Abstract
Social responsibility (SR) requires critical self-evaluating personalities. Here is a case of self-measurement. Some basic content-, methodology- and implementation-related characteristics of evaluation in education are presented. Particularly emphasized are attributes of good evaluation and good evaluators. The study empirically surveys the cognitive and emotional–motivational preparedness of e.g. authors of natural sciences learning materials for evaluation of their authored materials. Data analysis shows that authors hesitate. They worry about their objectivity, lack of time, and insufficient methodological training. Authors more generally confirmed their cooperation in the planning of evaluation in terms of content and methodology and evaluation report generation. Method may be usable in other cases, too, and may help its users improve their SR in self-measurement.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Similar content being viewed by others
Notes
We refer to an empirical evaluation as a type of evaluation (see Sagadin, 1999) that is the most appropriate one for evaluation of educational materials. It can be formative (simultaneous, detailed) or summative (final, less detailed) and internal (the authors of the materials are their evaluators, too).
References
Borg WR, Gall MD (1989) Educational Research. Longman, New York
Cencič M et al (2010) Model evalvacije kakovosti izvajalcev programov usposabljanj strokovnih delavcev [Evaluation model for assessing the quality of lecturers at professional training meetings]. Univerza na Primorskem, Pedagoška fakulteta, Koper
Chinapah V, Miron G (1990) Evaluation Educational Programmes and Project. UNESCO, Paris
Cohen J (1988) Statistical power analysis for the behavioral sciences, 2nd Ed edn. Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Hillsdale
Eash MJ (1991) Curriculum Components. In: Lewy A (ed) The International Encyclopedia of Curriculum. Pergamon Press, Oxford, pp 67–69
EU (2011): Communication from the Commission to the European Parliament, the Council, the European Economic and Social Committee and the Committee of the Regions. A renewed EU strategy 2011–2014 for Corporate Social Responsibility. COM(2011) 681 final. Brussels, Accessed 25 Oct 2011
Hopkins D (1997) Evaluation for school development. Open University Press, Philadelphia
ISO (2010): ISO 26000. http://www.iso.org/iso/discovering_iso_26000.pdf
Joint Comittee on Standards for Educational Evaluation (1994) The Program Evaluation Standards: How to Assess Evaluation of Educational Programmes, vol 2. Sage, Thousand Oaks
Marentič Požarnik B (1999) Evalvacija—kakšna, za koga, čemu? [Evaluation—of what kind, for whom and why?]. Sodobna pedagogika 50(4):20–37
Mulej M et al (2012) Dialectical Systems Thinking and the Law of Requisite Holism. ISCE Publishing, Goodyear
Repnik R, Gerlič I, Grubelnik V, in Ferk E (2010) Predstavitev projekta [Presentation of a project]. In: Grubelnik V (ed) Opredelitev naravoslovnih kompetenc [Definition of natural science competences]. Fakulteta za naravoslovje in matematiko, Maribor, pp 8–17
Sagadin J (1999) Programska evalvacija [Program evaluation]. Sodobna pedagogika 50(2):196–211
Tyler RW (1949) Basic principles of curriculum and instruction. The University of Chicago Pres, Chicago and London
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Čagran, B., Grmek, M.I. Critical Self-Evaluation: An Attribute of Systemic Behavior: Authors of Natural Science Learning Materials as Evaluators. Syst Pract Action Res 26, 537–547 (2013). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11213-013-9302-z
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11213-013-9302-z