research? What is nursing research? What are the goals of Nursing research?
Winter 2011SEG Chapter 11 Chapter 1 (Part 1) Review from previous courses Subject 1: The Software Development Process.
Dimensionality of Evaluation Contexts for Ontologies Hans Polzer Chair Emeritus, Net Centric Attributes Functional Team 24 January 2013.
Postmodern Approaches ©2013 Brooks/Cole Cengage Learning.
What is Research?. Intro.  Research- “Any honest attempt to study a problem systematically or to add to man’s knowledge of a problem may be regarded.
Investigate Plan Design Create Evaluate (Test it to objective evaluation at each stage of the design cycle) state – describe - explain the problem some.
English Extension 1 Preliminary Course. A Word From BOS  2 English (Extension) 12.1 Structure  The Preliminary English (Extension) course consists of.
Classification of Research
Chapter 13 Post Modern Approaches.
Presentation transcript:

EVAL 6000: Foundations of Evaluation Dr. Chris L. S. Coryn & Carl D. Westine October 7, 2010

Stage 2 Theories Stage 2 theories can be characterized as a period of “enlightenment” in the evolution of evaluation theory –Theorists argued that rigorous causal knowledge was not always useful for improving programs –Theorists emphasized different users of evaluation and their roles in “valuing” social programs –Theorists focused on the complex nature of social programs –Despite a number of commonalities, the three major theorists of this period differed in more and less significant ways

Stage 2 Theories Criterion 1: Theory of Social Programming –Stage 1 theorists operated on “naive” assumptions (i.e., that radical changes would be made as a result of evaluation –Stage 2 theories and theorists recognized the “political” aspects of evaluation and directed efforts toward “incremental change” (Weiss, in her later work, reverted to more radical ideologies) –Related to theories of use, Stage 2 theories of social programming sought to determine “who” could make changes The resulting assumptions were complex and produced no definitive solutions

Stage 2 Theories Criterion 2: Theory of Use –In Stage 2, theories of use became the dominant concern of theories and theorists Who would use? For what? –These concerns were reflected in a view of wider types of uses than those anticipated by Scriven and Campbell –They also reflected concerted efforts to identify users Ultimately, this became Patton’s ideological perspective (i.e., intended users for specific uses) Even so, users and uses differed between the major theorists of the time

Stage 2 Theories Criterion 3: Theory of Knowledge Construction –Priority shifted from “truth” to both “truthful and useful” –During this period theories and theorists took a “pragmatic” stance Willingness to sacrifice valid knowledge for useful knowledge –This pragmatic position was reflected in various ways, but predominately as “methodological pluralism” (with the exception of Stake) –This position also included a more thorough understanding of social programs “in context” Central focus was no longer effects, but included a variety of more “discovery” related concerns

Stage 2 Theories Criterion 4: Theory of Valuing –Theorists at this stage predominately advocated descriptive values –This view reflected the notion of “pluralistic” sources of values as valuing takes place in a political context of social programs with multiple stakeholders and constituents –Here, the three dominant theorists of the period prefer to let intended users determine value Valuing is not a task for evaluators given the complexities involved in valuing as well as the complexities involved in decisions about social programs

Stage 2 Theories Criterion 5: Theory of Practice –Although methodological pluralism was prominant during this period, Wholey and Stake assigned central methods to practice –Weiss never claimed that particular methods were to be preferred over other Her choice of method was one related to types of knowledge to be generated, intended users of that knowledge, and the questions to be answered through evaluation In her later work, she (like Cronbach) became more concerned with issues about generalization and explaining how programs work

Carol Weiss Weiss gave priority to state and federal decision makers in her thoery of evaluation Originally premised on “truth” (similar to Stage 1 theories) she later developed a contingency-based theory –Who? –For what purpose? Later in her career she became more concerned with “enlightenment”

Joseph Wholey Wholey was predominately concerned with management issues and decisions reflecting their concenrs Like Weiss, Wholey began under the auspises of “truth” seeking His later work emphasized “instrumental use” of evaluation—immediate decisions and actions Overall, his central concern was producing actionaable information aimed at those who are in positions to take decisions Like Weiss, his choice of method was quantitative in orientation

Robert Stake Stake, unlike prior (and later) theorists, developed his theory on the premise of “discovery” By discovery, Stake implied that the only realities (i.e., truth) are those that are constructed He also claimed that valuing is socially constructed –The value of a program is best determined by those who experience it –Emphasis was on local stakeholders values –Premised on the assumption that most decision making takes place locally, and that values of local constituents often compete with others

Contrasting Stage 1 and 2 Work with the person sitting to your right, select one of the criteria for evaluation theory, and critically compare and contrast (using example if possible) Stage 1 and Stage 2 theorists’ position on the selected criterion 1.Theories of Social Programming 2.Theories of Use 3.Theories of Knowledge Construction 4.Theories of Valuing 5.Theories of Practice

Further Discussion of the Readings What specific questions were raised as you read the assigned readings for this week (or past weeks)? Is there something specific that you didn’t understand? What problems remain unresolved regarding Stage 2 theories? What other issues emerged from the readings that need further exploration?

Encyclopedia Entries for this Week Conceptual use Context Countenance model of evaluation Cronbach, Lee J. Developmental evaluation Evaluability assessment Evaluation use Goal Implementation Intended users Intended uses Objectives Performance indicator Process use Responsive evaluation Rossi, Peter H. Setting Stake, Robert E. Thick description Utilization of evaluation Weiss, Carol H. Wholey, Joseph S.