Evaluation Thesaurus

Rating:
Summary: Infuriating but essential
Review: Actually the same could be said of the man himself. The evaluation thesaurus is difficult to define and place. It is not so much a thesaurus or dictionary as a series of mini (and not so mini) essays from one of evaluation's leading philosophers.

Michael Scriven has strong views about the place, role and requirements of evaluation, and he uses this book, amongst other things, to lecture on these subjects. The book starts with an extended introduction to (Scriven's view of) the place of evaluation within the academic world, much of which is focused on an over-extended geographical metaphor of academic disciplines. The point of this is an attempt to stake elevaluation's claim to independence as a "trans-discipline" servicing other disciplines in a similar fashion to statistics. (Despite this declaration of independence, Scriven himself is employed within a School of Education)

More useful are the entries themselves, which alert readers to issues such as the "Harvard fallacy" (the assumption that a programme must be good because of its outcomes, without considering any advantages that it might derive, for example from having exceptional student intakes) and the fact that evaluators cannot avoid making value judgements.

You do not have to agree with Scriven, but you need to address the issues he raises if you are serious about evaluation.

Rating:
Summary: Infuriating but essential
Review: Actually the same could be said of the man himself. The evaluation thesaurus is difficult to define and place. It is not so much a thesaurus or dictionary as a series of mini (and not so mini) essays from one of evaluation's leading philosophers.

Michael Scriven has strong views about the place, role and requirements of evaluation, and he uses this book, amongst other things, to lecture on these subjects. The book starts with an extended introduction to (Scriven's view of) the place of evaluation within the academic world, much of which is focused on an over-extended geographical metaphor of academic disciplines. The point of this is an attempt to stake elevaluation's claim to independence as a "trans-discipline" servicing other disciplines in a similar fashion to statistics. (Despite this declaration of independence, Scriven himself is employed within a School of Education)

More useful are the entries themselves, which alert readers to issues such as the "Harvard fallacy" (the assumption that a programme must be good because of its outcomes, without considering any advantages that it might derive, for example from having exceptional student intakes) and the fact that evaluators cannot avoid making value judgements.

You do not have to agree with Scriven, but you need to address the issues he raises if you are serious about evaluation.

Rating:
Summary: The best
Review: Addresses the question of subjectivity in evaluation, and recommends new approaches to overcome subjectivity.

Rating:
Summary: Hard-Won Lessons in Program Evalution : Summer 1993 (New Dir
Review: I would like to free downlond "Hard-Won Lessons in Program Evalution" : Summer 1993 (New Direction for Program Evlution No,58) by Michael scriven.
Thank you
ranee rammasak

Rating:
Summary: Hard-Won Lessons in Program Evalution : Summer 1993 (New Dir
Review: I would like to free downlond "Hard-Won Lessons in Program Evalution" : Summer 1993 (New Direction for Program Evlution No,58) by Michael scriven.
Thank you
ranee rammasak