ＣＩＰＰ模式在臺灣省國民中學訓輔工
作評鑑上應用之研究 ─ 以宜蘭縣為例

摘 要

本研究旨在探討ＣＩＰＰ模式在臺灣省國民中學訓輔工作評
鑑的應用情形，以瞭解其評鑑架構的適用性。
為達成上述的目的，本研究採用文獻分析、問卷調查、座談
與訪談等方法，進行資料的蒐集與分析研究。本研究首先探討Ｃ
ＩＰＰ模式的內涵，包括其發展過程、評鑑流程、類型、設計、
後設評鑑、應用情形與優點及限制的討論；接著分析國民中學訓
輔工作評鑑與學校評鑑及其評鑑設計與評鑑架構等；然後依據研
究目的與問題，編製問卷與訪談題綱，進行調查研究與訪談。本
研究為期深入探討是項評鑑的實施情形，並考量研究者本身的經
驗，乃採個案的方式，選取宜蘭縣全部23所公立國民中學的 332
教師為研究樣本，按其接受評鑑的先後順序，分兩階段實施問卷
調查與訪談。
問卷調查所得資料，採用次數分配與卡方檢定統計方法，分
別就受訪教師對訓輔工作評鑑的目的、設計、實施、資料分析與
結果的應用，以及其對ＣＩＰＰ模式評鑑架構的應用情形的看法
，進行分析討論。至於個別訪談與座談會資料的處理，係依照各
受訪教師的意見，分類歸納之後再予探討。這兩項資料旨在針對
前述問卷調查資料進行補充與對照，因此，其探討的層面與上述
問卷資料分析討論的層面相同。
透過文獻探討、問卷調查與訪談等資料的分析與討論，本研

究獲致下列五項結論：
壹、國民中學訓輔工作評鑑能達成以評鑑瞭解現象，提供作成
決定用以改進缺失與進行績效考核的目的，但不同性別、職務與
學校規模的教師的看法有差異。
貳、國民中學訓輔工作評鑑的評鑑標準，能提供自我評鑑與訪
問評鑑的參考；評鑑內容與範圍的分類及設計，大部分亦能涵蓋
且適用，但部分評鑑項目重疊應可合併，而且應配合教育政策予
以更新或增刪。
參、國民中學訓輔工作評鑑的實施，能依據相關計畫與辦法，
並考量各校特殊情況與不同的需求，按規定程序順利完成，但在
自我評鑑與訪問評鑑的實施方式與功能方面，仍有待加強。
肆、評鑑資料的處理能以優點與價值的方式呈現，並以各校自
我評鑑的資料為主，且能避免做校際之間的比較與評鑑；評鑑結
果亦能提供改進方案擬定的參考，並據以實施後續的評鑑與追蹤
輔導，但是時效性與流通性應再加強。
伍、應用ＣＩＰＰ模式評鑑類型與架構的評鑑工具，能清楚而
明確地引導各校自我評鑑的進行，並協助作成各種決定，惟各評
鑑類型的實施並未能完全符合ＣＩＰＰ模式的真正內涵與精神。
針對上述結論，本研究分別就國民中學學校評鑑與進一步研
究方面，提出以下的建議以供參考：
壹、在國民中學學校評鑑方面
一、強化學校自我評鑑的實施，以實踐學校本位的管理理念並
落實校園民主化的精神。
二、妥善規畫訪問評鑑的實施，以發揮其應有的功能。
三、加強評鑑人員專業能力的教育。
四、採用ＣＩＰＰ模式評鑑類型的評鑑設計，應視實際情況，

運用多元的方法進行評鑑，以真正達成以不同評鑑指導作成不同
決定的功能。
五、設置專業的評鑑機構，負責評鑑的研究、規畫、設計與實
施，並配合各級學校教育評鑑，提供各種訓練、支援與諮詢，以
解決相關的評鑑問題。
六、建構適合國內學校評鑑的有效指標，以及後設評鑑的標準。
七、融合理論取向評鑑與方法取向評鑑的優點，建構符合國內
評鑑需求的評鑑模式與架構。
貳、進一步研究方面
本研究旨在透過宜蘭縣國民中學訓輔工作評鑑的個案研究，
以瞭解是項評鑑在應用ＣＩＰＰ模式的評鑑類型與架構，進行評
鑑設計的情形與實施的成效，在研究方法、對象與實施上仍有其
限制與不足，未來可進一步擴及各級學校與有關方案評鑑的類似
研究；除了採用質與量的方法兼施之外，也可以從事後設的研究
，進行分析與比較的工作；或是採用理論建構的方式，進行新評
鑑模式的研究與建立等。

.

