:::

詳目顯示

回上一頁
題名:析論Stake之回應式教育方案評鑑取向
書刊名:國立臺北教育大學學報. 教育類
作者:黃嘉雄 引用關係
作者(外文):Huang, Chia-hsiung
出版日期:2006
卷期:19:2
頁次:頁1-26
主題關鍵詞:方案評鑑教育評鑑課程評鑑回應式評鑑取向史鐵克Program evaluationEducational evaluationCurriculum evaluationResponsive evaluation approachRobert E. Stake
原始連結:連回原系統網址new window
相關次數:
  • 被引用次數被引用次數:期刊(4) 博士論文(3) 專書(0) 專書論文(0)
  • 排除自我引用排除自我引用:4
  • 共同引用共同引用:68
  • 點閱點閱:108
過去數十年來,標準本位或預定式評鑑取向支配了台灣教育評鑑界。然而,另一方面,自1980 年代以來,一些學者則強烈主張所謂回應式或顧客中心的評鑑取向。他們批評預定式評鑑之發現,對委託評鑑之顧客和評鑑之相關利害關係人難以發揮效用及服務功能,乃主張評鑑應該要更回應於委託者和利害關係人所關注之議題而非預定的評鑑藍圖,更導向於方案的活動而非意圖,更反映方案內部和週遭利害關係者之不同價值觀而非固定的價值判斷標準。換言之,回應式評鑑觀念之產生,是希望增進評鑑發現對方案內部和週遭相關人士之效用性與服務功能。台灣之教育評鑑若欲增進評鑑對委託者和利害關係人士之效用性,發揮其服務功能,則值得對回應式評鑑取向給予更多關注和運用。 基於此,本文乃以Robert E. Stake 的論著為對象,分析探討回應式評鑑取向之源起和發展、核心觀念和實施方法,以及其理論命題;此外,亦對回應式評鑑之核心觀念與命題予以評論,並據此引申其對國內課程評鑑的一些提議。
For several decades, the standard-based or preordinate evaluation approach has assumed a dominant position in educational evaluation in Taiwan. However, on the other hand, some evaluation scholars have been strongly recommended an alternative evaluation approach, named responsive or client-centered evaluation, since 1980’s. Inspired by the criticism of uselessness in the finding of the preordinate evaluation for the clients and the stakeholders of the evaluation, they argued that evaluation should be more responsive to the concerning issues of the clients and stakeholders rather than to a preordinate evaluation plan, more oriented to the program activities rather than to its intents, more reflective to the different value perspectives of the people in and around the program rather than to a fixed evaluation standard. In other words, the responsive evaluation is created by the idea of increasing the usefulness of the evaluation finding for persons in and around the program. It is worth of paying more attention to, and making more use of, the responsive evaluation approach for Taiwan educational evaluators if they want the educational evaluation to be more useful for the clients and the stakeholders in and around the program. To this end, the article inquires into the conceptual rising and forming, the core ideas and study methods, and the methodological assumptions of the responsive evaluation, based on Robert E. Stake’s writings. In addition to this, the author also discusses some criticism of the responsive evaluation and provides some suggestions for its implementation in the curriculum evaluation in Taiwan.
期刊論文
1.Abma, T. A.、Stake, R. E.(2001)。Stakes'€™ responsive evaluation: Core ideas and evaluation。New Directions for Evaluation,92,7-21。  new window
2.Abma, T. A.(2005)。Responsive evaluation: Its meaning and special contribution to health promotion。Evaluation and Program Planning,28,279-289。  new window
3.Curran, V.、Christopher, J.、Lemire, F.、Collins, A.、Barrett, B.(2003)。Application of a responsive evaluation approach in medical education。Medical Education,37,256-266。  new window
4.House, E. R.(2001)。Responsive evaluation (and its influence on deliberative democrative evaluation)。New Directions for Evaluation,92,23-30。  new window
5.Schwandt, T. A.(2001)。Responsiveness and everyday life。New Directions for Evaluation,92,73-88。  new window
6.Stronach, J.(2001)。The changing face of responsive evaluation: A postmodern rejoinder。New Directions for Evaluation,92,59-72。  new window
7.黃嘉雄(20051000)。十項有關形成性和總結性評鑑的觀念謬誤。國民教育,46(1),68-75。  延伸查詢new window
8.潘慧玲(20031200)。從學校評鑑談到學校本位課程評鑑。北縣教育,46,32-36。  延伸查詢new window
9.張嘉育、黃政傑(20010400)。學校本位課程評鑑的規劃與實施。課程與教學,4(2),85-109+157。new window  延伸查詢new window
會議論文
1.吳清山(2004)。學校本位課程評鑑表之建構。「開啟課程評鑑對話,掌握課程改革方向」論文研討會。台北:台北市立師院。331~356。  延伸查詢new window
圖書
1.何福田、曾憲政(2004)。國民中小學九年一貫課程評鑑模式及其規準之研發與試用。台北:教育部。  延伸查詢new window
