5.3 Historical Evolution of Program Evaluation

Let us now look in detail at a more accurate history of the development of evaluation within school contexts.

To try to picture the image of the development of the evaluation field is really a complex task; because the evaluation has always been something that humans utilized in an informal way for thousands of years. Evaluation is an old practice but, at the same time it is a very young discipline, it is something that has been a shared common practice. 

In this view, In the past years, the field of evaluation has matured.

We can describe the evolution of the whole field according to seven different stages of development, called periods of program evaluation. First, the period prior to 1900, which the authors call Age of Reform; second, from 1900 until 1930, they call the Age of Efficiency; third, from 1930 to 1945, called the Tylerian Age; fourth, from 1946 to about 1957, called the Age of Innocence; fifth, from 1958 to 1972, the Age of Development; sixth, from 1973 to 1983, the Age of Professionalization; and seventh, from 1983 to 2000 the Age of Expansion and Integration.

Time Period 1: The Age of Reform (1792-1900’s)

The first documented formal use of evaluation took place in 1792 when William Farish utilized the quantitative mark to assess students’ performance (Hoskins, 1968). The quantitative mark permitted objective ranking of examinees and the averaging and aggregating of scores. Furthermore, the quantitative mark was historically relevant in relation to the fruition of program evaluation as a discipline for two reasons:

(a) it was the initial step in the development in psychometrics; and (b) its questions were designed to measure factual technical competence in subject areas that gradually replaced questions aimed at assessing rhetorical style (Madaus & O’Dyer, 1999).

Let’s make some example from different countries:

During this period in Great Britain, education was reformed through evaluation. For example, the Powis Commission recommended that students’ performance on reading, spelling, writing, and arithmetic would determine teachers’ salaries. It was not uncommon to have annual evaluations on students’ attainments (Madaus & Kellaghan, 1982).

In the United States, instead, the earliest method of formal evaluation in the United States occurred in 1815 when the Army developed a system of policies for “uniformity of manufacturers’ ordinance” (Smith, 1987, p.42). These policies set standardized production processes that fostered conformity of materials, production techniques, inspection, and product specification for all suppliers of arms to the military. The first formal education evaluation in the United States took place in Boston, Massachusetts in 1845. Printed tests of various subjects were used to assess student achievement in the Boston education system. Horace Mann, Secretary of the State Board of Education, wanted a comprehensive assessment of student achievement to assess the quality of a large school system. According to Stufflebeam, Madaus, & Kellaghan (2000), this event served to be an important moment in evaluation history because it began a long tradition of using pupil test scores as a principal source to evaluate school or instructional program effectiveness. From 1887 to 1898, an educational reformer named Joseph Rice conducted a similar assessment by carrying out a comparative study on spelling instruction across a number of school districts. He was concerned about methods of teaching spelling, because U.S. students were not learning to spell. Rice was able to determine that there was no relationship between time devoted to spelling and competence. He reported his findings in The Forum in 1897, in an article entitled “The Futility of the Spelling Grind” (Colwell, 1998). Rice’s evaluation has been recognized as the first formal educational program evaluation in America (Stufflbeam et al., 2000).

Time Period 2: The Age of Efficiency and Testing (1900-1930)

Fredrick W. Taylor’s work on scientific management became influential to administrators in education (Biddle & Ellena, 1964). Taylor’s scientific management was based on observation, measurement, analysis, and most importantly, efficiency (Russell & Taylor, 1998). Objective-based tests were critical in determining quality of instruction. Tests were developed by departments set up to improve the efficiency of the educational district. According to Ballou (1916), tests developed for the Boston public schools were described as being objective referenced. The tests were used to make inferences about the effectiveness of the district. During this period, educators regarded measurement and evaluation as synonyms, with the latter thought of as summarizing student test performance and assigning grades (Worthen, Sanders, & Fitzpatrick, 1997).

Time Period 3: The Tylerian Age (1930-1945)

Ralph Tyler, considered the father of educational evaluation, made considerable contributions to evaluation. Tyler, as you may remember, directed an Eight-Year Study (1932-1940) which assessed the outcomes of programs in 15 progressive high schools and 15 traditional high schools. Tyler found that instructional objectives could be clarified by stating them in behavioral terms, and those objectives could serve as the basis for evaluating the effectiveness of instruction (Tyler, 1975).

