Abstract
Members of most professions and many other public service fields are expected to comply with given standards or codes of performance and service. The standards and codes have several important functions:
-
• protect consumers and society from harmful practices
-
• provide a basis for accountability by the service providers
-
• provide an authoritative basis for assessing professional services
-
• provide a basis for adjudicating claims of malpractice
-
• help assure that service providers will employ their field’s currently best available practices
-
• identify needs for improved technologies
-
• provide a conceptual framework and working definitions to guide research and development in the service area
-
• provide general principles for addressing a variety of practical issues in the service area
-
• present service providers and their constituents with a common language to facilitate communication and collaboration
-
• provide core content for training and educating service providers
-
• earn and maintain the public’s confidence in the field of practice
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Access this chapter
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
Preview
Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.
Similar content being viewed by others
References
American Evaluation Association Task Force on Guiding Principles for Evaluators. (1995). Guiding principles for evaluators. New Directions for Program Evaluation, 66, 19–26.
Cordray, D.S. (1982). An assessment of the utility of the ERS standards. In P.H. Rossi (Ed.), Standards for evaluation practice. New Directions for Program Evaluation, 15, 67–81.
Covert, R.W. (1995). A twenty-year veteran’s reflections on the guiding principles for evaluators. In W.R. Shadish, D.L. Newman, M.A. Scheirer, & C. Wye (Eds.), Guiding principles for evaluators. New Directions for Program Evaluation, 66, 35–45.
ERS Standards Committee. (1982). Evaluation Research Society standards for program evaluation. In P.H. Rossi (Ed.), Standards for evaluation practice. New Directions for Program Evaluation, 15, 7–19.
Joint Committee on Standards for Educational Evaluation. (1981). Standards for evaluations of educational programs, projects, and materials. New York: McGraw-Hill.
Joint Committee on Standards for Educational Evaluation. (1988). The personnel evaluation standards. Newbury Park, CA: Sage
Joint Committee on Standards for Educational Evaluation. (1994). The program evaluation standards: How to assess evaluations of educational programs. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
Sanders, J.R. (1995). Standards and principles. In W.R. Shadish, D.L. Newman, M.A. Scheirer, & C. Wye (Eds.), Guiding principles for evaluators. New Directions for Program Evaluation, 66, 47–53.
Shadish, W.R., Newman, D.L., Scheirer, M.A., & Wye, C. (Eds.). (1995). Guiding principles for evaluators. New Directions for Program Evaluation, 66.
Stufflebeam, D.L. (1982). A next step: Discussion to consider unifying the ERS and Joint Committee standards. In P.H. Rossi (Ed.), Standards for evaluation practice. New Directions for Program Evaluation, 15, 27–36.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2003 Kluwer Academic Publishers
About this chapter
Cite this chapter
Stufflebeam, D.L. (2003). Professional Standards and Principles for Evaluations. In: Kellaghan, T., Stufflebeam, D.L. (eds) International Handbook of Educational Evaluation. Kluwer International Handbooks of Education, vol 9. Springer, Dordrecht. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-010-0309-4_18
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-010-0309-4_18
Publisher Name: Springer, Dordrecht
Print ISBN: 978-1-4020-0849-8
Online ISBN: 978-94-010-0309-4
eBook Packages: Springer Book Archive