[{"data":1,"prerenderedAt":-1},["ShallowReactive",2],{"doc-detail-37287-en":3,"doc-seo-37287-105":30,"detail-sidebar-cat-0-en-105":90},{"code":4,"msg":5,"data":6},0,"success",{"doc_id":7,"user_id":8,"nickname":9,"user_avatar":10,"doc_module":4,"category_id":11,"category_name":12,"doc_title":13,"doc_description":14,"doc_content":15,"file_id":16,"file_url":17,"file_type":18,"file_size":19,"view_count":20,"is_deleted":4,"is_public":21,"is_downloadable":21,"audit_status":21,"page_count":22,"language":23,"language_code":24,"site_id":25,"html_lang":24,"table_of_contents":26,"faqs":27,"seo_title":13,"seo_description":14,"update_tm":28,"read_time":29},37287,687197207057,"Sage","https://ap-avatar.wpscdn.com/davatar_29158cc5080c5b710cf443261637dec0",4,"Exam","The Countenance of Educational Evaluation","The paper examines educational evaluation through both its informal and formal dimensions, contrasting casual, observation-based judgments with structured methods such as checklists, peer visitation, comparisons, and standardized testing. It argues that educators often undervalue formal evaluation due to limited research availability, weak data relevance, inadequate training of teams, and measurement designs that focus on differentiating students rather than assessing instructional impact. It proposes developing an evaluation plan grounded in antecedent conditions, classroom transactions, and outcome linkages.","THE COUTENANCE OF EDUCATIONAL EVALUATION  \nRobert E. Stake  \nCenter for Instructional Research and Curriculum Evaluation University of Illinois  \nPresident Johnson, President Conant, Mrs. Hull (Sara's teacher) and Mr. Tykociner (theman next door) are quite alike in the faith they have in education. But they have quite different ideas of what education is. The value they put on education does not reveal their way of evaluating education.  \nEducators differ among themselves as to both the essence and worth of an educational program. The wide range of evaluation purposes and methods allows, each to keep his own perspective. Few see their own programs \"in the round\", partly because of a parochial approach to evaluation. To understand better his own teaching and to contribute more to the science of teaching, each educator should examine the full countenance of evaluation.  \nEducational evaluation has its formal and informal sides. Informal evaluation is recognized by its dependence on casual observation, implicit goals, intuitive norms, and subjective judgment. Perhaps because these are also characteristic of day-td-day, personal styles of living, informal evaluation results in perspectives which are seldom questioned. Careful study reveals informal evaluation of education to be of variable quality-sometimes penetrating and insightful, sometimes superficial and distorted.  \nFormal evaluation of education is recognized by its dependence on checklists, structured visitation by peers, controlled comparisons, and standardized testing of students. Some of these techniques have long histories of successful use. Unfortunately, when planning an evaluation, few educators consider even these four. The more common notion is to evaluate informally: to ask the opinion of the instructor, to ponder the logic of the program, or to consider the reputation of the advocates. Seldom do we find a search for relevant research reports or for behavioral data pertinent to the ultimate curricular decisions.  \nDissatisfaction with the formal approach is not without cause. Few highly relevant, readable, research studies can be found. The professional journals are not disposed to publish evaluation studies. Behavioral data are costly, and often do not provide the answers. Too many accreditation-type visitation teams lack special training or even experience in evaluation. Many checklists are ambiguous; some focus too much attention on the physical attributes of a school. Psychometric tests have been developed primarily to differentiate among students at the same point in training rather than to assess the effect of instruction on acquisition of skill and understanding. Today's educator may rely little on formal evaluation because its answers have seldom been answers to questions he is asking.  \nThe educator's disdain of formal evaluation is due also to his sensitivity to criticism-and his is a critical clientele.. It is not uncommon for him to draw before him such curtains as\"national norm comparisons, \" \"innovation phase, \" and \"'academic freedom\" to avoid exposure through evaluation. The ' politics\" of evaluation is an interesting issue in itself, but it is not the issue 'here. The issue here is the potential contribution to education of formal evaluation. Today,  \neducators fail to perceive what formal evaluation could do for them. They should be imploring measurement specialists to develop a methodology that reflects the fullness, the complexity, and the importance of their programs. They are not.  \nWhat one finds when he examines formal evaluation activities in education today is too little effort to spell out antecedent conditions and classroom transactions (a few of which visitation teams do record) and too little effort to couple them with the various outcomes (a few of which are portrayed by conventional test scores) . Little attempt has been made to measure the match between what an educator intends to do and what he does do. The traditional concern o","cbCailX385fzm7G9","https://ap.wps.com/l/cbCailX385fzm7G9","pdf",183510,3,1,18,"English","en",105,"# Informal vs. Formal Evaluation\n## Informal evaluation characteristics\n## Formal evaluation characteristics\n# Limitations of Common Practices\n## Research and data constraints\n## Accreditation teams and ambiguous checklists\n# Toward a More Complete Evaluation\n## Antecedent conditions and classroom transactions\n## Linking intentions to enacted instruction\n## Program-centered evaluation plan","[{\"question\":\"How does informal educational evaluation differ from formal educational evaluation?