AN INVESTIGATION INTO CONTENT EVALUATION OF PROGRAMS BETWEEN 2013 – 2018

  • Cigdem Hursen
  • Felix Danjuma Tappi
Keywords: content analysis, evaluating programs, investigating, qualitative

Abstract

This research was conducted following specific content evaluation of programs between the period of 2015 – 2018 with limitations, a content analysis related studies on evaluation of programs to specify the direction of the research using qualitative study to analyze search results for four years. The Science Direct Data Base was searched to collect the data and journals were scanned to reach 72 studies. The aim of this research is to improve evaluation program effectiveness and to encourage researchers to study in this field. This study focused on program evaluation and answers were sought for distribution of studies by year of publication, subject area, country, method, and sample. The findings revealed that studies on program evaluation were mostly carried out in 2015 and 2018. The findings revealed that qualitative research was used more than quantitative and the mixed method. The result also revealed that most of the studies analyzed were in the area of teacher education and educational research. The analysis was done by the two researchers and for any disagreement, researchers studied on the issue and reached complete agreement. The data obtained from the studies were analyzed through descriptive statistic after calculating their frequency and percentage values

References

Berrang-Ford J. D., & Ford J. Paterson. (2011). Are we adopting to climate change?. Global Environment change, 21, 25-33
Brain, M. (2014). What is teaching?. USA: Permalink Publishers
Burns, R. (2000). Introduction to research methods. (4th ed.). London: Sage
Cai, J., & Cirillo, M. (2014). What do we know about reasoning and proving? Opportunities and missing opportunities from curriculum analyses. International Journal Research, 64, 132-140
Caswell, H. L., & Campbell, D. (1935). Curriculum Development. New York: American Book Company
Cheng, C. (1997). Multi-models of quality in Education. Quality Assurance in Education, 5(1), 212-231
Clemente, M., Ramirez, E., & Dominguez, B. (2000). The selection of contents in school projects in Spain. Curriculum Inquiry, 30(3), 295-317
Coakes, S. J., & Steed, L. (2007). SPPS Version 14.0 for windows: Analysis without anguish. Milton: John Wiley & Sons
Cohen, L., Manion, L., & Morrison, K. (2011). Research methods in education (7th ed.). London: Routledge
Culbertson, H. M., & Sumerick, N. (1976, may 19). Cloaked attribution. What does it mean to Readers?. ANPA News Research Bulletin, 3
Eisner, E. W. (2002). Those who ignore the past…12 ‘easy’ lessons for the next millennium. Journal of curriculum studies, 32(2) 343-357. Retrieved from: http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/002202700182808
Evening, M. L. (2001). Media education Ile-Ife. University of Ife. Press Limited
Glaser, B., & Strauss, A. (1967). The discovery of grounded Theory. Strategies for qualitative research. Chicago: Aldine
Guba, E. S., & Lincoln,Y. S. (1994). Competing paradigms in qualitative research, 105-117. London Sage
Gudmundsdottir, S. (1990). Values in pedagogical content knowledge. Journal of Teacher Education, 41(3), 44-52. Retrieved from: http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/002248719004100306
Jones, K. O., & Reid, J. M. V. (2007). Modifying teaching to address thinking styles. ACM International conference proceedings series, vol. 285, proceedings of the 2007 International Conference on computer systems and technologies. Retrieved from: http://dx.doi.org/10.1145/1330598.1330682
Skinner, B. (1964). Why we need teaching machine in educational technology. New York: Julia Klaus Ethrow Publications
Stephen, G. (2014). Soft skills assessment: Theory development and the research agenda. International Journal of lifelong Education, 33(4), 455-471
Strauss, A., & Corbin, J. (1998). Basic of qualitative research: Techniques and procedures for Developing grounded theory (2nd ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage
Leathwood, C., & Phillips, D. (2000). Developing Curriculum evaluation research in higher education process: Politics and practicalities. Higher Education, 40, 313-330
Lincoln, Y. S., & Guba, E. G. (1985). Naturalistic inquiry. Beverly Hills, CA: Sage
Munby, H. (1990). Metaphorical expressions of teachers’ practical curriculum knowledge Journal of curriculum and supervision, 6(1), 18-30
Ratsoy, E. W., & Bing, Z. (1999). Students participation in university governance. The Canadian Journal of Higher Education, 29(1), 1-26
Published
2018-09-06
How to Cite
Hursen, C., & Danjuma Tappi, F. (2018). AN INVESTIGATION INTO CONTENT EVALUATION OF PROGRAMS BETWEEN 2013 – 2018. Near East University Online Journal of Education, 1(1), 01-10. Retrieved from http://dergi.neu.edu.tr/index.php/neuje/article/view/46