The wide angle: program evaluation studies in Turkey in terms of models and approaches

  • Tuba Gökmenoğlu
Keywords: Program evaluation, program evaluation models, review study


The purpose of the present study is to examine the contents of the current program evaluation studies on the approaches and models in Turkey. Furthermore, this study also aims to explore the extent of stakeholder participation in the program evaluation process. Being designed as a review study, this study examined 18 journal papers and 34 Ph.D. dissertations through descriptive analysis. According to findings, four categories were observed namely used program evaluation models and research approaches, the scope of evaluation studies, stakeholder participation in studies, and disciplines. The results of the study showed that only five studies out of 52 studies prefer using program evaluation model. Furthermore, the studies conducted by the departments other than Educational Sciences, and Curriculum and Instruction departments in different universities. The general conclusion of the presented study is that the studies reviewed in this paper were not a part of curriculum development or program evaluation studies rather they seem to be carried out with purpose of publishing research.


Download data is not yet available.


Alex, J. P. S. (1995). Understanding the dynamics of stakeholder participation in evaluation research: A document study. Master’s thesis. The University of British Columbia.

Alkin, M. C., & Taut, S. M. (2003). Unbundling evaluation use. Studies in Educational Evaluation, 29, 1-12.

Azzam, T. (2011). Evaluator characteristics and methodological choice. American Journal of Evaluation, 32(3), 376-391.

Brandon, P. R. (1998). Stakeholder participation for the purpose of helping ensure evaluation validity:

Bridging the gap between collaborative and non-collaborative evaluations. American Journal of Evaluation, 19(3), 325-337.

Brinkerhoff, R. O., Brethower, D. M., Hluchyj, T., & Nowakowski, J. R. (1983). Program evaluation: A practitioner's guide for trainers and educators. Boston: Kluwer-Nijhoff Publishing.

Clewell, B. C., Cohen, C. C., Campbell, P. B., Deterding, N., Manes, S., Tsui, L., Rao, S. N. S., Branting, B., Hoey, L., & Carson, R. (2004). Review of evaluation studies of mathematics and science curricula and professional development models. Retrieved August 12, 2014, from

Cohen, L., Manion, L., & Morrison, K. (2007). Research methods in education. New York, NY: Routledge.

Creswell, J. W. & Miller, D. L. (2010). Determining validity in qualitative inquiry. Theory Into Practice, 39(3), 1 Edebi Sanatlar-Eda LALE24-130.

Cronbach, L. J., Ambron, S. R., Dornbusch, S. M., Hess, R.D., Hornik, R. C., Phillips, D. C. ... , Weiner, S. S. (1980). Toward reform of program evaluation. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.

Demirel, Ö. (2013). Eğitimde program geliştirme. Ankara: PegemA.

Denzin, N. K. (1978). The research act: A theoretical orientation to sociological methods (2nd ed.). New York: McGraw-Hill.

Eisner, E. W. (1979). The educational imagination: On the design and evaluation of school programs. New York: Macmillan.

Fitzpatrick, J. L., Sanders, J. R., & Worthen, B. R. (2004). Program evaluation: Alternative approaches and practical guidelines. NY: Pearson Education.

Fraenkel, J. R., & Wallen, N. (2005). How to design and evaluate research in education. NY: McGraw-Hill.

Glatthorn, A. A. (1987). Curriculum leadership. New York: HarperCollins.

Glatthorn, A. A., Boschee, F., & Whitehead, B. M. (2009). Curriculum leadership: Strategies for development and implementation. US: Sage.

Gredler, M. E. (1996). Program evaluation. NJ: Pearson Education.

Greene, J. G. (1988). Stakeholder participation and utilization in program evaluation. Evaluation Review, 12(2), 91-116.

Guba, E., & Lincoln, Y. (1981). Effective evaluation. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.

Hage, D. D. (2013). A review of the levels of stakeholder involvement in program evaluation and the effects of the level of involvement on school culture assessment and improvements. Yayınlanmamış doktora tezi. Marshall University, ABD.

Kaplan, A. (1964). The conduct of inquiry. San Francisco, CA: Chandler Press.

LeCompte, M. D. (2010). Analyzing qualitative data. Theory Into Practice, 39(3), 146-154.

