tyler's goal centered evaluation model 3. metfessel & michael's evaluation paradigm 4. hammond s

Download Tyler's Goal centered Evaluation Model 3. Metfessel & Michael's Evaluation Paradigm 4. Hammond s

Post on 26-Aug-2018

212 views

Category:

Documents

0 download

Embed Size (px)

TRANSCRIPT

  • 25/12/89 28/03/90 47 -73 1390

    * **

    .

    . .

    .

    .

    .

    .

    :

    )aminkhandaghi@ferdowsi.um.ac.ir: ( *

    **

    mailto:aminkhandaghi@ferdowsi.um.ac.ir

  • 48

    .

    ). 68: 1384 (

    ). 45: 1383 (

    .

    .

    . .

    .

    . : 1383 ( ) (

    197.(

    ). 62: 1388 (

    . ...

  • 49 ...

    ) (

    .. . ).108: 1385 (

    .

    .

    .

    .

    .

    .

    .

    . .

  • 50

    :

    .

    ) 2007( 1

    ). 9: 2009 2: (

    ( )

    ). 120: 1381 ( ) 1990( 3

    : 1387 (

    )1975( 4 ). 106 .)123: 1370 (

    1. Broadfoot 2. Oermann 3. Rowntree 4. Popham

  • 51 ...

    . .

    ) 1992( 1 3 2 :

    )1997( 5 . 4 9 8 7 6 ) 1987( 11 ). 2005 10 ( 9

    : 12

    .)1 ( 13

    )1(

    )1987( )1992( -1 -1 -1 -2 -2 -2

    -3 -3 -3 -4 -4 ------ - 5 -5 ------ ------ -6 ------

    1. Maduas, Honey and Kreitzer 2. Goal-oriented approach 3. Decision-oriented approach 4. Responsive or naturalistic approach 5. Fitzpatrick 6. Management-oriented approach 7. Cunsumer oriented approach 8. Expertise-oriented approach 9. Participant-oriented approach 10. Hughes 11. Worthen & Sanders 12. Adversary-oriented approach 13. Naturalistic approach

  • 52

    ) 1992(

    . ) 1987(

    )1997( .

    .

    . ) (

    .

    )1987(

    .

    : ) 1997( ) 1987( : -

    (

    ) 1987( ). 28: 2009 1

    .

    4 3 2 . 5

    1. Ruhe and Zumbo 2. Tyler's Goal centered Evaluation Model 3. Metfessel & Michael's Evaluation Paradigm 4. Hammond s Evaluation Approach 5. Provus s Discrepancy Evaluation Model

  • 53 ...

    : - .

    .

    ). 7: 2005 1(

    . 3 2

    ).77: 1987 ( : -

    .

    :

    4 .

    ).87: 1987 ( 5

    1. Hughes 2. Stufflebeam, The CIPP Evaluation Model 3. Alkin, The UCLA Evaluation Model 4. Scriven, The Goal-Free Evaluation Model 5. Comoski

  • 54

    : -

    1 . ).105: 1987 ( 3 2 : -

    - - .

    . .

    .

    : 1987 (

    ). 114

    .

    5 4 . .)114: 1987 ( 6

    1. Educational connoisseurship and criticism 2. Eisner 3. Accreditation models 4. Wolf's Advocacy Evaluation Model 5. Owens 6. Levine

  • 55 ...

    1967 : -

    .

    (

    ) .

    .

    .

    . .

    1 ( 3 2

    ).127: 1987 )2(

    .

    1. Stake's Countenance Evaluation Model 2. Guba & Linkoln's Process Evaluation Model 3. MacDonald

  • 56

    )2(

    ) 1380( ). 4: 1386 (

    ) 1984( 1 . . 2 :

    5 4 3 1. Garvin 2. Transcendental 3. Product-oriented 4. Customer-oriented 5. Value-for-money

    -

  • 57 ...

    ) 1996( ). 176: 2008 1 ( :

    . 2 6 5 4 )1994( 3

    ). 77: 1385 ( )1997( 9 ) 1983( 8 7

    .

    12 ) 1983( 11 10

    ) 1997( 3 .

    .

    )3(

    ) 1983( )1996( )1994( )1984( )1997(

    - ------ ------ ------ ------ ------

    ------ ------

    ------ ------

    1. Van Kemendade 2. Outcomes 3. Birnbaum 4. Meritorious. oriented 5. Community. oriented 6. Individual. oriented 7. Cameron 8. Whetten 9. Cheng 10. Cameron 11. Whetten 12. Cheng

  • 58

    :1 -

    : .

    ....

    ).24: 1997 2(

    :3 - .

    .

    .

    ).25: 2005 4( : 5 -

    .

    .

    1. Goal specification model 2. Tam 3. Legitimacy model 4. Fyodorona 5. Process model

  • 59 ...

    .

    .

    ).10: 2001 ( ) 1997( :1 -

    . ) 1984( 2

    .

    . .

    .

    :3- -

    . :

    ) 1984( .

    ).25: 1997 ( 1. Absence of problem model 2. Cameron 3. Resource-input model

  • 60

    :1 -

    .

    .

    .

    . ).102001 (

    :2 - .

    .

    .

    .

    : .

    ).25: 2005 .. (.

    . 4

    1. Satisfaction model 2. Organizational learning model

  • 61 ...

    )4(

    -

    .

    . "

    " .

  • 62

    . .

    ) 2 (

    ) 4 ( .

    .