A Structure for Formative Evaluation in Product Development

Abstract

Many educators working on the development of educational products have stated a need for a logical structure for formative evaluation functions since Scriven (1967) made the distinction between formative and summative evaluation. Recent writers (viz., Reynolds & Light, 1971; Abedor, 1971; Tate, 1971; Westbury, 1970; and Weiss, 1971) have noted the ambiguity in definition of the term, formative evaluation, and the consequent paucity of well-defined procedures and techniques for conducting such evaluation studies. The need for a framework for discussing and organizing formative evaluation studies has become evident. The most urgent need, judging from the frequency of pleas in the literature, appears to be in the area of product development. The questions of how to put limits systematically on formative evaluation studies, and how to choose appropriate evaluation methods once the limits are set, appear to have been especially difficult to answer by developers. The focus of this paper is limited to the formative evaluation of educational materials, which we are calling developmental products, and to their production. There are many other educational entities that might be the target of formative evaluation, but they require evaluation approaches different from those we are outlining. Our purpose is to present a framework appropriate for discussing and organizing formative evaluation studies in product development. The framework is a result of the synthesis of various development and evaluation models and a review of case histories in educational development. The structure has been conceived to be consistent with Scriven's view of the process of evaluation. The term evaluation will be used herein to refer to the process of determining the value or worth of a process or product. Formative evaluation will refer to the process of judging a fluid process or product that can be revised in form. The results of formative evaluation studies

Cite this work

No public copy is stored for this record, so only the metadata is cited.

Stored only when both papers are in the corpus — 36 citations exist upstream.

Papers that cite the same references — the relational fallback while embeddings are still backfilling.