Evaluation at the Frontier: Some "Timely" Comments for Future Use
dc.contributor.author | Wortman, Paul M. | en_US |
dc.date.accessioned | 2010-04-13T19:15:11Z | |
dc.date.available | 2010-04-13T19:15:11Z | |
dc.date.issued | 1984 | en_US |
dc.identifier.citation | Wortman, Paul (1984). "Evaluation at the Frontier: Some "Timely" Comments for Future Use." American Journal of Evaluation 5(1): 33-44. <http://hdl.handle.net/2027.42/67212> | en_US |
dc.identifier.issn | 1098-2140 | en_US |
dc.identifier.uri | https://hdl.handle.net/2027.42/67212 | |
dc.format.extent | 3108 bytes | |
dc.format.extent | 586965 bytes | |
dc.format.mimetype | text/plain | |
dc.format.mimetype | application/pdf | |
dc.publisher | Sage Publications | en_US |
dc.title | Evaluation at the Frontier: Some "Timely" Comments for Future Use | en_US |
dc.type | Article | en_US |
dc.subject.hlbsecondlevel | Education | en_US |
dc.subject.hlbsecondlevel | Social Sciences (General) | en_US |
dc.subject.hlbtoplevel | Social Sciences | en_US |
dc.description.peerreviewed | Peer Reviewed | en_US |
dc.contributor.affiliationum | ERS Presidential Address University of Michigan | en_US |
dc.description.bitstreamurl | http://deepblue.lib.umich.edu/bitstream/2027.42/67212/2/10.1177_109821408400500110.pdf | |
dc.identifier.doi | 10.1177/109821408400500110 | en_US |
dc.identifier.source | American Journal of Evaluation | en_US |
dc.identifier.citedreference | Boruch, R.F., Cordray, D.S., et al. (1983). Recommendations to Congress and their rationale: The Holtzman project. Evaluation Review, 1983, 7, 5-35. | en_US |
dc.identifier.citedreference | Boruch, R.F., & Wortman, P.M. (1979). Implications of educational evaluation for evaluation policy. In D. C. Berliner (Ed.), Review of research in education. Washington, DC : AERA., | en_US |
dc.identifier.citedreference | Campbell, D.T., & Stanley, J.C. (1963). Experimental and quasi-experimental designs for research on training. In N. L. Gage (Ed.), Handbook of research on teaching. Chicago : Rand Mc Nally. | en_US |
dc.identifier.citedreference | Chelimsky, E. (1981). Designing backward from the end-use. Paper presented to the Evaluation Research Society Annual Meeting, October. | en_US |
dc.identifier.citedreference | Cronbach, L.J. (1975). Beyond the two disciplines of scientific psychology. American Psychologist, 30 116-127. | en_US |
dc.identifier.citedreference | Cronbach, L.J. (1977). Remarks to the New Society. Evaluation Research Society Newsletter, 1, 1-3. | en_US |
dc.identifier.citedreference | Cronbach, L.J. & associates (1980). Toward reform of program evaluation: Aims, methods, and arrangements. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass. | en_US |
dc.identifier.citedreference | Datta, L.-E. (1976). The impact of the Westinghouse/ Ohio evaluation on the development of Project Head Start: An examination of the immediate and longer-term effects and how they came about. In C. C. Abt (Ed.), The evaluation ofsocialprograms. Beverly Hills, CA: Sage. | en_US |
dc.identifier.citedreference | Gilbert, J.P., Mc Peek, B., & Mosteller, F. (1977). Progress in surgery and anesthesia: Benefits and risks of innovative therapy. In J. P. Bunker, B. A. Barnes, and F. Mosteller (Eds.), Costs, risks and benefits of surgery. New York: Oxford (1980). University Press. | en_US |
dc.identifier.citedreference | Heilman, J.G. (1980). Paradigmatic choices in evaluation methodology. Evaluation Review, 4, 693-712. | en_US |
dc.identifier.citedreference | House, E.R. (1980). Evaluating with validity. Beverly Hills, CA: Sage. | en_US |
dc.identifier.citedreference | Kantrowitz, A. et al. (1976). The science court experiment: An interim report. Science, 193, 653-656. | en_US |
dc.identifier.citedreference | Kolata, G. (1982). Heart study produces a surprise result. Science, 218, 31-32. | en_US |
dc.identifier.citedreference | Lazar, I., Hubbell, V.R., Murray, H., Rosche, M., and Royce, J. (1977). The persistence of preschool effects: A long-term follow-up of fourteen infant and preschool experiments. Washington, DC: Government Printing Office. | en_US |
dc.identifier.citedreference | Mosteller, F. (1981). Innovation and evaluation. Science, 211, 881-886, | en_US |
dc.identifier.citedreference | Multiple Risk Factor Intervention Trial Research Group (1982). Multiple Risk Factor intervention trial: Risk factor changes and mortality results. JAMA. 248, 1465-1477. | en_US |
dc.identifier.citedreference | Nicholson, R.A. & Berman, J.S. (1983). Is follow-up necessary in evaluating psychotherapy. Psychological Bulletin, 93, 261-278. | en_US |
dc.identifier.citedreference | Patton, M.Q. (1978). Utilization-focused evaluation. Beverly Hills, CA: Sage. | en_US |
dc.identifier.citedreference | Riecken, H.W., Boruch, R.F., & associates (1974). Social experimentation: A methodfor planning and evaluating social intervention. New York: Academic Press. | en_US |
dc.identifier.citedreference | Tharp, R.G., & Gallimore, R. (1979). The ecology of program research and evaluation: A model of evaluation succession. In L. Sechrest and associates (Eds.), Evaluation studies review annual (vol. 4). Beverly Hills, CA: Sage. | en_US |
dc.identifier.citedreference | Weiss, C.H. (1977). Introduction. In C. H. Weiss (Ed.), Using social research in public policy making. Lexington, MA: D. C. Heath. | en_US |
dc.identifier.citedreference | Wortman, P.M., & Bryant, F.B. (in press). School desegregation and black achievement: An integrative review. Sociological Methods and Research. | en_US |
dc.identifier.citedreference | Wortman, P.M., Vinokur, A., Sechrest, L., & associates(1982). Evaluation of the NIH consensus Development Process-Phase 1: Final Report. Ann Arbor, MI: Institute for Social Research. | en_US |
dc.identifier.citedreference | Wortman, P.M. & Yeaton, W.H. (1983). Synthesis of results in controlled trials of coronary artery bypass graft surgery. In R. J. Light (Ed.), Evaluation studies review annual (Vol. 8). Beverly Hills, CA: Sage. | en_US |
dc.owningcollname | Interdisciplinary and Peer-Reviewed |
Files in this item
Remediation of Harmful Language
The University of Michigan Library aims to describe library materials in a way that respects the people and communities who create, use, and are represented in our collections. Report harmful or offensive language in catalog records, finding aids, or elsewhere in our collections anonymously through our metadata feedback form. More information at Remediation of Harmful Language.
Accessibility
If you are unable to use this file in its current format, please select the Contact Us link and we can modify it to make it more accessible to you.