A Case Study on the Evaluation on the
Disciplinary and Guidance Affairs
of Junior High Schools in
Taiwan Province in Terms
of CIPP Models

Abstract
The main purpose of the thesis is to understand the evaluation
on the disciplinary and guidance affairs of junior high schools in
Taiwan province in terms of CIPP model. In order to fulfill the
above-mentioned purpose, several research tools are employed, in-
cluding literature review, interviews and questionnaires.
The first and foremost one is the empirical investigation. 332
teachers, including deans and master teachers are selected to answer
the questionnaires in Yilang county in eastern Taiwan. Some 79 teachers
of the subjects are interviewed as well both to verify and complement
the empirical data. The questionnaires and the interviews went through
two stages. The first stage began in May 1996 and ended in July.
The second one also lasted for three months in the next year, from
September to November.
The conclusion are as the follows:
First, the evaluation can carry out its posited objectives, that
is, to improve both disciplinary and guidance affairs on the one hand
,and to grade the accountability on the other.
Second, the evaluation criteria play an important role both in
self evaluation and on-site evaluation phases. They owe a lot of
references to the evaluational designs and contents as well.
Third, the evaluation goes through as scheduled and offers many
recommendations on the improvements in several aspects according to
the disparity among different schools.
Fourth, based on the values and merits of each school, the final
report of the evaluation can be a good guideline to its follow-up
and metaevaluation phase.
Finally, in terms of CIPP models, the evaluation is able to
accomplish its original functions both on the design of the tools
and its application of the afore-mentioned evaluation models.
According to the conclusions, several recommendations are made
as well. The top priority is how to establish both the indigenous
evaluation and metaevaluation criteria or indexes. Besides, to set
up the professional teams or institutions, to enforce concepts and
abilities of the self-evaluation personnel, to apply both method-
driven and theory-driven evaluations to the follow-up evaluations
etc. are also the necessary tasks that need to be done in the near
future in order to raise the standards and feasibility of the
evaluation here in Taiwan.

參 考 書 目
壹、中文資料
王政彥（民79）以ＣＩＰＰ評鑑當前的教育視導。~U2;教育研究~U1;，第
15期，頁45-51。
白博文（民72）~U2;國中輔導工作評鑑之研究~U1;。國立臺灣師範大學教
育研究所碩士論文。
丘慧芬（民69a） 教育評鑑概念與模式之研究。~U2;師大學報~U1;，第25
集，頁141-166。
（民69b） 教育評鑑應有價值導向之任務。~U2;今日教育~U1;，第
37期，頁20-25。
台中市政府教育局（民84）~U2;台中市八十三學年度國民中學訓輔工~U1;
~U2;作評鑑報告~U1;。
台北市政府教育局（民69）~U2;台北市六十八學年度國中教育評鑑報~U1;
~U2;告~U1;。
台北市政府教育局（民70）~U2;台北市六十九年度國中輔導工作評鑑~U1;
~U2;報告~U1;。
台北市政府教育局（民74）~U2;台北市七十三學年度國民中學道德教~U1;
~U2;育評鑑報告~U1;。
台北市政府教育局（民78）~U2;台北市七十七學年度中學特殊教育評~U1;
~U2;鑑報告~U1;。
台北市政府教育局（民84）~U2;台北市八十三學年度公私立幼稚園評~U1;
~U2;鑑報告~U1;。
台灣省教育廳（民76）~U2;臺灣省改進國民中小學教學方法及生活教~U1;
~U2;育評鑑手冊~U1;。