Tyler wrote, «each objective must be defined in terms which clarify the kind of behavior which the course should help to develop» (cited in Walbesser & Eisenberg, 1972). Stufflebeam et al. (2000) concluded that Tylerian evaluation involves internal comparisons of outcomes with objectives; it need not provide for costly and disruptive comparisons between experimental and control groups, as were utilized by comparative studies used by Rice.

According to Worthen et al. (1997), Tyler’s work formed the basis of criterion-referenced testing.

Time Period 4: The Age of Innocence (1946-1957)

Starting in the mid 1940’s, American’s moved mentally beyond the war (World War II) and great depression. According to Madaus & Stufflebeam (1984), society experienced a period of great growth; there was an upgrading and expansion of educational offerings, personnel, and facilities. Because of this national optimism, little interest was given to accountability of national funds spent on education; hence the label of this evaluation time period, The Age of Innocence. In the early 1950’s during The Age of Innocence, Tyler’s view of evaluation was rapidly adopted. Bloom, Engelhart, Furst, Hill, and Krathwohl (1956) gave objective based testing advancement when they published the Taxonomy of Educational Objectives. The authors indicated that within the cognitive domain there were various types of learning outcomes. Objectives could be classified according to the type of learner behavior described therein, and that there was a hierarchical relationship among the various types of outcomes. Moreover, they indicated that tests should be designed to measure each type of outcome (Reiser, 2001).

Time Period 5: The Age of Development (1958-1972)

In 1957, the Russian’s successful launch of Sputnik I sparked a national crisis. As a result, legislation was passed to improve instruction in areas that were considered crucial to the national defense and security. In 1958, Congress enacted the National Defense Education Act (NDEA) which poured millions of dollars into new curriculum development projects and provided for new educational programs in mathematics, sciences, and foreign languages (Stufflebeam, Madaus, & Kellaghan, 2000). Evaluations were funded to measure the success of the new curricula. In the early 1960’s, another important factor in the development of evaluation was the emergence of criterion-referenced testing. Until that time, most tests, called norm-referenced tests, were designed to discern between the performances of students. In contrast, a criterion-referenced test was intended to measure individual performance in terms of established criteria. It discerns how well an individual can perform a particular behavior or set of behaviors, irrespective of how well others perform (Reiser, 2001). The passage of the Elementary and Secondary Education Act (ESEA) of 1965 was recognized as the birth of the contemporary program evaluation and included requirements for evaluation. According to Ferguson (2004), the ESEA was intended to supplement academic resources for low-income children who needed extra support in the early grades. Educators were required to evaluate their efforts. Senator Robert Kennedy sponsored the Act because he wanted to authenticate that federal money was not going to support schools’ exhausted practices, but rather would help disadvantaged students in new ways (Weiss, 1998).

Time Period 6: The Age of Professionalization (1973-1983)

During the 1970’s, evaluation emerged as a profession. A number of journals including Educational Evaluation and Policy Analysis, Studies in Educational Evaluation, CEDR Quarterly, Evaluation Review, New Directions for Program Evaluation, Evaluation and Program Planning, and Evaluation News were published (Stufflebeam et al., 2000). Further, universities began to recognize the importance of evaluation by offering courses in evaluation methodology. Among them were the University of Illinois, Stanford University, Boston College, UCLA, University of Minnesota, and Western Michigan University (Stufflebeam et al., 2000).

Time Period 7: The Age of Expansion and Integration (1983-Present)

In the early 1980’s, evaluation struggled under the Reagan administration. Cutbacks in funding for evaluation took place and emphasis on cost cutting arose. According to Weiss (1998), funding for new social initiatives were drastically cut. By the early 1990’s, evaluation had rebounded with the economy. The field expanded and became more integrated. Professional associations were developed along with evaluation standards. In addition, the Joint Committee on Standards for Educational Evaluation developed criteria for personnel evaluation. Evaluation approaches for the 21st Century Many evaluation approaches have emerged since the 1930’s and range from checklists of suggestions to comprehensive prescriptions. Worthen et al., (1997) classified the different evaluation approaches into the following five categories: (a) objectives-oriented, (b) management-oriented, (c) consumer-oriented, (d) expertise oriented, (e) adversary-oriented, and (f) participant-oriented evaluation approaches.