ERIC Number: ED179554
Record Type: RIE
Publication Date: 1978-Nov-6
Reference Count: 0
Evaluative Research Systems for Educational Policy.
Moyer, Kerry L.
Four evaluation methods for determining educational policy are objectivism; subjectivism; emotive-imperative; and instrumentalism. For the objectivist, the rationale for undertaking an evaluation is based on empirical verification or non-verification of claims of existing policies or activities. Secondly, the objectivist is interested in questioning what should exist in education. Objectivists may be disinterested in the agency or policy making decisions, and are mainly concerned with precision, methodological accuracy, and the reliability of the evidence. The subjectivist is interested in the affective domain of feelings, attitudes, and interests, and many use the questionnaire as a methodological tool. The subjectivist is concerned with the value of educational products in terms of approval or interest. For emotive-imperative theorists, in contrast to the subjectivists, praise or condemnation of programs is based on individual feelings, and emotive evaluation is used to change attitudes of policy makers. Although data collection is involved, results are presented as expressions of feelings. Instrumentalists are involved in influencing decisions which resolve problems practically. Instrumental evaluations are related to specific programs. These evaluations are associated with operations performed during the implementation of programs or policies. Educational policy is considered secondary to educational practice. (MH)
Descriptors: Affective Objectives, Change Strategies, Cognitive Processes, Conceptual Schemes, Data Collection, Decision Making, Educational Assessment, Educational Policy, Emotional Response, Evaluation, Evaluation Criteria, Evaluation Methods, Evaluators, Policy Formation, Problem Solving, Research Criteria, Research Methodology, Research Problems
Publication Type: Speeches/Meeting Papers; Reports - General
Education Level: N/A
Authoring Institution: N/A
Note: Paper presented at the annual meeting of the Concerned Leaders in Educational Administration and Research (2nd, Alexandria, VA, November 6, 1978)