Goal-Free Evaluation: An Orientation for Foundations’ Evaluations

Youker, Brandon W.; Ingraham, BS Allyssa

doi:10.9707/1944-5660.1182

Cited by 5 publications

(7 citation statements)

References 28 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Goal-free evaluation is suggested to be used as a supplementary to goaloriented framework by Scriven (Popham, 1995). Youker and Ingraham (2013) suggested a guideline for evaluators to follow when they conduct a goal-free evaluation. The guideline proposes four main steps that evaluators should take as follows (p.7): …”

Section: The Nature and Characteristics Of Scriven's Goal-free Modelmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…The second advantage of goal-free evaluation is that it can be used to supplement goal-based evaluation (Youker & Ingraham, 2013;Youker, Hunter, Bayer, & Zielinski, 2016). For instance, an evaluation may begin goal-free but later become goal-based using goal-free data for preliminary investigation purposes while the evaluation is ensured to examine goal achievement (Stufflebeam & Shinkfield, 1985).…”

Section: Strengths and Weaknesses Of Scriven's Goal Free Modelmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Identifying which goals the evaluator should use is, in fact, a difficulty if the program has multiple stakeholders with different goals. GFE can avoid this issue by eliminating the distraction of goals (Youker & Ingraham, 2013).…”

Section: Strengths and Weaknesses Of Scriven's Goal Free Modelmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Nevertheless, even though goal-free model has a long history, it has remained conceptually abstract and highly theoretical with very few practitioners and others who have written about it (Youker & Ingraham, 2013). "Goal-free evaluation has been widely criticized for lack of operations by which to conduct it" (Shadish, Cook, & Levinton, 1991, p.61).…”

Section: Strengths and Weaknesses Of Scriven's Goal Free Modelmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 3 more Smart Citations

Evaluation Models in Educational Program: Strengths and Weaknesses

Anh¹

2018

JFS

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

In the 21st century, evaluation in education has been paid great attention and the evaluation models in education which were created in the 20th century have been further developed and widely applied in educational evaluation. The paper provides readers with comprehensive discussions on the four well-known evaluation models in education: Tyler’s objective model, Stake’s responsive model, Scriven’s goal free model and Stufebeam’s CIPP model. These models have a long history and have been thoroughly developed over time. The application of these four models is found in many felds of evaluation, but mostly in educational program evaluation. In order to help educational evaluators have better and deeper understandings of the four models, the paper presents the nature of the models, the characteristics of the models, as well as discusses strengths and weaknesses of each model.

show abstract

Section: The Nature and Characteristics Of Scriven's Goal-free Modelmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Strengths and Weaknesses Of Scriven's Goal Free Modelmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Strengths and Weaknesses Of Scriven's Goal Free Modelmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Strengths and Weaknesses Of Scriven's Goal Free Modelmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

Evaluation Models in Educational Program: Strengths and Weaknesses

Anh¹

2018

JFS

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Fitzpatrick et al, 2012;Grinnell, Unrau, & Gabor, 2011;Patton, 2002). That said, the articulation of specific methods for conducting GFE remains scant; and nearly half a century since its introduction, GFE has remained conceptually abstract and highly theoretical in the minds of most evaluators with very few practitioners and even fewer who have written about it (Youker & Ingraham, 2013). Moreover, there still are only two known research studies on GFE, both doctoral dissertations (Evers, 1980;Youker, 2011).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Who Needs Goals? A Case Study of a Goal-Free Evaluation

Youker

Zielinski²,

Hunter³

et al. 2016

J Multidiscip Eval

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background: Goal-free evaluation (GFE) is any evaluation in which the evaluator conducts the evaluation without knowledge of or reference to predetermined goals and objectives whereas the goal-based evaluator determines merit according to the evaluand’s goal achievement. Purpose: To examine a GFE in actual practice focusing on its operationalization as well as paying particular attention to the evaluation users’ perspective of its utility. Setting: The evaluand was a day long training of summer camp counselors on occupational therapy (OT) related skills such as feeding, dressing, and bathing. Intervention: GFE was the intervention however for comparison purposes an independent and simultaneous goal-based evaluation (GBE) also evaluated the evaluand. Research Design: Case study. Data Collection and Analysis: After the evaluation users read both the GBE and GFE reports, data collection consisted of a semantic differential questionnaires followed by a focus group. Additionally, the research team analyzed both GBE and GFE reports for relevant themes. Findings: The evaluation users reported a slightly more positive attitude toward the GFE report on the semantic differential yet many focus group respondents stated that they found the GBE report more useful or perceived no difference between the two. Evaluation users reported the benefits of GFE to include its potential for developing or aligning goals, expanding the pool of potential outcomes, and supplementing GBE strategies.

show abstract

Evaluation of the Anti-Corruption Education Policy within the Civil Servant Apparatus (ASN) in the Central Java Province

Santosa

2023

Jurnal Penelitian Pendidikan

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This study aims to assess the alignment and precision of policy formulation, the quality of policy implementation, the policy's suitability, and the effectiveness of the anti-corruption education program for civil servants (ASN) established through Governor Regulation No. 10/2019 in Central Java. This research employed a qualitative research design with a descriptive approach. The subjects of the study consisted of 23 participants, including five structural and functional officials from the Central Java Regional Training and Education Center (BPSDMD), six trainers from BPSDMD, two anti-corruption instructors from the Inspectorate of Central Java Province, and ten training participants at BPSDMD in Central Java. The data for this study comprised primary data obtained from interviews and secondary data including journals, books, and articles. The evaluation uses the Context, Input, Process, Product (CIPP) evaluation model. Data collection techniques involved in-depth interviews and documentation, collecting data such as interview transcripts and documents related to anti-corruption education from BPSDMD in Central Java. The research findings indicate that there is alignment and precision in the formulation of the anti-corruption education policy for civil servants as stipulated in Governor Regulation No. 10/2019, and the policy has achieved its intended goals. The anti-corruption education policy has demonstrated quality, and there is congruence between the policy and its implementation environment. The anti-corruption program for civil servants in Central Java has been effective. Recommendations for improvement include the need for annual program updates to maximize evaluation improvements, more extensive anti-corruption education, the establishment of Integrity Seeds within each local government organization, and the necessity for more intensive collaboration between BPSDMD, the Inspectorate, the Central Java Anti-Corruption Educator Community, and the Corruption Eradication Commission (KPK).

show abstract

Goal-Free Evaluation: An Orientation for Foundations’ Evaluations

Cited by 5 publications

References 28 publications

Evaluation Models in Educational Program: Strengths and Weaknesses

Evaluation Models in Educational Program: Strengths and Weaknesses

Who Needs Goals? A Case Study of a Goal-Free Evaluation

Evaluation of the Anti-Corruption Education Policy within the Civil Servant Apparatus (ASN) in the Central Java Province

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About