Meta-Evaluation Revisited
Main Article Content
Abstract
Next month will mark the passage of forty years since I published my first article about “meta-evaluation” (Scriven, 1969), a term I had invented somewhat earlier in a report to the Urban Institute, who had asked me for help in dealing with the noncomparability of the evaluations they had commissioned for several housing projects. This year also marks the elevation of the concept to the status of an independent category in the latest edition of the Program Evaluation Standards (Joint Committee, 1994). So the editors of JMDE thought it might be time to take another look at this process and its products, and, as promised, we have provided a special section in this issue on the topic. Many thanks for the much-appreciated contributions that were sent in for that section! Before reading them, and hence without implying any criticism of them for ignoring or disagreeing with what follows, I’m going to mention some reflections on the notion that now seem to me worth stressing. They—and the other articles in this issue—may inspire reactions from you: Please put them on paper or screen, and we’d be happy to consider them for the (nonrefereed) discussion section of a later issue of JMDE.
Downloads
Article Details
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License.
Copyright and Permissions
Authors retain full copyright for articles published in JMDE. JMDE publishes under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License (CC BY - NC 4.0). Users are allowed to copy, distribute, and transmit the work in any medium or format for noncommercial purposes, provided that the original authors and source are credited accurately and appropriately. Only the original authors may distribute the article for commercial or compensatory purposes. To view a copy of this license, visit creativecommons.org
References
Coryn, C. L. S. (2008). Models for evaluating scientific research: A comparative analysis of national systems. Saarbrücken, Germany: VDM Verlag.
Coryn, C. L. S., & Scriven, M. (Eds.). (2008). Reforming the evaluation of research. New Directions for Evaluation, 118.
https://doi.org/10.1002/ev.256 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1002/ev.256
Davidson, J. (2008, December 28). Critic on site [Review of the book On architecture: Collected Reflections on a century of change]. New York Times. Retrieved January 10, 2008, from http://www.nytimes.com
Luhn, R. (2009, January 1). Can you trust online user reviews? PC World.
Joint Committee on Standards for Educational Evaluation. (1994). The program evaluation standards (2nd ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
Scriven, M. (1969). An introduction to meta- evaluation. Educational Products Report, 2, 36- 38.
Scriven, M. (2007). Key evaluation checklist. Retrieved January 22, 2009, from the Western Michigan University Web site: http://www.wmich.edu/evalctr/checklists/ kec_feb07.pdf
Stufflebeam, D. L. (2007). The CIPP evaluation model checklist. Retrieved January 22, 2009, from http://www.wmich.edu/evalctr/ checklists/cippchecklist_mar07.pdf