江啟昱（民82）~U2;CIPP評鑑模式之研究~U1;。國立臺灣師範大學教育研
究所碩士論文。
江文雄（民71）~U2;國民小學實施教育評鑑之研究~U1;。台灣省教育廳。
伍振鷟主編（民82）~U2;教育評鑑~U1;。台北：南宏圖書公司。
李緒武（民79）教育評鑑的意義與發展。載於伍振鷟主編：~U2;教育~U1;
~U2;評鑑~U1;，台北：南宏圖書公司。頁1-12。
吳明清（民79）教育評鑑在教育決策的應用：一個概念架構的說
明。載於伍振鷟主編：~U2;教育評鑑~U1;，臺北：南宏圖書公司，
頁133-144。
呂美員（民72）~U2;我國大學教育評鑑之研究~U1;。國立臺灣師範大學教
育研究所碩士論文。
宜蘭縣政府教育局（民82）~U2;宜蘭縣八十二學年度國民中學訓輔工~U1;
~U2;作評鑑報告~U1;。
梁恆正（民79）評鑑與政策結合的趨向分析。載於伍振鷟主編：
~U2;教育評鑑~U1;，台北：南宏圖書公司。
馬信行（民79）教育評鑑指標之選擇。載於伍振鷟主編：~U2;教育評~U1;
~U2;鑑~U1;，台北：南宏圖書公司。頁39-55。
秦夢群（民79）教育評鑑對目前教育決策的影響─CIPP與司法評
鑑模式為例。載於伍振鷟主編：~U2;教育評鑑~U1;，台北：南宏圖
書公司，頁145-158。
國立新竹師範學院（民81a） ~U2;臺灣省國民中學訓輔工作評鑑手冊~U1;
。新竹：編者。
國立新竹師範學院（民81b） ~U2;臺灣省國民中學訓輔工作評鑑表~U1;。
新竹：編者。
張植珊（民66）教育評鑑的實施與展望。載於龔寶善編：~U2;昨日今~U1;
~U2;日與明日的教育~U1;。台北：開明書店，頁699-710。

張植珊（民68）~U2;教育評鑑~U1;。台北：教育部教育計畫小組。
張渝役（民81）我見我聞─論學校評鑑。~U2;臺灣教育~U1;，第504 期，
頁5-7。
教育部（民68）~U2;國民中學評鑑標準及評鑑手冊~U1;。台北：台灣書店。
陳漢強（民81）學校評鑑。~U2;臺灣教育~U1;，第504 期，頁1-4。
陳舜芬譯（民78）Stufflebeam 的改良導向評鑑。載於黃光雄編
譯：~U2;教育評鑑的模式~U1;。台北：師大書苑。
陳義分（民76）~U2;多目標評估技術在教育評鑑之應用~U1;。國立清華大
學碩士論文。
許繼籐（民84）~U2;台北市國民小學學校自我評鑑之研究~U1;。國立臺灣
師範大學教育研究所碩士論文。
許玉齡（民81）管理取向的評鑑。~U2;臺灣教育~U1;，第504 期，頁25-
38。
婁立（民81）「臺灣省中小學訓輔工作評鑑研究」參與記述。~U2;臺~U1;
~U2;灣教育~U1;，第504 期，頁38-41。
游家政（民83）~U2;國民小學後設評鑑標準之研究~U1;。國立臺灣師範大
學教育研究所博士論文。
黃光雄編譯（民79）~U2;教育評鑑的模式~U1;。台北：師大書苑。
黃政傑（民76）~U2;課程評鑑~U1;。台北：師大書苑。
雲林縣政府教育局（民84）~U2;雲林縣國民中學訓輔工作評鑑追蹤輔~U1;
~U2;導訪視報告~U1;。
新竹市政府教育局（民82）~U2;新竹市八十一學年度國民中學訓輔工~U1;
~U2;作評鑑總報告~U1;。
楊文雄（民69）~U2;教育評鑑的理論及其在教育行政決策上的應用~U1;。
臺灣省立屏東師範學校。
劉奕權（民74）~U2;國民中學教育評鑑之研究~U1;。國立臺灣師範大學教

