THE AIM OF THIS PAPER IS TO EXHIBIT SOME OF THE PHILOSOPHICAL AND PRACTICAL DEFICIENCIES OF CURRENT CONCEPTIONS OF HOW EDUCATIONAL INSTRUMENTS SHOULD BE EVALUATED, AND TO SHOW WAYS FOR REDUCING THESE DEFICIENCIES. THE TERM "EDUCATIONAL INSTRUMENTS" IS USED TO INCLUDE SUCH THINGS AS NEW CURRICULUMS, PROGRAMED TEXTS, INDUCTIVE METHODS, AND INDIVIDUAL TEACHERS. THE MAIN FOCUS OF THE PAPER IS ON CURRICULUM EVALUATION, BUT IN THE AUTHOR'S OPINION, ALMOST ALL THE POINTS MADE TRANSFER IMMEDIATELY TO OTHER KINDS OF EVALUATION. SECTION HEADINGS ARE AS FOLLOWS--(1) OUTLINE, (2) GOALS OF EVALUATION VERSUS ROLES OF EVALUATION, (3) ARGUMENTS FOR AND AGAINST FORMATIVE AND SUMMATIVE EVALUATION, (4) EVALUATION VERSUS PROCESS STUDIES, (5) EVALUATION VERSUS ESTIMATION OF GOAL ACHIEVEMENT, (6) INSTRUMENTAL VERSUS CONSEQUENTIAL EVALUATION, (7) COMPARATIVE VERSUS NONCOMPARATIVE EVALUATION, (8) COMPARATIVE EVALUATION--THE CRITERIA OF EDUCATIONAL ACHIEVEMENT, (9) VALUES AND COSTS, (10) ANOTHER KIND OF EVALUATION--"EXPLANATORY EVALUATION," AND (11) CONCLUSIONS. THE DISCUSSION WHICH IS RELATIVELY ELEMENTARY AND ETIOLOGICAL IN THE EARLY SECTIONS PROGRESSES TO AN OCCASIONALLY MORE DIFFICULT AND GENERALLY MORE PRACTICAL LEVEL IN LATER SECTIONS. THIS PAPER WAS WRITTEN AS PART OF THE SOCIAL SCIENCE EDUCATION CONSORTIUM, A CURRICULUM PROJECT DESIGNED TO OUTLINE THE CONCEPTS, METHODS, AND STRUCTURE OF SEVERAL OF THE SOCIAL SCIENCES FOR USE BY TEACHERS AND CURRICULUM WORKERS AT ALL GRADE LEVELS. (JH)