Program Evaluation. AAHE-ERIC/Higher Education Research Report No. 2, 1980.

Autor/in	Feasley, Charles E.
Institution	George Washington Univ., Washington, DC. ERIC Clearinghouse on Higher Education.; American Association for Higher Education, Washington, DC.
Titel	Program Evaluation. AAHE-ERIC/Higher Education Research Report No. 2, 1980.
Quelle	(1980), (68 Seiten) PDF als Volltext kostenfreie Datei Verfügbarkeit
Reihe	ERIC Publications
Sprache	englisch
Dokumenttyp	gedruckt; online; Monographie
Schlagwörter	Accountability; Administrative Policy; Budgeting; Case Studies; College Administration; Delivery Systems; Departments; Educational Policy; Evaluation Criteria; Evaluation Methods; Higher Education; Models; Multicampus Colleges; Objectives; Program Evaluation; Research; Self Evaluation (Groups); State Boards of Education; State Legislation; Statewide Planning; Florida + Suchen Sie Ihr Suchwort? Verantwortung; Case study; Fallstudie; Case Study; College administrators; Hochschulverwaltung; Auslieferung; Department; Abteilung; Politics of education; Bildungspolitik; Hochschulbildung; Hochschulsystem; Hochschulwesen; Analogiemodell; Goal definition; Zielsetzung; Programme evaluation; Programmevaluation; Forschung; Self evaluation; Group; Groups; Selbstevaluation; Gruppe (Soz); Landesrecht; Planwirtschaft
Abstract	The major distinctions between evaluation and research are examined, the chief differences being the intent and type of criteria against which judgments are made. Conceptualization of the evaluation process in higher education is discussed on two levels. A collection of nine similes for understanding evaluation is examined in terms of major activities, advantages, and disadvantages: evaluation as: (1) measurement; (2) expert judgment of worth; (3) assessment between performance and objectives; (4) the basis for decisions; (5) a goal-free process; (6) conflict resolution; (7) complacency reduction; (8) a change agent; and (9) ritual. Consideration is given to three types of formal evaluation models: the experimental, ecological, and eclectic approaches. The program evaluation process considered most restricting, that built into the budget process, is examined in detail. An investigation is also made of the purpose and practice of evaluation according to organizational level: state legislative audit, review by a state coordinating board, multicampus scrutiny, campus program evaluation, accrediting review, and departmental study. Factors that affect usefulness of program evaluation reports--such as timing, comparisons to similar units, and format--are discussed. The Florida State University system is described. Speculation about the future of the practice is made by examining present practices in diverse policy areas: nontraditional delivery systems, government revenue reduction schemes (taxpayer advocacy), management, regulation of professions, and consumer protection. (MSE)
Anmerkungen	Publications Department, American Association for Higher Education, Suite 780, One Dupont Circle, Washington, DC 20036 ($4.00)
Erfasst von	ERIC (Education Resources Information Center), Washington, DC