育研究所碩士論文。
賴士葆（民83）~U2;教育部大學學門評鑑計畫~U1;。教育部高教司研究計
畫成果報告。
盧增緒（民79）教育評鑑的問題與趨向。載於伍振鷟主編：~U2;教育~U1;
~U2;評鑑~U1;，台北：南宏圖書公司。頁13-38。
盧增緒（民74）教育評鑑初探。~U2;師大學報~U1;，30期，頁115-148。
蘇錦麗（民84）~U2;大學學門評鑑試辦計畫成效評估之研究~U1;。台北：
師大書苑。
蘇錦麗（民82）論美國學校評鑑過程對我國的啟示。載於~U2;臺灣區~U1;
~U2;公私立幼稚園評鑑委員研討座談會手冊~U1;，頁55-89。
~t72;
貳、英文資料
~t64;
Bickman, l. (Ed.) (1987). ~BI2;Using Program Theory in Eval-
uation~BI1;. San Francisco, CA:Jossey-Bass.
Bickman, l. (Ed.) (1990). ~BI2;Advances in Program Evaluations.
~BI1;San Francisco, CA:Jossey-Bass.
Blue, C. D. G. (1989).~BI2; An Evaluation of a New Teacher
Assistance Program in a Large Suburban School Sys-
tem.~BI1; Unpublished doctoral dissertation, University
of Maryland.
Boonprakob, Manat (1994).~BI2; The Development of a Curricu-
lum Model for Teaching Science in Secondary Schools
in Thailand.~BI1; Unpublished doctoral dissertation,
Illinois State University.
Brown, S. (1994). School Effectiveness Research and the

Evaluation of Schools. Evaluation and Research in
Education, Vol. 8, Nos 1ž. pp. 55-68.
Cady, M. G. (1997).~BI2; Assessing the Value Students, Tax-
payers, and Employers Place on Continuing Education
and Community Services Programs at College of the
Maryland, Texas.~BI1; Unpublished doctoral disserta-
tion, University of Houston.
Cadwalander, D. S. Stevenson. (1985).~BI2; Evaluation of Vol-
unteer Leadership Development Workshops - Effects of
Participation in the Planning Process.~BI1; Unpublished
Oklahoma doctoral dissertation, Oklahoma State Uni-
versity.
Chen, Huey-Tsyh(1990). ~BI2;Theory-Driven Evaluation.~BI1; New-
bury Park:Sage Publications.
Chen, Huey-Tsyh (1994). Current Trends and Future Direc-
tions in Program Evaluation. ~BI2;Evaluation Practice,~BI1;
Vol. 15, No. 3, pp. 229-238.
Chen, Huey-Tsyh (1994a). Theory-Driven Evaluations: Needs
, Difficulties, and Options. ~BI2;Evaluation Practice,~BI1;
Vol. 15 No.1, pp. 79-82.
Chen, H. T. & Rossi, P. H. (1992). ~BI2;Using Theory to Im-
prove Program and Policy Evaluations.~BI1; Westport, CT:
Greenwood.
Chiang, Pei-Ling Wu (1997).~BI2; Assessing the Effectiveness
of Five-Year Mechanical Engineering Technology Pro-
grams of Junior Colleges in Taiwan, R.O.C.: an
Application of the CIPP Evaluation Model.~BI1; Unpubli-

shed doctoral dissertation, Florida International
University.
Duffey, D. R. (1985).~BI2; A Study to Develop and Test a Com-
puter Literacy Curriculum for the 4-H Program of
the Texas Agricultural Extension Service.~BI1; Unpubli-
shed doctoral dissertation, Texas A&M University.
Eisner, E. W. (1985).~BI2; The Educational Imagination: On the
Design and Evaluation of School Programs~BI1;. New York:
Macmillan College Publishing Company.
Eisner, E. W. (1985).~BI2; The Art of Educational Evaluation:
A Personal View~BI1;. London: The Falmer Press.
Ellit, A. C. (1989).~BI2; A Framework for the Evaluation of
the Capacity-Building Components in Rural Develop-
ment Projects: Implications to Program Development
and Agicultural Extension Education.~BI1; Unpublished
doctoral dissertation, Iowa State University.
Fidone, D. J. (1993).~BI2; An Evaluation of A Secondary Sci-
ence Program Using the Context Component of the CIPP
Deision-Making Model.~BI1; Unpublished doctoral disser-
tation, Texas A&M University.
Fortney, J. J. (1988).~BI2; A Follow-up Study of Students in
Rural Secondary Gifted Programs.~BI1; Unpublished doc-
toral dissertation, Indiana University.
Frazier, M. A. (1996)~BI2; An Evaluation of an Educational
Partnership: The Special Friends Scholarship Pro-
gram.~BI1; Unpublished doctoral dissertation, Univer-
sity of Houston.

