Use of communication theory as a paradigmfor studing the impact of different evaluation
report styles on different audiences was explored. Ratings of the evaluation consultant
and the evaluation report were influenced by use of jargon and data, but, as in previous
studies, were generally unrelated to whether they were read by lay or professional audiences. In contrast, extend of agreement with recommendations were related primarily to
audience type and rarely related to the style of the report.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
Braskamp, L.A., R.D. Brown, and D.L. Newman (1978) "Credibility of a local educational program evaluation report: author source and client characteristics." Amer. Educ. Research J.15, 3: 441-450.
2.
Brown, R.D. and D.L. Newman (1979) "Communication theory as a paradigm for making evaluation reports more effective." Presented at the annual meeting of the American Education Research Association, San Francisco.
3.
Brown, R.D., L.A. Braskamp, and D.L. Newman (1978) "Evaluator credibility and acceptance as a function of report styles: do jargon and data make a difference?" Evaluation Q.2, 2: 331-341.
4.
Fishbein, M. and I. Ajzen (1975) Belief, Attitudes, Intention and Behavior: An Introduction to Theory and Research. Reading. MA: Addison-Wesley.
5.
House, E.R. (1977) The Logic of Evaluative Argument. CSE Monograph Series, Los Angeles: Graduate School, UCLA .
6.
McGuire, W.J. (1969) "The nature of attitudes and attitude change," in G. Lindzey and E. Aronson (eds.) The Handbook of Social Psychology. Reading, MA: Addison-Wesley.
7.
Newman, D.L., R.D. Brown, and L.A. Braskamp (1980) "Communication theory and the utilization of evaluation ," pp. 29-35 in L. Braskamp and R. Brown (eds.) Utilization of Evaluative Information. New Directions for Program Evaluation, 5. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
8.
Newman, D.L., R.D. Brown, and M. Littman (1979) "Evaluation report audience characteristics which influence the impact of evaluation reports: does who say what to whom make a difference?" CEDR Q.12, 2: 14-18.
