Throughout the 1970's many "accountability systems" were developed and offered as panaceas for curing the ills of education. The purpose of this study was to develop a method by which the wide variety of accountability designs could themselves be held accountable, and then to apply the methodology of these evaluation criteria to develop an accountability system that would, in fact, accomplish the basic ends of accountability and thus place the entire process of education on a deliberate basis. The design and effectiveness of accountability systems, at the application level, presuppose the rules of the more fundamental target, sequence, and relational models that provide the rules and categories for the development of all manner of accountability systems. As part of this study's investigation, the purposes and goals, objectives and activities, support conditions and evaluations of selected accountability evaluation systems were reviewed and placed into a design. The bases for the categories of accountability and the ways in which definitional types were used by those systems of accountability clearly set conditions for the performance of the accountability system. An examination of some of the accountability criteria used by evaluation designs resulted in the identification of three levels of evaluation associated with accountability. These criteria judged the ability of systems to (1) measure the data or material involved in the system, (2) provide a format or structure for collecting and classifying the information generated by the system, and (3) a statement of the mission goal or objective which provides the purposes for the system. Using these criteria as guidelines, selected literature related to accountability systems was reviewed and critiqued. The literature represented a variety of systems ranging from the use of standardized tests, to performance contracting, to the systems approach. The criteria for evaluating the systems presented in the literature were used as guiding standards for the development of a model for a comprehensive accountability system. The system developed in this study, the Parallel Pairs model, is derived from the more generic concepts developed through the use of relational models. This model permits the interrelationship of two categorical systems within the same framework. Thus, the accountability categories are capable of being interrelated with and subsumed under the categories of education. Moreover, the hierarchical structure of the model provides for placing the evaluation categories and criteria into levels. The use of the Parallel Pairs accountability model should provide a means for separating and isolating, continuing and phasing the complex variables that will emerge in the future expansion of science and technology in our daily lives. The model is based upon five evaluation types with the same system. These evaluations make it possible to evaluate individual activity accomplishments, accomplishments by categories, management of specific projects, the effective management of projects, and a comprehensive evaluation of the overall results of an educational system in a district. The accountability model proposed by this study was predicated upon the articulation and application of the criteria that produce a "good" accountability system. The foundation of this study was based upon the exploration of those model bases that give rise to the variety of accountability systems. The criteria and model presented by this investigation should contribute substantially to the understanding of models accountability and evaluation by the general public as well as to offer specialists in evaluation an in-depth perspective on the internal, technical, and methodological issues in forming an evaluation of any kind. The criteria for accountability for models of evaluation offer a clear insight into accounting for accountability and effective evaluation.
Identifer | oai:union.ndltd.org:arizona.edu/oai:arizona.openrepository.com:10150/290545 |
Date | January 1980 |
Creators | Engle, Joseph Spangler |
Publisher | The University of Arizona. |
Source Sets | University of Arizona |
Language | en_US |
Detected Language | English |
Type | text, Dissertation-Reproduction (electronic) |
Rights | Copyright © is held by the author. Digital access to this material is made possible by the University Libraries, University of Arizona. Further transmission, reproduction or presentation (such as public display or performance) of protected items is prohibited except with permission of the author. |
Page generated in 0.0023 seconds