Evaluation Comment, The Journal of Educational Evaluation. Volume 3, Number 4.

Alert:

Limited Availability of Full-Text Documents. Click here for more information, or here to request the return of a PDF online.

Help

Tutorial

Help |

Tutorial

Help |

Tutorial

Help With This Page

Back to Search Results Help Permalink Share this record

More Info:
Help 0 items in My Clipboard | Add record to My Clipboard

Record Details - ED084200

Title: Evaluation Comment, The Journal of Educational Evaluation. Volume 3, Number 4.

Full-Text Availability Options:

ERIC Full Text (992K)

Related Items: Show Related Items

Click on any of the links below to perform a new search
Title:	Evaluation Comment, The Journal of Educational Evaluation. Volume 3, Number 4.
Authors:	N/A
Descriptors:	Course Evaluation; Curriculum Evaluation; Educational Objectives; Educational Theories; Evaluation; Evaluation Criteria; Evaluation Methods; Formative Evaluation; Newsletters; Opinions; Summative Evaluation; Theoretical Criticism
Source:	N/A
More Info: Help Peer Reviewed:
Publisher:	Center for the Study of Evaluation, 145 Moore Hall, University of California, Los Angeles, Los Angeles, California 90024 (Issued Quarterly; Free to professional educators)
Publication Date:	1972-12-00
Pages:	8
Pub Types:	N/A
Abstract:	Each quarterly issue of this journal, available free to professional educators, discusses topics in educational evaluation by presenting articles on evaluation theory, procedures, methodologies, or practices. The topic of the six articles in this newsletter is an examination of free evaluation (GFE). Michael Scriven discusses the role of goal free evaluation in formative and summative evaluation, especially in the evaluation of unintended effects, observes favorable considerations of this method, and presents methodological analogies of GFE in fields other than education. Daniel L. Stufflebeam criticizes Scriven's position and develops four questions he feels to be important in assessing the merit of GFE. Marvin C. Alkin writes that GFE does recognize goals, but that they are wider-context goals rather than specific objectives of a program. W. James Popham proposes that the GFE concept emphasizes results rather than rhetoric and provides a useful caution to educators who are overly enamored of instructional objectives. George P. Kneller argues with the logic of Scriven's argument and finds the issue one of taste rather than of theory. (KSM)
Abstractor:	N/A
Reference Count:	0

Note:	N/A
Identifiers:	Goal Free Evaluation
Record Type:	Non-Journal
Level:	1 - Available on microfiche
Institutions:	California Univ., Los Angeles. Center for the Study of Evaluation.
Sponsors:	N/A
ISBN:	N/A
ISSN:	N/A
Audiences:	N/A
Languages:	N/A
Education Level:	N/A

Back to Search Results