PROGRAM DEĞERLENDİRMEDE META-ANALİZ VE META-DEĞERLENDİRME

Year 2007, Issue: 18, - , 20.06.2015

Mustafa Sağlam İsmail Yüksel

Abstract

Nowadays in program evaluation studies different approaches and methods are being used. While some of these have fundamental functions in evaluating a program; some of them have the function to control the quality of completed studies or to make interpretations gathering the similar completed studies in one study. Meta-evaluation and meta-analysis are the most used methods among. Unfortunately, in recent years in program evaluation studies in Turkey, these two methods are being misused because of the generalization done based on two consecutive or complementary steps: Analyze and evaluation. In this article to make contributions to use these methods correctly, it is aimed at explaining the context, the scope, theoretical frame and application stages of these methods

Keywords

Program evaluation, Meta-evaluation, Meta-analysis

PROGRAM DEĞERLENDİRMEDE META-ANALİZ VE META-DEĞERLENDİRME

Abstract

Günümüzde program değerlendirme çalışmalarında birbirinden farklı yaklaşım ve yöntemler değerlendirilmesinde temel bir işleve sahipken, bazıları tamamlanmış çalışmaların niteliğinin yöntemlerin

Keywords

Program değerlendirme, Meta-değerlendirme, Meta-analiz

References

• Abramson, J. H. ve Abramson, Z. H. (2001). Making sense of data. A self- Instruction manual on the interpretation of epidemiological data. New York: Oxford University Press.
• Balcı, A. (2001). Sosyal bilimlerde araştırma: Yöntem, teknik ve ilkeler. Ankara: PegemA Yayıncılık.
• Bıckman, L. (1997). Evaluating evaluation: Where do we go from here?. Evaluation Practice. 18, 1–16.
• Brınkerhoff, B. ve diğerleri. (1983). Program evaluation: A practitioner’s guide for trainers and educators. Boston: Klumer-Nijhoff.
• Chambers, E. (2004). An Introduction to meta-analysis with articles from The Journal of Educational Research (1992–2002). The Journal of Educational Research. 98(1), 35–44.
• Cooksky, L. ve Caraceli, V. (2005). Quality, context, and use: Issues in achieving the goals of metaevaluation. American Journal of Evaluation. 26(1), 31–42.
• Decoster, J. (2004). Meta-analysis notes. www.stat-help.com/notes adresinden 20.11.2006 tarihinde indirilmiştir.
• Erden, M. (1993). Eğitimde program değerlendirme. Ankara: Pegem Yayıncılık. Eysenck, H. J. (1978). An exercise in mega-silliness. American Psychologist, 33, 517.
• Egger, M. ve Smith G. (1997). Meta-analysis: Potentials and promise. British Medical Journal, 315, 1371–1374
• Ergene T. (2003). Sınav kaygısını azaltma programlarının etkililiği: Bir meta-analiz çalışması. VII. Ulusal psikolojik Danışma ve Rehberlik Kongresi, Malatya: İnönü Üniversitesi.
• Fitzpatrick, J.L., Sanders, J.R ve Worthen, B. L. (2004). Program evaluation alternative approaches and practical guidelines. Boston, Pearson Education Inc.
• Gallo, P. (1978). A meta-analysis-a mixed metaphor?. American Psychologist, 33, 511–519.
• Glass, G. (1978). Primary, secondary, and meta-analysis of research. Educational Researcher. 5, 3–8.
• Gözütok, D. (2001). Program değerlendirme. Öğretimde Planlama ve Değerlendirme. Editör: Mehmet Gültekin. Eskişehir: Anadolu Üniversitesi Yayınları. ss:175–189.
• Hamer, R. ve Simpson, P. (2002). Tools for meta-analysis. Proceedings of the Twenty-Seventh Annual SAS (Bildiri No: 250). NC: SAS Institute Inc.
• Lıpsey, M ve Wilson, D. (2000). Practical meta-analysis. Londra: Sage Publication. Rosenthal, R. (1979). The file drawer problem and tolerance for null results. Psychological Bulletin. 86(3), 638–641.
• Scriven, M. (1991). Evaluation thesaurus. Newbury Park: Sage.
• ________. (1969). An Introduction to meta-evaluation. Educational Product Report. 2(5), 36–38
• Stufflebeam, D. (2000). The Methodology of metaevaluation as reflected in metaevaluations by the Western Michigan University Evaluation Center. Journal of Personnel Evaluation in Education 14(1), 95–125.
• ________. (1978). Meta-evaluation: An overview. Evaluation and Health Profession. 1(1), 17–43.
• Şahin, M.C.(2005). İnternet tabanlı uzaktan eğitimin etkililiği: Bir meta analiz çalışması. Yayınlanmamış yüksek lisans tezi. Adana: Çukurova Üniversitesi Tarım, K. (2003). Kubaşık öğrenme yönteminin matematik öğretimindeki etkinliği ve kubaşık öğrenme yöntemine ilişkin bir meta analiz çalışması. Yayınlanmamış doktora tezi. Adana: Çukurova Üniversitesi
• Widmer, T. (2002). Evaluation standards in the context of sustainability. Easy-ECO Evaluation of Sustainability Euro Conference. Vienna.
• Yaşar, Ş., M. Gültekin, N. Köse, P. Girmen, Ş. Anagün. The Meta- Evaluation Of Teacher Training Programs For Elementary Education In Turkey, Conference Proceedings, Gold Coast, Queensland, Australia, 6-9 July 2005, pp.498-504, 06/07/2005