Against the Whim: State Legislatures' Use of Program Evaluation (R. Jonas). Legislative Utilization of Evaluations (D. Bezruki, et al.). Lessons Learned from Evaluating the Feasibility of Privatizing Government Services (R. Thomas, et al.). Access to Information: The Legislative Advantage (R. Jonas). The Use of Systems Modeling in Legislative Program Evaluation (P. McIntire & A. Glaze). Convergent Policy Analysis (D. Saunders-Newton, et al.). How Information Technology Changes Delivery of Evaluation: The Florida Government Accountability Report (G. Wade). The Nature of Knowledge and Language in the Legislative Arena (N. Zajano & S. Lochtefeld). The Impact of Term Limits on Legislative Program Evaluation (R. Mohan & M. Stutzman).
AbstractThis chapter describes a comprehensive model for the evaluation of science education programs that was developed from existing models. Observations are also provided regarding the role of evaluation models in the reform of science education.
Presented here is the version of the American Evaluation Association Guiding Principles for Evaluators that was approved and copyrighted by the AEA board of directors and subsequently adopted by vote of the AEA membership.
AbstractRadical changes in the ways science is presented and taught in classrooms are transforming how the science curriculum must be evaluated. These new evaluation strategies, responsive to a program's needs, may require that both internal and external evaluators assume roles more consistent with curriculum developers than curriculum judges.
The author presents an agenda of issues related to the future development of ethics in evaluation and suggests initial steps in addressing these issues, emphasizing the role of evaluators, clients, and organizations supporting evaluation.
AbstractJudging the American Evaluation Association principles to be weak statements, difficult to apply in concrete circumstances, and potentially misleading through ambiguity, the author argues for more concern with doing good research rather than getting everyone's approval.
AbstractThis chapter addresses the concerns that full‐time evaluators in private practice have about the uses and value of the American Evaluation Association Guiding Principles.
AbstractThe American Evaluation Association Guiding Principles and the Joint Committee Program Evaluation Standards have stated intentions that sound alike, but are they? This analysis leads to the conclusion that they are different in important ways.
AbstractDrawing on literature from the field of ethics in research and on multicultural, feminist ethical principles, the author explores methodological implications for evaluation practice.
AbstractA response to the American Evaluation Association Guiding Principles from the perspective of evaluators working in settings outside the United States is presented here.
AbstractThe American Evaluation Association's succinct Guiding Principles for Evaluators quietly establish new boundaries for addressing ethical problems of the profession.
AbstractAs useful as they are, the American Evaluation Association Guiding Principles fail to appreciate the precarious position of the evaluator who speaks truth to power, and their near total focus on elaborating further responsibilities for the evaluator may increase the evaluator's vulnerability to partisan attack.
AbstractIf science education reforms represent a journey toward a vision, then external evaluators play an important, collaborative role in keeping the journey on track.
AbstractThis chapter reviews the qualities of existing assessments and their role in the past in evaluating students, programs, and reform efforts, and discusses the shifts in that role with the emergence of new forms of assessment.
AbstractComparing the American Evaluation Association Guiding Principles with other sets of evaluation standards, this chapter addresses reactions to the principles and concludes with recommendations for their use.
This chapter presents some history relevant to the American Evaluation Association Guiding Principles for Evaluators, the processes used to create them, and some of the issues considered and controversies examined in the process.
Cluster evaluation is a collaborative method for evaluating the impact of a set of projects with similar goals and objectives. As the evaluation is constructed out of the shared visions, values, and directions of the cluster of projects, new roles and relationships for evaluators emerge.
Demand for program evaluation has led many government agencies to develop in‐house evaluation units, and a web of possible conflicts of interest presents internal evaluators with decisions about ethical actions not encountered by an independent evaluator.
The author views the main purpose of evaluation training programs as preparing practitioners. She suggests that evaluation training programs could consider the model provided by professional schools.