\",\"answer\":\"Informal evaluation relies on casual observation, implicit goals, intuitive norms, and subjective judgment. Formal evaluation uses checklists, structured peer visitation, controlled comparisons, and standardized student testing.\"},{\"question\":\"Why do many educators tend to rely less on formal evaluation?\",\"answer\":\"Many formal methods have limited relevant, readable research backing, behavioral data can be costly, accreditation visitation teams may lack evaluation training, and existing measures often do not answer the questions educators are actually asking.\"},{\"question\":\"What does the paper suggest should be emphasized in designing formal evaluation?\",\"answer\":\"Evaluation should spell out antecedent conditions and classroom transactions and connect them to outcomes. It should also measure the match between intended educational actions and what actually occurs in practice, shifting attention from narrow score reliability toward contextual contingencies and instructional effects.\"}]",1783026782,45,{"code":4,"msg":31,"data":32},"ok",{"site_id":25,"language":24,"slug":33,"title":13,"keywords":34,"description":14,"schema_data":35,"social_meta":85,"head_meta":87,"extra_data":89,"updated_unix":28},"the-countenance-of-educational-evaluation","",{"@graph":36,"@context":84},[37,52,67],{"@type":38,"itemListElement":39},"BreadcrumbList",[40,44,48,50],{"item":41,"name":42,"@type":43,"position":21},"https://docshare.wps.com","Home","ListItem",{"item":45,"name":46,"@type":43,"position":47},"https://docshare.wps.com/document/","Document",2,{"item":49,"name":12,"@type":43,"position":20},"https://docshare.wps.com/document/exam/",{"item":51,"name":13,"@type":43,"position":11},"https://docshare.wps.com/document/the-countenance-of-educational-evaluation/37287/",{"url":51,"name":13,"@type":53,"author":54,"headline":13,"publisher":56,"fileFormat":59,"inLanguage":24,"description":14,"dateModified":60,"datePublished":61,"encodingFormat":59,"isAccessibleForFree":62,"interactionStatistic":63},"DigitalDocument",{"name":9,"@type":55},"Person",{"url":41,"name":57,"@type":58},"DocShare","Organization","application/pdf","2026-07-08","2026-07-02",true,{"@type":64,"interactionType":65,"userInteractionCount":20},"InteractionCounter",{"@type":66},"ViewAction",{"@type":68,"mainEntity":69},"FAQPage",[70,76,80],{"name":71,"@type":72,"acceptedAnswer":73},"How does informal educational evaluation differ from formal educational evaluation?","Question",{"text":74,"@type":75},"Informal evaluation relies on casual observation, implicit goals, intuitive norms, and subjective judgment. Formal evaluation uses checklists, structured peer visitation, controlled comparisons, and standardized student testing.","Answer",{"name":77,"@type":72,"acceptedAnswer":78},"Why do many educators tend to rely less on formal evaluation?",{"text":79,"@type":75},"Many formal methods have limited relevant, readable research backing, behavioral data can be costly, accreditation visitation teams may lack evaluation training, and existing measures often do not answer the questions educators are actually asking.",{"name":81,"@type":72,"acceptedAnswer":82},"What does the paper suggest should be emphasized in designing formal evaluation?",{"text":83,"@type":75},"Evaluation should spell out antecedent conditions and classroom transactions and connect them to outcomes. It should also measure the match between intended educational actions and what actually occurs in practice, shifting attention from narrow score reliability toward contextual contingencies and instructional effects.","https://schema.org",{"og:url":51,"og:type":86,"og:title":13,"og:site_name":57,"og:description":14},"article",{"robots":88,"canonical":51},"index,follow",{"doc_id":7,"site_id":25},{"code":4,"msg":5,"data":91},[92,96,100,103,108,113,118,123,128,131,135],{"id":21,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":46,"category_name":93,"show_sort_weight":94,"slug":95},"Story & Novel",90,"story-novel",{"id":47,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":46,"category_name":97,"show_sort_weight":98,"slug":99},"Literature",80,"literature",{"id":11,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":46,"category_name":12,"show_sort_weight":101,"slug":102},70,"exam",{"id":104,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":46,"category_name":105,"show_sort_weight":106,"slug":107},5,"Comic",60,"comic",{"id":109,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":46,"category_name":110,"show_sort_weight":111,"slug":112},6,"Technology",50,"technology",{"id":114,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":46,"category_name":115,"show_sort_weight":116,"slug":117},7,"Healthcare",40,"healthcare",{"id":119,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":46,"category_name":120,"show_sort_weight":121,"slug":122},8,"Research & Report",30,"research-report",{"id":124,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":46,"category_name":125,"show_sort_weight":126,"slug":127},9,"Religion & Spirituality",20,"religion-spirituality",{"id":126,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":46,"category_name":129,"show_sort_weight":126,"slug":130},"World Cup","world-cup",{"id":132,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":46,"category_name":133,"show_sort_weight":132,"slug":134},10,"Lifestyle","lifestyle",{"id":136,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":46,"category_name":137,"show_sort_weight":104,"slug":138},19,"General","general"]