An application of the Impact Evaluation Process for designing a performance measurement and evaluation framework in K-12 environments

Evaluation and Program Planning

Volumn 35, Issue 2, 2012, Pages 222-235

  Guerra López, Ingrid ^a   Toker, Sacip ^a  

^a WAYNE STATE UNIVERSITY   (United States)

Author keywords

Educational informatics; Evaluation; Performance improvement; Performance indicators; Performance management systems

Indexed keywords

DECISION MAKING; DESIGN METHOD; EDUCATION; ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT; MANAGEMENT PRACTICE; PARTICIPATORY APPROACH; PERFORMANCE ASSESSMENT; SECONDARY EDUCATION; STAKEHOLDER; URBAN PLANNING;

ADOLESCENT; ARTICLE; HEALTH CARE QUALITY; HUMAN; METHODOLOGY; ORGANIZATION; ORGANIZATION AND MANAGEMENT; PROGRAM DEVELOPMENT; SCHOOL; STANDARD;

ADOLESCENT; DECISION MAKING, ORGANIZATIONAL; HUMANS; PROGRAM DEVELOPMENT; PROGRAM EVALUATION; SCHOOLS;

EID: 81255123478     PISSN: 01497189     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/j.evalprogplan.2011.10.001     Document Type: Article

References (27)

1. AdvancED Accreditation standards for quality schools: For schools seeking NCA CASI or SACS CASI accreditation 2007, Retrieved from http://www.advanc-ed.org/accreditation/standards/advanced_school_standards.pdf.
2. Anderson C., Kilduff G. Why do dominant personalities attain influence in face-to-face groups? The competence-signaling effects of trait dominance. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 2009, 96:491-503.
3. Aranda C., Arellano J. Consensus and link structure in strategic performance measurement systems: A field study. Journal of Management Accounting Research 2010, 22(x):271-299.
4. Bertalanffy von L. General systems theory 1968, Braziller, New York.
5. Campbell K., Goodie A., Foster J. Narcissism, confidence, and risk attitude. Journal of Behavioral Decision Making 2004, 17:1-15.
6. Caroll A. Conceptual and consulting aspects of stakeholder theory, thinking, and management. Handbook of organizational consulting 2000, 169-181. Marcel Dekker, New York. 2nd ed. R.T. Golembiewski (Ed.).
7. Dick W., Carey L., Carey J.O. The systematic design of instruction 2005, Pearson Allyn and Bacon, Boston, MA. 6th ed.
8. Dyehouse M., Bennett D., Harbor J., Childress A., Dark M. A comparison of linear and systems thinking approaches for program evaluation illustrated using the Indiana Interdisciplinary GK-12. Evaluation and Program Planning 2009, 32(3):187-196.
9. Gilbert T.F. Human competence: Engineering worthy performance 1978, McGraw-Hill Book Company, New York.
10. Guerra I. How to develop useful questionnaires. The 2005 training and performance sourcebook 2005, 233-238. Active Training, Princeton. M. Silberman, P. Phillips (Eds.).
11. Guerra-López I. Evaluating impact: Evaluation and continual improvement for performance improvement practitioners 2007, HRD Press, Inc., Amherst, MA.
12. Guerra-López Performance measurement and magement systems. Handbook of improving performance in the workplace volume 2: Selexting and implementing performance interventions 2010, 251-274. Pfeiffer, San Francisco, CA. R. Watkins, D. Leigh (Eds.).
13. Guerra-Lopez I., Norris-Thomas M. Making sound decisions: A framework for judging the worth of your data. Performance Improvement Journal 2011, 50(5.):30-38.
14. Kaufman R. Determining and diagnosing organizational needs. Group & Organization Management 1981, 6(3):312-322.
15. Kaufman R. Change, choices and consequences: A guide to Mega thinking and planning 2006, HRD Press, Amherst, MA.
16. Kaufman, T. (2011). Performance management and school reform: A multi-case study of middle and high school performance management for instructional improvement. Ed.D. Dissertation. Harvard University, MA, United States.
17. Kaufman R., Guerra I., Platt W. Practical evaluation for educators: Finding out what works and what doesn't 2006, Corwin Press, Thousand Oaks.
18. Kling, R., & Hara, N. (2002). Informatics and distributed learning, as cited in Levy, P., Ford, N., Foster, J., Madden, A., Miller, D., Baptista, M., McPherson, M., & Webber, S. (2003). Educational informatics: An emerging research agenda. Journal of Information Science 29, 298.
19. Ladd H.F., Walsh R.P. Implementing value-added measures of school effectiveness: Getting the incentive right. Economics of Education Review 2002, 21(x):1-17.
20. Lohman C., Fortuin L., Wouters M. Designing a performance measurement system: A case study. European Journal of Operational Research 2004, 156(2):267-286.
21. Radin B. A challenging the performance movement: Accountability, complexity and democratic values 2006, Georgetown University Press, Washington, DC.
22. Richey R., Klein J.D. Design and development research 2007, Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Mahwah, NJ.
23. Scriven M. The methodology of evaluation. Perspectives of curriculum evaluation 1967, Vol. 1:39-83. Rand McNally, Chicago, IL.
24. See K. Reactions to decisions with uncertain consequences: Reliance on perceived fairness versus predicted outcomes depends on knowledge. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 2009, 96:104-118.
25. Tessmer M., Richey R. The role of context in learning and instructional design. Educational Technology Research and Development 1997, 45(2):85-115. 10.1007/BF02299526.
26. U.S. Department of Education Race to top fun September 2010, Retrieved from http://www2.ed.gov/programs/racetothetop/index.html.
27. Williams, B. (2011). Organizational health and mindfulness as predictors of school effectiveness: Using the Balanced Scorecard. Ed.D. Dissertation. The University of Alabama, AL, United States.