Frita, S. K. (1996).~BI2; Assessing Undergraduate Student
Needs Utilizing the CIPP Model of Evaluation.~BI1;
Unpublished doctoral dissertation, University of
Idaho.
Gagne', R. M., Scriven, M. & Tyler, R. W. (1967).~BI2; Pers-
pectives of Curriculum Evaluation~BI1;. Washington, D.
C.: American Educational Research Association.
Gallegos, A. (1994). Meta-Evaluation of School Evaluation
Models. ~BI2;Studies in Educational Evaluation~BI1;, Vol. 20,
pp. 41-54.
Gally, Jonathan. (1982).~BI2; The Evaluation Component: an Ex-
ploratory Study in Educational Adiministration.~BI1; Un-
published doctoral dissertation, University of Cali-
fornia, Santa Barbara.
Galvin, J. C. (1983).~BI2; Evaluating Management Education:
Models and Attitudes of Training Specialists.~BI1; Un-
published doctoral dissertation, Northern Illinois
University.
Green, J. C., Caracelli, V. & Graham, W. F. (1989). To-
ward a Conceptual Framework for Mixed-Method Eval-
uation Designs. ~BI2;Educational Evaluation and Policy
Analysis~BI1;, Vol. 11, No. 3, pp. 255-274.
Guba, E. G. & Lincoln Y. S. (1981).~BI2; Effective Evaluation
: Improving the Usefulness of Evalaution Results
Through Responsive and Naturalistic Approaches~BI1;. San
Francisco: Jossey-Bass Publishers.
Hekimian, Shirley. (1985).~BI2; Criteria for the Institutional

Evaluation of Community College Staff Development
Programs.~BI1; Unpublished doctoral dissertation, Uni-
versity of Florida.
Hebel, T. M.(1987).~BI2;An analysis of the Evaluation Practices
of NCAET-Accredited Teacher Education Institution:
Utilizing the Context, Input, Process, and Product
Evaluation Model.~BI1; Unpublished doctoral dissertation,
Northern Illinois University.
Hinkle, D. E.(1971). ~BI2;The Conceptualization of the Stuffle-
beam CIPP Evaluation Model in a Multivariate Con-
text.~BI1; Unpublished doctoral dissertation, The Univer-
sity of Toledo.
Hopkins, D.(1989). ~BI2;Evaluation for School Development.~BI1; PA:
Open University Press.
House, E. R.(1978). Assumptions Underlying Evaluational
Models, in Madaus, G. F. et al.(eds)(1983)~BI2; Evalua-
tion Models.~BI1; Boston: Kluwer-Nijhoff, pp.45-64.
House, E. R.(Ed.)(1986).~BI2; New Directions in Educational
Evaluation.~BI1; London: The Falmer Press.
Humble, E. P. (1993).~BI2; A Review of School Facility Needs
in Idaho, an Analysis of Multiple Funding Options,
and the Identification of Basic Principles Which
Could be Used to Delop Facility Funding Models in
Idaho.~BI1; Unpublished doctoral dissertation, Univer-
sity of Idaho.
Joint Committee on Standards for Educational Evaluation.
(1994).~BI2; Standards for Evaluation of Educational

Progarms, Projects, and Materials.~BI1; New York:McGraw
-Hill.
Jou, Meei-Ling Ivy (1986).~BI2; The Development of Program Asse-
ssment Methods for Developmental Studies.~BI1; Unpubli-
shed doctoral dissertation, University of Georgia.
Kelly, P. A. (1984).~BI2; A Case Study of the Design, Imple-
mentation, and Evaluation of a Special Needs Program
for Handicapped Teenagers.~BI1; Unpublished doctoral
dissertation, The Catholic University of America.
Khoury, N. M. (1988).~BI2; A Technical Training Program
for International Students in a Mid-western Aviation
Technical School: An Administrative Perspective.~BI1;
Unpublished doctoral dissertation, The University
of Tulsa.
Lewey, A. (1989). School Evaluation and School Autonomy.
In Y. Friedman (Ed.). ~BI2;Autonomy in Education~BI1; (pp.
145-178) . Jerusalem: Henrientta Szold Institute.
Matinez Munoz, Marius (1997).~BI2; Orientation of Classroom
Climate: Investigations in the Course of supervi-
sion (intervention).~BI1; Unpublished doctoral disser-
tation, Universitat Autonoma De Barcelona, Spain.
Moussa, L. M. (1996).~BI2; Post-Literacy in Nigeria: Program
Design and the Transfer of Learning.~BI1; Unpublished
doctoral dissertation, The Florida State University.
Murphy, J., Weil, M., Hallinger, P. & Mitman A. (1985).
School Effectiveness: A Conceptual Framework. ~BI2;Edu-
cational Forum.~BI1; Vol. 49, No. 3.

Musiime, Reuben. (1996).~BI2; A Critical Evaluation of the
Religious Education Curriculum for Secondary school
Students in Uganda.~BI1; Unpublished doctoral dis-
sertation, University of North Texas.
Nevo, David (1983). The Conceptualization in Educational
Evaluation: An Analytical Review of the Literature
.~BI2; Review of Educational Research~BI1;, 1, 117-128.
Nevo, David (1994). Combining Internal and External Eval-
uation: A Case for School-Based Evaluation, ~BI2;Studies
in Educational Evaluation~BI1;, Vol. 20, pp. 87-98.
Oakes, Jeannie (1989). What Educational Indicators? The
Case for Assessing the School Context. ~BI2;Educational
Evaluation and Policy Analysis.~BI1;Vol. 11, No. 2, pp.
181-199.
Palmisano, M. J.(1981). ~BI2;An Analysis of Classroom Teachers'
and Curriculum Supervisors' Perceptions of the Edu-
cational Program Evaluation Process in terms of the
CIPP Evaluation Model.~BI1; Unpublished doctoral disser-
tation, Loyola University of Chicago.
Penh, Hsin-Chen sparks (1995). ~BI2;Design and Evaluation of an
In-service Model for Vocational High School Automo-
tive Electronic Technology Teachers in Taiwan.~BI1;
Unpublished doctoral dissertation, Florida Interna-
tional University.
Popham, W. J.(Ed.)(1974).~BI2; Evaluation in Education: Cur-
rent application~BI1;. University of California, Los
Angeles.

Popham, W. J.(1993).~BI2; Educational Evaluation.~BI1; New Jersey:
Prentice-Hall, Inc.
Purkey, S. C. & Smith, M. S. (1983). Effective Schools: A
Review. ~BI2;The Elementary School Journal, ~BI1;Vol. 48
, No. 4.
Quincey, R. D. (1987).~BI2; Probation Workload Activities Ma-
nagement System: An Alternative Approach in Judicial
Systems.~BI1; Unpublished doctoral dissertation, Uni-
versity of La Verne.
Reid, K., Hipkins, D. & Holly, P. (1987). ~BI2;Toward the Eff-
ective School: The Problems and Some Solutions.~BI1; Ox-
ford: Basil Blackwell.
Rendulic, P. A. (1994).~BI2; An Evaluation into the Potential
Values and the Validity of a Curriculum Evaluation
Model for Community Colleges.~BI1; Unpublished doctoral
dissertation, Florida International University.
Rold, B. A. J. (1988).~BI2; Guidelines for Wellness Programs
in School Corporations.~BI1; Unpublished doctoral dis-
sertation, Indiana University.
Ruangsuwan, Chaiyot (1986).~BI2; An Evaluation of the under-
grauate Educational Technology Program at Srinakhar-
inwirot University, Mahasarakham, Thailand.~BI1; Unpu-
blished doctoral dissertation, Illinois State Uni-
versity.
Sarria, A. E. (1997).~BI2; Instructional Change through Colla-
boration and Reflection (Middle School Teachers). ~BI1;
Unpublished doctoral dissertation, Florida Interna-

