As program evaluation has developed over the last twenty years into a viable profession, its central challenge has become to define what it means to be an evaluator. This debate is fueled less by traditional divisions between academic and service-related professionals, or disagreements over methodologies, than by sharply different visions of the evaluator's moral and political role, derived from the profession's historic roots in principles of social justice and concern for individual rights.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
Anderson, J. R.
, L. M. Reder, and H. Simon. 1996. Situated learning and education. Educational Researcher25 (4): 5-21.
2.
Blanchard, K.
1986. Situational leadership. Two-volume, twelve-tape audiotape set. Escondido, CA: Blanchard Training and Development.
3.
Brightman, H.
, and C. Noble. 1979. On the ineffective education of decision scientists. Decision Sciences10:151-157.
4.
Chelimsky, E.1995. The political environment of evaluation and what it means for the development of the field. American Evaluation Association Presidential Address, Vancouver, November 1995. Evaluation Practice16 (3): 215-225.
5.
Cousins, J. B.
, J. J. Donohue, and G. Bloom. 1995. Collaborative evaluation: Survey of practice in North America. Paper presented at the International Evaluation Conference, November, Vancouver.
6.
Cousins, J. B.
, J. J. Donohue, and G. Bloom. 1996. Understanding collaborative evaluation: Results from a survey of North American evaluators. Unpublished paper, University of Ottawa.
7.
Davis, H. R.
, and S. E. Salasin. 1975. The utilization of evaluation. In Handbook of evaluation research. Vol. 1. Edited by Elmer L. Struening and Marcia Guttentag, 621-666. