ABSTRACT
Do strong opinions and preconceived notions influence the evaluation process?
Even with a large research base, SET continues to have both supporters and critics with strong but opposite opinions about applications and validity. These preconceived notions have been found to influence research conclusions and SET applications. There has been a tendency to interpret the evaluations based on preconceived ideological, organizational, and personal opinions and interests. The evaluations do have real-world consequences and create, in some cases, logical and ethical dilemmas that have been generally ignored by both researchers and administrators. Logical inconsistencies are common, with little attempt for resolution. As a result, research is consistently done on questions taken for granted by those less engaged, and research findings are interpreted as evidence for assumptions made before the research was conducted. One of the consequences has been a lack of concern for legal and ethical implications produced by the process. The legal systems in several countries are limiting the use of SET for summative purposes. On balance, it appears the existing SET paradigm is not sufficient to resolve the errors and questions raised by its utilization.