tional University.
Scriven M. (1967). The Methodology of Evaluation. In~BI2; cur-
riculum Evaluation,~BI1; ed. R. E. Stake, American Edu-
cational Evaluation, No. 1. chicago: Rand McNally.
Scriven M. (1994). Evaluation as a Discipline. ~BI2;Studies in
Educational Evaluation~BI1;, Vol. 20, pp.147-166.
Smith, K. M.(1981). ~BI2;An Analysis of the Practice of Educa-
tional Program Evaluation in Terms of the CIPP Eva-
luation Model.~BI1; Unpublished doctoral dissertation,
Loyola University of Chicago.
Stake, R. E. (1976).~BI2; Evaluating Educational Programmes:
The Need and the Response~BI1;. Center for Instructional
Research and Curriculum Evaluation, University of
Illinois at Urbana Champaign.
Stufflebeam, D. L. et al. (1971).~BI2; Educational Evaluation
and Decision Making.~BI1; Itasca: F. E. Peacock Publish-
ers, INC.
Stufflebeam, D. L. et al. (1985).~BI2; Conduction Educational
Needs Assessments.~BI1; Boston:Kluwer-Nijhoff Publish-
ing.
Stufflebeam, D. L. and Madaus G. F. (1983). The Standards
for Evaluation of Educational Programs, Projects,
and Materials: A Description and Summary. in Madaus
, G. F. et al. (Eds).~BI2; Evaluation Models.~BI1; Boston:
Kluwer-Nijhoff Publishing. pp.395-404.
Stufflebeam, D. L. & Shinkfielf, A. G.(1985).~BI2; Systematic
Evaluation: A Self-Instructional Guide to Theory

and Practice.~BI1; Boston: Kluwer-Nijhoff Publishing.
Stufflebeam, D. L., Madaus G. F. & Scriven M. S. (1983).
~BI2;Evaluation Models: Viewpoints on Educational and
Human Services Evaluation.~BI1; Boston: Kluwer-Nijhoff
Publishing.
Stufflebeam, D. L. and Webster W. J. (1980).~BI2; Literature
Related to Educational Personnel Evaluations: The
Need for Standards.~BI1; Paper presented at the Annual
Meeting of the American Association of Colleges for
Teacher Education.
Stufflebeam, D. L. and Webster W. J. (1980). An Alterna-
tive Approaches to Evaluation. In Madaus, G. F. et
al. (Eds.)~BI2; Evaluation Models.~BI1; Boston: Kluwer-
Nijhoff Publishing. pp.23-44.
Stufflebeam, D. L. (1994). Introduction: Recommendations
for Improving Evaluation in U.S. Public Schools.
~BI2;Studies in Education~BI1;, Vol. 20, pp. 3-21.
Stufflebeam, D. L. (1997). A Standards-Based Perspective
on Evaluaiton, In Mabry, Linda (ed.):~BI2; Evaluation
and Postmodern Dilemma.~BI1; (pp. 61-88);Greenwich, Con-
necticut: JAI Press Inc.
Suthummaraksa, S. R. (1986).~BI2; An Evaluation of the Doctoral
Program in Development Education at Srinakharinwirot
University, Thailand.~BI1; Unpublished doctoral disser-
tation, Illinois State University.
Tyler, R. W. (1949).~BI2; Basic Principles of Curriculum and
Instruction.~BI1; Chicago: The University of Chicago
Press.

Tyler, R. W. (Ed.)(1969).~BI2; Educational Evaluation: New
Roles, New Means.~BI1; Chicago: The University of Chi-
cago Press.
Worthen, B. R. (1990). Program Evaluation. In Herbert J.
Walberg and Geneva D. Haertel (Eds.).~BI2; The Interna-
tional Encyclopedia of Educational Evaluation.~BI1; New
York: Peragmon Press. pp.42-47.
Waters, L. D. (1987).~BI2; Outcome Measure of Graduates of a
Master's Degree in Nursing Program: Assessing Con-
gruence of Perceptions of Graduates and Employers.~BI1;
Unpublished doctoral dissertation, University of De-
laware.
Wolf R. M. (1992). ~BI2;Evaluation in Education: Foundations of
Competency Assessment and Program Review.~BI1; New York:
Praeger Publication.
Worthen, B. R. & Sanders, J. R.(Eds.)(1973).~BI2; Educational
Evaluation: Theory and Practice.~BI1; Worthington, Ohio:
Charles A. Jones, Inc.
Wortman, P. M. (1983). Evaluation Research: A Methodolo-
gical Perspective. ~BI2;Annual Review of Psychology~BI1;, 34,
223-260.

5