Diamond (the Association for Assessment in Counseling)Joy Frechtling (the American Educational Research Association)Philli H f d ( h A i i f S i i d C i l D l )Phillip Hosford (the Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development)Thomas Houlihan & Henry Johnson (the American Association of school Administrators)Edgar A Kelley & W Eugene Werner (the National Association of SecondaryEdgar A. Filling (The American Evaluation Association)Esther E. SandersCOMMITTEE MEMBERSRalph Alexander & Robert Baker (The American Psychological Association)p ( y g )Marsha Berger & Beth Bader (the American Federation of Teachers)Rolf Blank (the Council of Chief State School Officers)Oliver W. (2nd edition)The Joint Committee on Standards for Educational Evaluation for the 1994 Editionfor the 1994 EditionChair: James R. Sanders, Chair)The Program Evaluation Standards: How to Assess Evaluations of Educational Programs (2nd edition)Evaluations of Educational Programs. 2nd edition.The Joint Committee on Standards for Educational EvaluationThe Joint Committee on Standards for Educational Evaluation(James R.
...
Significant i i fi di d l i h ld binterim findings and evaluation reports should be disseminated to intended users, so that they can be used in a timely fashionused in a timely fashion.U7 Evaluation Impact. Evaluation reports should clearly describe the program being evaluated, including its contexts, and the purposes, procedures, and findings of evaluation, so that essential information is provided and easilythat essential information is provided and easily understood.U6 Report Timeliness and Dissemination. The perspectives, procedures, and rationale used to interpret the findings should be carefully described so that the bases for value judgmentsfully described, so that the bases for value judgments are clear.U5 Report Clarity. Information collectedShould be broadly selected to address pertinent questions about the program and be responsive to thequestions about the program and be responsive to the needs and interests of clients and other specified stakeholders.U4 Values Identification.
Obligations of the formal parties to an evaluation (what is to be done how by whom when)an evaluation (what is to be done, how, by whom, when) should be agreed to in writing, so that these parties are obligated to adhere to all conditions of the agreement or g gformally to renegotiated. Evaluation should be designed to assist organizations to address and effectively serve the g yneeds of the full range of targeted participants.P2 Formal Agreement. The Evaluation should be efficient, and produce information of sufficient value so thatand produce information of sufficient value, so that the resources expended can be justified.PROPRIETY STANDARDSPROPRIETY STANDARDSSERVICE Orientation (P1)SERVICE Orientation (P1)Formal Agreement (P2)Ri ht f H S bj t (P3)Rights of Human Subjects (P3)Human Interactions (P4)Complete and Fair Assessment (P5)Disclosure of Findings (P6)g ( )Conflict of Interest (P7)Fiscal Responsibility (P8)Fiscal Responsibility (P8)The propriety standards are intended to ensure that an evaluation will be conducted legally ethically andan evaluation will be conducted legally, ethically, and with due regard for the welfare of those involved in the evaluation, as well as those affected by its results.yP1 Service Orientation. The evaluation should be planned d d d h f h d ffand conducted with anticipation of the differentPositions of various intertest groups, so that their cooperation may be obtained, and so that possiblecooperation may be obtained, and so that possible ttempts by any of these groups to curtail evluation operations or to bias or misapply the results can be averted or counteractedF3 Cost Effectiveness. The evaluation procedures shouldBe practical, to keep disruption to a minimum whilebe practical, to keep disruption to a minimum while needed information is obtained.F2 Political Viability. 1994)FEASIBILITY StandardsF1 Practical Procedures.
The formal parties to an evaluationShould ensure that the full set of evaluation findings alongshould ensure that the full set of evaluation findings along with pertinent limitations are made accessible to the persons affected by the evaluation, and any others with expressed legal rights to receive the results.P7 Conflict of Interest. The evaluation should be complete and fair in its examination and recording of strengths and weaknesses of the program being evaluated, so that strengths can beprogram being evaluated, so that strengths can be built upon and problem areas addressed.PROPRIETY standards (3)P6 Disclosure of Findings. Evaluation should respect human dignity and worth in their interactions with other persons associated with a n evaluation, so thatother persons associated with a n evaluation, so that participants are not threatened or harmed.P5 Complete and Fair Assessment. Evaluation should be 3 g ts o u a Subjects a uat o s ou d bedesigned and conducted to respect and protect the rights and welfare of human subjects.P4 H I i E l i h ldP4 Human Interactions.
The evaluators allocation and expenditure of resources should reflect sound accountability procedures and otherwise be prudent and ethically responsible so that expenditures are accountedethically responsible, so that expenditures are accounted for and appropriate.
0 kommentar(er)
