This article briefly characterizes a deliberative democratic approach to program evaluation, recounts its application to the evaluation of school choice policy in the Boulder Valley School District, and describes the results and recommendations of the evaluation. It then assesses the evaluation in terms of its role in stimulating policy change and how it fits with the requirements of the deliberative democratic ideal. It concludes with an assessment of the deliberative democratic approach itself in light of the Boulder experience.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
BoundsA. (2001). Addressing open enrollment—Procedure changes, but stratification persists. Daily Camera, November 25, 1A, 4A.
2.
ChelimskyE. (1998). The role of experience in formulating theories of evaluation practice. American Journal of Evaluation, 19, 35—55.
3.
CohenJ. (1999). Deliberation and democratic legitimacy. In BohmanJ., and RehgW. (Eds.), Deliberative democracy, essays on reason and politics (pp. 67—91). Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
4.
CorleyR. (2001). School choice: Many factors point to ‘white flight’. Daily Camera, December 18, 12B.
5.
CousinsJ., and WhitmoreE. (1998). Framing participatory evaluation. In Whitmore, E. (Ed.), Understanding and practicing evaluation [Special issue]. New Directions in Evaluation, 80, 5—23.
6.
deKiefferK. L. (2001). Rich school, poor school. Daily Camera, February 4, 3E.
7.
GubaE., and LincolnY. (1989). Fourth generation evaluation. Newbury Park, CA: Sage.
8.
GutmannA. (1987). Democratic education. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.
9.
GutmannA., and ThompsonD. (1996). Democracy and disagreement. Cambridge, MA: Belknap Press.
10.
HoweK. (1997). Understanding equal educational opportunity: Social justice, democracy and schooling. New York: Teachers College Press.
11.
HoweK. (2002, April 10). Free market free for all. Education Week, 21(30), 32, 34–35.
HoweK., and EisenhartM. (2001). Open enrollment: A look at the evidence. Daily Camera, January 14, 1E, 5E.
14.
HoweK., EisenhartM., and BetebennerD. (2001). School choice crucible: A case study of Boulder Valley. Phi Delta Kappan, 83, 137—146.
15.
HouseE., and HoweK. (1999). Values in evaluation and social research. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
16.
JeffersonE. A. (2000). Schools seek enrollment input. Daily Camera, November 6, B1.
17.
JeffersonE. A. (2000a). BVSD revises enrollment. Daily Camera, November 29, 3B, 11B.
18.
JohnsonG. (2000). Open enrollment is discriminatory: Study makes clear it's time for board to enact limits. Daily Camera, November 26, 3E.
19.
MatternE. (2001). Schools: Choosing or losing?Daily Camera, January 21, 2001, 1A.
20.
McNergneyR. (Ed.). (1992). Education research, policy and the press: Research as news. Boston: Allyn & Bacon.
21.
RawlsJ. (1971). A theory of justice. Cambridge, MA: Belknap Press.
22.
RawlsJ. (1999). The idea of public reason. In BohmanJ., and RehgW. (Eds.), Deliberative democracy, essays on reason and politics (pp. 93—141). Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
23.
RyanK., and DeStefanoL. (Eds.). (2000). Evaluation as a democratic process: Promoting inclusion, dialogue, and deliberation [Special issue]. New Directions in Program Evaluation, 85.
24.
ShadishW., CookT., and LevitonL. (1995). Foundations of program evaluation. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
25.
SeebachL. (2000). Too much school choice? Increase parents’ options, don't reduce them. Rocky Mountain News, November 18, Editorial.
26.
WhaleyM. (2000). Boulder schools alter rules on open enrollment. Denver Post, November 30, 2B.