Madaus, G. F., & Kellanghan, T. (2000). Models, metaphors, and definitions in evaluation. In D. L. Stufflebeam, G. F. Madaus ve T. Kellaghan (Eds.), Evaluation models viewpoints on educational and human services evaluation (2nd ed.). Dordrecht: Kluwer Academic Publishers Group.

Miles, M., & Huberman, M. (1994). Qualitative Data Analysis. London: Sage.

ODTÜ (2014). Sosyal bilimler ulusal A, B ve B grubu aday dergi listesi. 24.03.2014 tarihinde adresinden alınmıştır.

Oliva, P. F. (1997). Developing the curriculum. New York: Longman.

Özdemir, M. S. (2009). Eğitimde program değerlendirme ve Türkiye’de eğitim programlarını değerlendirme çalışmalarının incelenmesi. Yüzüncü Yıl Üniversitesi, Eğitim Fakültesi Dergisi, 5(2), 126-149.

Patton, M. Q. (1987). Evaluation’s political inherency: Practical implications for design and use. In D. Palumbo (Ed.), The politics of program evaluation (pp. 100-145). Beverly Hills, CA: Sage.

Patton, M. Q. (1997). Utilization-focused evaluation: The new century text (3rd ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.

Patton, M. Q. (2008) Qualitative research and evaluation methods. Thousand Oaks: SAGE.

Rolstad, K., Mahoney, K., & Glass, G. V. (2005). The big picture: A meta-analysis of program effectiveness research on english language learners. Educational Policy, 19(4), 572-594.

Silverman, D. (2006). Interpreting qualitative data. London: SAGE.

Stake, R. E. (1975). Evaluating the arts in education: A responsive approach. Columbus, OH: Bobbs-Merrill.

Stufflebeam, D. L. (1971). Educational evaluation and decision making. Itasca, IL: Peacock.

Stufflebeam, D. L., & Shinkfield, A. J. (1985). Systematic evaluation. Boston: Kluwer-Nijhoff.

Taylor-Powell, E., Steele, S., & Douglah, M. (1996). Planning a program evaluation. Madison, WI: University of Wisconsin Cooperative Extension.

Tobler, N. S., Roona, M. R., Ochshorn, P., Marshall, D. G., Streke, A. V., & Stackpole, K. M. (2000). Schoolbased adolescent drug prevention programs: 1998 Meta-analysis. The Journal of Primary Prevention, 20(4), 275-336.

Tyler, R. (1949). Basic principles of curriculum and instruction. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.

Upreti, G., & Koonce, D. (2010). Stakeholder utility: Perspectives on school-wide data for measurement, feedback, and evaluation. Education and Treatment of Children, 33(4), 497-511.

Westbury, I. (1970). Educational evaluation. Review of Educational Research, 40(2), 239-260.

Wholey, J. S., Hatry, H. P., & Newcomer, K. E. (2010). Handbook of practical program evaluation. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass

Worthen, B. R. & Sanders, J. R. (1973). Educational evaluation: Theory and practice. Worthington, OH: Charles A. Jones.

Worthen, B. R., Sanders, J. R., & Fitzpatrick, J. L. (1997). Program evaluation: Alternative approaches and practice guidelines (2nd ed.). New York: Longman.

Yaşar, S., Gültekin, M., Köse, N., Girmen, P. ve Anagün, Ş. (2005). The Meta- evaluation of teacher training programs for elementary education in Turkey. ATEA: Australian Teacher Education Association

33. Annual Conference (s. 498- 504). Gold Coast, Queensland, Australia: ATEA.

Yıldırım, A. ve Şimşek, H. (2005). Sosyal bilimlerde nitel araştırma yöntemleri. Ankara: Seçkin Yayıncılık.

Yüksel, I. (2010). Türkiye için program değerlendirme standartları oluşturma çalışması. Yayımlanmamış doktora tezi, Anadolu Üniversitesi, Eskişehir.
How to Cite
Gökmenoğlu, T. (2014). The wide angle: program evaluation studies in Turkey in terms of models and approaches. Uluslararası Eğitim Programları Ve Öğretim Çalışmaları Dergisi, 4(7), 55-70.