008 |
|
090417s2005 xxu e eng d |
020 |
|
|a0496985906
|
035 |
|
|a(UnM)AAI3163925
|
035 |
|
|aAAI3163925
|
040 |
|
|aTMUE|beng|cTMUE|dTMUE
|
066 |
|
|c$1
|
100 |
1
|
|aSchumakerJulie A
|
245 |
10
|
|aA case study of the development, implementation and utilization of a local school evaluation|h[[electronic resource]]
|
260 |
|
|aAnn Arbor, Mich : |bUMI, |c2005
|
300 |
|
|a221 p
|
500 |
|
|aSource: Dissertation Abstracts International, Volume: 66-02, Section: A, page: 0440
|
500 |
|
|aChair: Elizabeth B. Moje
|
500 |
|
|aSchool code: 0127
|
502 |
|
|aThesis (Ph.D.)--University of Michigan, 2005
|
520 |
|
|aThis study provides a descriptive analysis of the development of a comprehensive evaluation model of a local school reform, and examines the utilization of the evaluation by school board members and its impact on local policy making. The subject of this study is an evaluation of a local school reform---the Interdisciplinary High School
|
520 |
|
|aThe theory guiding the evaluation process and a description of how this theory was put into practice in the design and implementation of the evaluation is explained in sufficient detail so that other districts may adapt the model for their own use. The evaluation employed a stakeholder-based model and incorporated a mixed-methods approach to address both formative and summative evaluation questions. The evaluation included fourteen components: a longitudinal analysis of students' performance; comparative analysis of students' performance using a matched cohort; Program Review Team; development of program videos; documentation of the curriculum; student portfolios; students' assessments; parents' assessments; teachers' assessments; review of school and student records; interviews with students who left the program; interviews with program graduates; tabulation of student-teacher contact; and tabulation of parent-teacher contact
|
520 |
|
|aThe findings reveal that there were two distinct patterns of evaluation use. In Pattern A, the dominant pattern observed, school board members considered the findings from the evaluation along with data from other sources. The evaluation findings were taken into account, but did not drive decision-making. In Pattern B, board members made minimal use of the evaluation. They privileged data from personal sources more than the evaluation
|
520 |
|
|aSchool board members weighed factors other than the program's outcomes by a 2:1 ratio when making a decision regarding the future of the Interdisciplinary High School. Organizational factors, the presence of competing information, and users' receptivity to the evaluation affected decision-making more than did the program's outcomes. A revised theoretical framework of evaluation utilization is offered
|
520 |
|
|aThe results of this study suggest that evaluation utilization is affected by factors outside the control of the evaluator, in particular the political context, that evaluation findings are only one source of information considered by school board members, and that local evaluations intended to impact school board decision-making need to capture the attention of district administrators
|
650 |
0
|
|aEducation, Administration
|
710 |
2
|
|aUniversity of Michigan
|
856 |
7
|
|uhttp://pqdd.sinica.edu.tw/twdaoapp/servlet/advanced?query=3163925|z連接論文全文
|