Last week I read four core chapters from Fitzpatrick, Sanders, and Worthen’s text Program Evaluation that dealt with major theoretical models and approaches to evaluation, including Objectives-Oriented (71 – 87), Management-Oriented (88 – 99), Consumer-Oriented (100 – 111), and Expertise-Oriented (112 – 128). Each of these chapters outlined major thinkers and practitioners who shaped the particular approaches and models, each highlighted the features of the particular model(s) that set it apart from other approaches, or made it uniquely suited for particular situations, and each listed perceived strengths and weaknesses of the approach.
The objectives-oriented approach was the most accessible to me, since it is based on logic and employs what I think of as common practices evident in even daily evaluative activities. To summarize from the chapter, Tyler designed this approach to judge the effectiveness or value of programs, but recognized that programs’ goals and objectives must first be evaluated. An emphasis on emprical evaluation seems evident in objectives-oriented approaches. There are 5 stages proposed by Provus: 1) definition, 2) installation, 3) process, 4) product, 5) cost-benefit analysis. Objectives-oriented approaches seem to have encouraged counter-approaches such as goal-free evaluations which attempt to identify and gauge unanticipated outcomes or effects of programs unanticipated by objectives-oriented evaluations.
The management-oriented approaches are aimed at providing decision-makers with information that illuminates the problem and provides new or alternate ways forward. Stufflebeam’s CIPP model addresses four kinds of decisions: Context (planning), input (resources/structuring), process (implementation), and product (summative/recycling). Stufflebeam systematically outlined evaluation design steps, and the text codifies how these four types of evaluation may be applied and categorized as formative or summative. The chapter includes Alkin’s UCLA model, which maps fairly well onto CIPP with some minor modification.
The consumer-oriented approaches, as the label suggests, deals primarily with programs aimed at satisfying end-user needs, and were born of the purported need to evaluate educational products. This approach seems also squarely aimed at commercial product or service providers as well. Scriven is one of several major contributors to such approaches and listed 13 neccessita–criteria which a given product must meet–as well as the Key Evaluation Checklist, which provides consumers with defensible results.
Expertise-oriented approaches is suggested to be the oldest and most widely used approach, and may be formal or informal. Examples include ad hoc panel reviews, blue-ribbon panels, funding agency reviews, etc. The reliance on professional judgment indicates a faith in a kind of connoisseurship, referred to as connoisseurship-criticism. Such evaluations are common in institutional and program accreditation.
All of the approaches included in these chapters are useful as background information, though with respect to the anticipated evaluation project targeting Timez Attack I expect that consumer-oriented approaches will be emphasized, though aspects of expertise-oriented evaluation and management-oriented evaluation may come into play. The expertise-orientation may be more important to the client, as they hope to have this evaluation impress potential clients with the weight of our class’s collective educational background. I’m inclined to focus on consumer-oriented and objectives-oriented evaluation in this project, as I care less about the success of the product as I do in judging it’s appropriateness and effectiveness. These are not, of course, mutually exclusive.
Summary of “Program Evaluation” chs 4 – 7
Last week I read four core chapters from Fitzpatrick, Sanders, and Worthen’s text Program Evaluation that dealt with major theoretical models and approaches to evaluation, including Objectives-Oriented (71 – 87), Management-Oriented (88 – 99), Consumer-Oriented (100 – 111), and Expertise-Oriented (112 – 128). Each of these chapters outlined major thinkers and practitioners who shaped the particular approaches and models, each highlighted the features of the particular model(s) that set it apart from other approaches, or made it uniquely suited for particular situations, and each listed perceived strengths and weaknesses of the approach.
The objectives-oriented approach was the most accessible to me, since it is based on logic and employs what I think of as common practices evident in even daily evaluative activities. To summarize from the chapter, Tyler designed this approach to judge the effectiveness or value of programs, but recognized that programs’ goals and objectives must first be evaluated. An emphasis on emprical evaluation seems evident in objectives-oriented approaches. There are 5 stages proposed by Provus: 1) definition, 2) installation, 3) process, 4) product, 5) cost-benefit analysis. Objectives-oriented approaches seem to have encouraged counter-approaches such as goal-free evaluations which attempt to identify and gauge unanticipated outcomes or effects of programs unanticipated by objectives-oriented evaluations.
The management-oriented approaches are aimed at providing decision-makers with information that illuminates the problem and provides new or alternate ways forward. Stufflebeam’s CIPP model addresses four kinds of decisions: Context (planning), input (resources/structuring), process (implementation), and product (summative/recycling). Stufflebeam systematically outlined evaluation design steps, and the text codifies how these four types of evaluation may be applied and categorized as formative or summative. The chapter includes Alkin’s UCLA model, which maps fairly well onto CIPP with some minor modification.
The consumer-oriented approaches, as the label suggests, deals primarily with programs aimed at satisfying end-user needs, and were born of the purported need to evaluate educational products. This approach seems also squarely aimed at commercial product or service providers as well. Scriven is one of several major contributors to such approaches and listed 13 neccessita–criteria which a given product must meet–as well as the Key Evaluation Checklist, which provides consumers with defensible results.
Expertise-oriented approaches is suggested to be the oldest and most widely used approach, and may be formal or informal. Examples include ad hoc panel reviews, blue-ribbon panels, funding agency reviews, etc. The reliance on professional judgment indicates a faith in a kind of connoisseurship, referred to as connoisseurship-criticism. Such evaluations are common in institutional and program accreditation.
All of the approaches included in these chapters are useful as background information, though with respect to the anticipated evaluation project targeting Timez Attack I expect that consumer-oriented approaches will be emphasized, though aspects of expertise-oriented evaluation and management-oriented evaluation may come into play. The expertise-orientation may be more important to the client, as they hope to have this evaluation impress potential clients with the weight of our class’s collective educational background. I’m inclined to focus on consumer-oriented and objectives-oriented evaluation in this project, as I care less about the success of the product as I do in judging it’s appropriateness and effectiveness. These are not, of course, mutually exclusive.