Currently, formative evaluation strategies are used in special education programs to the near exclusion of impact or outcome evaluations. Fast practices, misconceptions concerning group impact evaluation designs, and philosophical orientations have all contributed to this trend. Impact evaluations of special education programs, however, can be designed and conducted so that they produce information useful for program improvement—regardless of whether the intervention is massive or results are statistically significant. Illustrative case studies of recent impact evaluations support this position. Assessment of program implementation and measurement of outcome, two critical areas that can greatly improve the usefulness of evaluation results, are emphasized in the concluding discussion.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
Boruch, R. F. (1976). On common contentions about randomized field experiments. In G.V. Glass (Ed.), Evaluation studies review annual, vol. 1 (pp. 158–194). Beverly Hills, CA: Sage Press.
2.
Boruch, R. F., & Gomez, H. (1979). Measuring impact: Power theory in social program evaluation. In L. Datta & R. Perloff (Eds.), Improving evaluations (pp. 139–170). Beverly Hills: Sage.
3.
Campbell, D., & Stanley, J. (1963). Experimental and quasi-experimental designs for research. Chicago: Rand McNally.
4.
Campbell, D., & Boruch, R. F. (1975). Making the case of randomized assignments to treatments by considering the alternatives: Six ways in which quasi-experimental evaluations in compensatory education tend to underestimate effects. In C. A. Bennett & A. A. Lumsdaine (Eds.), Evaluation and experiment: Some critical issues in assessing social programs (pp. 195–296). New York: Academic Press.
5.
Chall, J. S. (1979). The great debate: Ten years later, with a modest proposal for reading stages. In L. B. Resnick & P. A. Weaver (Eds.), Theory and practice of early reading (Vol. 1, pp. 29–56). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
6.
Charters, W. W., & Jones, J. E. (1973). On the risk of appraising non-events in program evaluation. Educational Researcher, 2, 5–7.
7.
Cook, T. D., & Campbell, D. T. (1979). Quasi-experimentation: Design and analysis for field settings. Chicago: Rand McNally College Publishing.
8.
Edmonds, R. (1979). Effective schools for the urban poor. Educational Leadership, 37, 15–24.
9.
Elashoff, J. D. (1969). Analysis of covariance: A delicate instrument. American Educational Research journal, 6, 383–401.
10.
Fischer, C. W., Berliner, D. C., Filby, N. N., Marliave, R., Cahen, L. S., & Dishaw, M. M. (1980). Teaching behaviors, academic learning time, and student achievement: An overview. In C. Denham & A. Lieberman (Eds.), Time to learn. Washington, DC: USOE/NIE Printing.
11.
Fullan, M., & Pomfret, A. (1977). Research on curriculum and instruction implementation. Review of Educational Research, 47, 335–397.
12.
Hallahan, D. P., & Kauffman, J. M. (1977). Categories, labels, behavioral characteristics: ED, LD, and EMR reconsidered. Journal of Special Education, 1977, 11, 139–149.
13.
Hersh, R., & Walker, H. M. (in press). Great expectations: Making schools effective for all children. Policy Studies Journal.
14.
Horst, D. P., Tallmadge, G. K., & Wood, C. T. (1975). A practical guide to measuring project impact on student achievement (Monograph No. 1 on Evaluation in Education). Washington, DC: U.S. Government Printing Office.
15.
House, E. R., Glass, G. V., McLean, L. D., & Walker, D. E. (1978). No simple answer: Critique of the “Follow Through” evaluation. Harvard Educational Review, 48, 128–160.
16.
Irvin, L. K., Gersten, R., Bellamy, G. T., Taylor, V., & Close, D. W. (1980). The trainee performance sample: Improving vocational skill assessment of severely retarded adults. In R. Horner and T. Bellamy (Eds.), Habilitation of severely and profoundly retarded adults: Reports from the Specialized Training Program (Vol. 3). Eugene: University of Oregon Center on Human Development.
17.
Irvin, L., Gersten, R., Bellamy, T., Taylor, V., & Close, D. (1981). The Trainee Performance Sample: Improving vocational skill assessment for the severely retarded. American Journal of Mental Deficiency, 85, 631–638.
18.
Jones, R. R. (1979). Program evaluation design issues. Behavioral Assessment, 1, 51–56.
19.
Kazdin, A. (1973). Methodological and assessment considerations in evaluating reinforcement programs in applied settings. Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis, 6, 517–531.
20.
Kennedy, M. (Chair). (April 1980). Minutes of first meeting of AERA Task Force on special education evaluation. Cambridge, MA: Huron Institute.
21.
Kennedy, M. (March 1982). Report of the AERA Division H task force on special education evaluation. Cambridge, MA: Huron Institute.
22.
L'E. Stein, C., & Goldman, J. (1980). Beginning reading instruction for children with minimal brain dysfunction. Journal of Learning Disabilities, 13, 219–222.
23.
Leinhardt, G., Zigmond, N., & Cooley, W.W. (1981). Reading instruction and its effects. American Education Research Journal, 18, 343–361.
24.
Maggs, A., & Morath, T. (1976). Effects of direct verbal instruction on intellectual development of institutionalized moderately retarded children: A two-year study. Journal of Special Education, 10, 357–364.
25.
MacMillan, D. L., & Semmel, M. I. (1977). Evaluation of mainstreamed programs. Focus on Exceptional Children, 99(4), 1–14.
Pflaum, S., Walberg, H., Karegaines, M., & Rahser, S. (1980). Reading instruction: A quantitative analysis. Educational Researcher, 9(7), 12–18.
28.
Serwer, B. L., Shapiro, B. J., & Shapiro, P. (1973). The comparative effectiveness of four methods of instruction on the achievement of children with specific learning disabilities. Journal of Special Education, 7, 241–249.
29.
Shepard, L. A., Smith, M. L., & Bojire, C. P. (1983). Characteristics of pupils identified as Learning Disabled. American Education Research Journal, 20, 309–332.
30.
Stallings, J. (1975). Implementation and child effects of teaching practices in Follow Through classrooms. Monographs of the Society for Research in Child Development, 40.
31.
Walker, H. M., McConnell, S., Walker, J., Clarke, J. Y., Todis, B., Cohen, G., & Rankin, R. (in press). Initial analysis of the SBS curriculum: Efficacy of instructional and behavior management procedures for improving the social competence of handicapped children. Analysis and Intervention in Developmental Disabilities.
32.
Weber, G. (1971). Inner-city children can be taught to read: Four successful schools. Washington, DC: Council for Basic Education.
33.
White, O. R. (1980). Adaptive performance objectives: Form versus function. In W. Sailor, B. Wilcox, and L. Brown (Eds.), Methods of instruction for severely handicapped students (pp. 47–69). Baltimore: Paul H. Brookes.