2.教育部(2003)。國民中小學九年一貫課程綱要。台北:教育部。  延伸查詢new window
3.Guba, E. G.、Lincoln, Y. S.(1989)。Forth generation evaluation。Newbury Park, CA:Sage。  new window
4.Migotsky, C.、Stake, R.(2001)。An evaluation of an evaluation: CIRCE’s meta-evaluation of the site visits and issue papers of the ATE program evaluation。Illinois:CIRE, University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign。  new window
5.Stake, Robert E.(1975)。Evaluating the arts in education: A responsive approach。Columbus, Ohio:Merrill。  new window
6.Tyler, R. W.(1969)。Basic principles of curriculum and instruction。Chicago, IL:The University of Chicago Press。  new window
7.Stake, Robert E.(1995)。The Art of Case Study Research。Sage Publications。  new window
8.Gredler, M. E.(1996)。Program evaluation。NJ:Prentice-Hall。  new window
9.Worthen, B. R.、Sanders, J. R.(1987)。Educational evaluation: Alternative approaches and practical guidelines。Longman。  new window
10.陳美如、郭昭佑(20030000)。學校本位課程評鑑:理念與實踐反省。臺北市:五南。new window  延伸查詢new window
11.Stufflebeam, Daniel L.、Shinkfield, Anthony J.(1985)。Systematic evaluation: A self-instructional guide to theory and practice。Kluwer-Nijhoff Publishing。  new window
12.黃嘉雄(2002)。九年一貫課程改革的省思與實踐。台北:心理。  延伸查詢new window
圖書論文
1.游家政(2002)。學校本位課程評鑑的規準。自省與前瞻--課程改革向前跑。台北縣:中華民國教材研究發展學會。new window  延伸查詢new window
2.蔡清田(2004)。學校課程實施與評鑑。課程綱要實施檢討與展望。台北:台灣師大。new window  延伸查詢new window
3.Cronbach, L. J.(2000)。Course improvement through evaluation。Evaluation models: Viewpoints on educational and human services evaluation。Boston:Kluwer Academic Publishers。  new window
4.Fetterman, D. M.(2000)。Steps of empowerment evaluation: From California to Cape Town。Evaluation Models: Viewpoints on educational and human services evaluation。Boston:Kluwer Academic Publishers。  new window
5.House, E. R.、Howe, K. R.(2000)。Deliberative democratic evaluation in practice。Evaluation Models: Viewpoints on educational and human services evaluation。Boston:Kluwer Academic Publishers。  new window
6.Patton, M. Q.(2000)。Utilization-focused evaluation。Evaluation models: Viewpoints on educational and human services evaluation。Boston:Kluwer Academic Publishers。  new window
7.Scriven, M.(1977)。The methodology of evaluation。Curriculum and evaluation。Berkeley, CA:McCutchan。  new window
8.Scriven, M.(1991)。Beyond formative and summative evaluation。Evaluation and education: At quarter century。Chicago:NSSE。  new window
9.Scrive, M.(2000)。Evaluation ideologies。Evaluation models: Viewpoints on educational and human services evaluation。Boston:Kluwer Academic Publishers。  new window
10.Stake, R. E.(1977)。The countenance of educational evaluation。Curriculum and evaluation。Berkeley, CA:McCutchan。  new window
11.Stake, R. E.(1991)。Retrospective on the countenance of educational evaluation。Evaluation and education: At quarter century。Chicago:NSSE。  new window
12.Stake, R. E.(1997)。The Fleeting discernment of quality。Advances in program: Evaluation and the postmodern dilemma。Greenwich, Connecticut:JAI Press。  new window
13.Stake, R. E.、Pearsol, J. A.(1981)。Evaluating responsively。Applied strategies for curriculum evaluation。Alexandria, Virginia:ASCD。  new window
14.Stufflebeam, D. L.(2000)。Foundational models for 21st century program evaluation。Evaluation models:Viewpoints on educational and human services evaluation。Boston:Kluwer Academic Publishers。  new window
15.Stake, Robert E.(2000)。Program evaluation, particularly responsive evaluation。Evaluation models: Viewpoints on educational and human services evaluation。Kluwer Academic Publishers。  new window
16.潘慧玲(2005)。邁向下一代的教育評鑑:回顧與前瞻。教育評鑑的回顧與展望。臺北:心理。  延伸查詢new window
 
 
 
 
第一頁 上一頁 下一頁 最後一頁 top
:::
無相關著作
 
無相關點閱
 
QR Code
QRCODE