The limits of collaborative evaluation

TESOL Quarterly

Volumn 33, Issue 4, 1999, Pages 681-700

  Lewkowicz, Jo A ^a   Nunan, David ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF HONG KONG   (Hong Kong)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

EID: 33645406200     PISSN: 00398322     EISSN: 15457249     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.2307/3587882     Document Type: Review

References (18)

1. Alderson, J. C., & Scott, M. (1992). Insiders, outsiders and participatory evaluation. In J. C. Alderson & A. Beretta (Eds.), Evaluating second language education (pp. 25-58). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
2. Cook, T. (1997). Lessons learned in evaluation over the past 25 years. In E. Chelminsky & W. Shadish (Eds.), Evaluation for the 21st century (pp. 30-52). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
3. Education Commission. (1990). Education Commission Report No. 4. Hong Kong: Hong Kong Government Printer.
4. Guba, E. D., & Lincoln, Y. S. (1981). Effective evaluation: Improving the usefulness of evaluation results through responsive and naturalistic approaches. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
5. Jansen, E. (1995). Joint evaluation of short EFL courses between course-provider and client as a means to improve course quality. In P. Rea-Dickins & A. F. Lwaitama (Eds.), Evaluation for development in English language teaching (pp. 59-73). London: Macmillan.
6. Long, M. H. (1984). Process and product in ESL program evaluation. TESOL Quarterly, 18, 409-425.
7. Lynch, B. (1996). Language program evaluation: Theory and practice. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
8. Mackay, R., Wellesley, S., Tasman, D., & Bazergan, E. (1998). Using institutional self-evaluation to promote the quality of language and communication training programmes. In P. Rea-Dickins & K. Germaine (Eds.), Managing evaluation and innovation in language teaching (pp. 111-131). London: Longman.
9. Nunan, D., & Lewkowicz, J. (1997). Intensive English programme report. Unpublished report submitted to the British Council.
10. Parlett, M., & Hamilton, D. (1976). Evaluation as illumination: a new approach to the study of innovatory programs. In G. V. Glass (Ed.), Evaluation studies review annual (Vol. 1, pp. 141-157). Beverly Hills, CA: Sage.
11. Pawson, R., & Tilley, N. (1997). Realistic evaluation. London: Sage.
12. Rea-Dickins, P., &: Germaine, K. (Eds.). (1998). Managing evaluation and innovation in language teaching. London: Longman.
13. Scherer, G., & Wertheimer, M. (1964). A psycholinguistic experiment in foreign language teaching. New York: McGraw-Hill.
14. Shadish, W. R. (1995). Philosophy of science and the quantitative-qualitative debate. Evaluation and Program Planning, 18, 63-75.
15. Smith, P. D. (1970). A comparison of the cognitive and audiolingual approaches to foreign language instruction: The Pennsylvania foreign language project. Philadelphia: Center for Curriculum Development.
16. Spada, N. (1990). Observing classroom behaviors and learning outcomes in different second language programs. In J. C. Richards & D. Nunan (Eds.), Second language teacher education (pp. 293-310). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
17. Stake, R. E. (1980). Program evaluation, particularly responsive evaluation. In W. B. Dockrell & D. Hamilton (Eds.), Rethinking educational research (pp. 72-87). London: Hodder & Stoughton.
18. Suchman, E. (1967). Evaluation research. New York: Russell Sage Foundation.