How legitimate and justified are judgments in program evaluation?;Dans quelle mesure les jugements émis dans le cadre d'une évaluation de programme sont-ils fondés et justifiés?

Evaluation

Volumn 15, Issue 3, 2009, Pages 307-319

  Hurteau, Marthe ^a   Houle, Sylvain ^a   Mongiat, Stéphanie ^b  

^a UNIVERSITÉ DU QUÉBEC À MONTRÉAL   (Canada)

^b CSST   (Canada)

Author keywords

Judgment in program evaluation; Legitimate justified judgment

Indexed keywords

EID: 69849096286     PISSN: 13563890     EISSN: 14617153     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1177/1356389009105883     Document Type: Article

References (43)

1. Arens, S.A. (2005) Understanding Practice through Exemplary Evaluation Cases, paper presented at the 2005 Joint Conference of CES/AEA, Toronto.
2. Arens, S.A. (2006) L'étude du raisonnement dans les pratiques évaluatives, Mesure et évaluation en éducation 29(3): 45-56.
3. Booth, W., G. Colomb and J. Williams (2003) The Craft of Research. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
4. Datta, L.E. (2006) The Practice of Evaluation Challenges and New Directions, in F. Shaw, J. C. Greene and M. M. Mark (eds) The Sage Handbook of Evaluation, pp. 419-38. Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE.
5. Davidson, E.J. (2005) Evaluation Methodology Basics: The Nuts and Bolts of Sound Evaluation. Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE.
6. Fournier, D.M. (1995) Establishing Evaluative Conclusions: A Distinction between General and Working Logic, in D. M. Fournier (ed.) Reasoning in Evaluation: Inferential Links and Leaps, pp. 15-31. New Directions for Evaluation, 68. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
7. Fournier, D.M. and N.L. Smith (1993) Clarifying the Merits of Argument in Evaluation Practice, Evaluation and Program Planning 16(4): 315-23.
8. Guba, E.G. (1972) The Failure of Educational Evaluation, in C. H. Weiss (ed.) Evaluating Action Programs: Readings in Social Action and Education, pp. 251-66. Boston, MA: Allyn & Bacon.
9. Habermas, J. (1979) Communication and the Evolution of Society. Boston, MA: Beacon Press.
10. House, E.R. (1980) Logic of Evaluative Argument, in E. R. House (ed.) Evaluating with Validity, pp. 67-96. Beverly Hills, CA: SAGE.
11. House, E.R. (1995) Putting Things Together Coherently: Logic and Justice, in D. M. Fournier (ed.) Reasoning in Evaluation: Inferential Links and Leaps, pp. 33-48. New Directions for Evaluation, 68. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
12. House, E.R. and K.R. Howe (1999) Values in Evaluation and Social Research. Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE.
13. Hurteau, M. and S. Houle (2005) Identifying a Core Body of Knowledge for Evaluators, paper presented at the 2005 Joint Conference of CES/AEA, Toronto.
14. Hurteau, M., G. Lachapelle and S. Houle (2006) Comprendre les pratiques évaluatives afin de les améliorer: la modélisation du processus spécifique à l'évaluation de programme, Mesure et évaluation en éducation 29(3): 27-44.
15. Joint Committee on Standards for Educational Evaluation (1994) Program Evaluation Standards: How to Assess Evaluations of Educational Programs. Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE.
16. Krippendorf, K. (2004) Content Analysis: An Introduction to its Methodology. Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE.
17. McCarthy, T.A. (1973) A Theory of Communicative Competence, Philosophy of the Social Sciences 3: 135-56.
18. Merriam-Webster Online Dictionary (2004) Available at http://www.MerriamWebsterCollegiate.com
19. Neuendorf, K.A. (2002) The Content Analysis Handbook. Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE.
20. Patton, M. (1997) Utilization-Focused Evaluation: The New Century Text. Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE.
21. Redding, P. (1989) Habermas' Theory of Argumentation, Journal of Value Inquiry 23: 15-32.
22. Rog, D.J. (1995) Reasoning in Evaluation: Challenges for the Practitioner, in D. M. Fournier (ed.) Reasoning in Evaluation: Inferential Links and Leaps, pp. 93-100. New Directions for Evaluation, 68. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
23. Rourke, L. and T. Anderson (2004) Validity in Quantitative Content Analysis, Educational Technology Research and Development 52(1): 5-17.
24. Schwandt, T.A. (2002) Evaluation Practice Reconsidered. New York: Peter Lang.
25. Schwandt, T.A. (2008) The Relevance of Practical Knowledge Traditions to Evaluation Practice, in N. L. Smith and P. R. Brandon (eds) Fundamental Issues in Evaluation, pp. 29-40. New York: Guilford Press.
26. Scriven, M.(1980) The Logic of Evaluation. Inverness, CA: Edgepress.
27. Scriven. M. (1990) The Evaluation of Hardware and Software, Studies in Educational Evaluation 16: 3-40.
28. Scriven, M. (1991a) Evaluation Thesaurus. Newbury Park, CA: SAGE.
29. Scriven, M. (1991b) The Science of Valuing, in W. E. Shadish, T. D. Cook and L. C. Leviton (eds) Foundations of Program Evaluation: Theories of Practice, pp. 73-118. Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE.
30. Scriven, M. (1993) Evaluation and Critical Reasoning: Logic's Last Frontier, in R. Talaska (ed.) Critical Reasoning in Contemporary Culture, pp. 353-406. Albany State, NY: University of New York Publications.
31. Scriven, M. (1995) The Logic of Evaluation and Evaluation Practice, in D. M. Fournier (ed.) Reasoning in Evaluation: Inferential Links and Leaps, pp. 49-70. New Directions for Evaluation, 68. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
32. Shadish, W.E., T.D. Cook and L.C. Leviton (1991) Foundations of Program Evaluation: Theories of Practice. Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE.
33. Stake, R.E. (2004) Standards-Based and Responsive Evaluation. Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE.
34. Stake, R., C. Migotsky, R. Davis, E.J. Cisneros, G. Depaul, C. Dunbar, R. Farmer, J. Feltovich, E. Johnson, B. Williams, M. Zurita and I. Chaves (1997) The Evolving Syntheses of Program Value, Evaluation Practice 18(2): 89-103.
35. Stake, R.E. and T.A. Schwandt (2006) On Discerning Quality in Evaluation, in I. F. Shaw, J. C Greene and M. M Mark (eds) The Sage Handbook of Evaluation, pp. 404-18. Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE.
36. Taylor, P.W. (1961) Normative Discourse. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall.
37. Toulemonde, J. (2005) Appropriation des résultats de l'évaluation: leçons de la pratique en Région Limousin, paper presented at the 2005 ́té française de l'évaluation, Lille.
38. Toulmin, S.E. (1964) The Uses of Argument. New York: Cambridge University Press.
39. Toulmin, S.E., R.D. Rieke and A. Janik (1984) An Introduction to Reasoning. New York: Macmillan.
40. Trelogan, T.K. (2001) Arguments and their evaluation, Department of Philosophy, University of Northern Colorado, unpublished manuscript.
41. Treasury Board of Canada Secretariat (2004) Examen de la qualité des évaluations dans les ministères et les organismes. URL (consulted Sept. 2006): http://www.tbs-sct.gc.ca/eval/pubs/rev-exam_f.asp
42. Valovirta, V. (2002) Evaluation Utilization as Argumentation, Evaluation 8(1): 60-80.
43. Wheeler, P., G.D. Haertel and M. Scriven (1992) Teacher Evaluation Glossary, Kalamazoo, MI: CREATE Project, Evaluation Center, Western Michigan University, unpublished manuscript.