東華大學圖書館 |

Language: English

Help

回圖書館首頁

手機版館藏查詢

Back

Switch To: Labeled | MARC Mode | ISBD

Using responsive evaluation to evalu...

Durdella, Nathan Richard.

Linked to FindBook

Google Book

Amazon

博客來

Using responsive evaluation to evaluate community college instructional support programs.

Record Type:	Electronic resources : Monograph/item
Title/Author:	Using responsive evaluation to evaluate community college instructional support programs./
Author:	Durdella, Nathan Richard.
Description:	221 p.
Notes:	Source: Dissertation Abstracts International, Volume: 67-07, Section: A, page: 2486.
Contained By:	Dissertation Abstracts International67-07A.
Subject:	Education, Community College. -
Online resource:	http://pqdd.sinica.edu.tw/twdaoapp/servlet/advanced?query=3226005
ISBN:	9780542796333

Using responsive evaluation to evaluate community college instructional support programs.
Durdella, Nathan Richard.

Using responsive evaluation to evaluate community college instructional support programs. - 221 p.

Source: Dissertation Abstracts International, Volume: 67-07, Section: A, page: 2486.

Thesis (Ph.D.)--University of California, Los Angeles, 2006.

Program evaluation has changed very little over the last half century (Rossi & Freeman, 1993). In particular, community college program evaluation has been dominated by systematic, outcomes-based evaluation models. However, alternative approaches to systematic evaluation models have emerged over the last two decades (Shapiro, 1988). For community college instructional support programs, the drive to comprehensively document effective program delivery and student success is greater than ever before, with increasingly more rigid requirements from grantors and state agencies.

ISBN: 9780542796333Subjects--Topical Terms:

1018008
Education, Community College.

Using responsive evaluation to evaluate community college instructional support programs.
LDR:03456nmm 2200325 4500 001 1830004
005 20070329084934.5
008 130610s2006 eng d
020 $a 9780542796333
035 $a (UnM)AAI3226005
035 $a AAI3226005
040 $a UnM $c UnM
100 1 $a Durdella, Nathan Richard. $3 1918850
245 1 0 $a Using responsive evaluation to evaluate community college instructional support programs.
300 $a 221 p.
500 $a Source: Dissertation Abstracts International, Volume: 67-07, Section: A, page: 2486.
500 $a Adviser: Arthur M. Cohen.
502 $a Thesis (Ph.D.)--University of California, Los Angeles, 2006.
520 $a Program evaluation has changed very little over the last half century (Rossi & Freeman, 1993). In particular, community college program evaluation has been dominated by systematic, outcomes-based evaluation models. However, alternative approaches to systematic evaluation models have emerged over the last two decades (Shapiro, 1988). For community college instructional support programs, the drive to comprehensively document effective program delivery and student success is greater than ever before, with increasingly more rigid requirements from grantors and state agencies.
520 $a The purpose of this study was to evaluate Project HOPE and MESA to test the effectiveness of responsive evaluation theory as an evaluation model. Housed at Cerritos College, Project HOPE (Health Opportunities and Pipeline to Education) seeks to increase underrepresented students' matriculation into math, science, and health science programs. Like Project HOPE, Santa Ana College's MESA (Math, Engineering, and Science Achievement) is charged with increasing underrepresented student transfer in math, science, and engineering fields.
520 $a Two primary research questions were asked in the study: How does responsive evaluation theory work as a model to evaluate instructional support programs? How does responsive evaluation articulate with systematic evaluation models? Project HOPE and MESA were evaluated using responsive evaluation theory, which consists of inviting program staff and participants to share "concerns and issues that they may wish to introduce" through discussion and consultation (Guba & Lincoln, 1989, p. 42). Data sources included interviews with program staff, faculty, administrators, and participants and journaling by program participants.
520 $a Results indicate that when program staff addressed process-oriented issues like being undervalued or facing faculty resistance, in the case of Project HOPE, responsive evaluation theory worked well. In contrast, when program staff wanted to evaluate outcomes-oriented issues like program impact in the case of MESA, the model was not as effective. Further, results from both Project HOPE and MESA reveal that evaluations are politically charged and can reinforce personality and power conflicts. Finally, even if the conditions exist for the effective use of responsive evaluation and program staff use responsive evaluation to assess a program, there is no assurance that the evaluation results will respond to all stakeholders.
590 $a School code: 0031.
650 4 $a Education, Community College. $3 1018008
650 4 $a Education, Administration. $3 626645
650 4 $a Education, Higher. $3 543175
690 $a 0275
690 $a 0514
690 $a 0745
710 2 0 $a University of California, Los Angeles. $3 626622
773 0 $t Dissertation Abstracts International $g 67-07A.
790 1 0 $a Cohen, Arthur M., $e advisor
790 $a 0031
791 $a Ph.D.
792 $a 2006
856 4 0 $u http://pqdd.sinica.edu.tw/twdaoapp/servlet/advanced?query=3226005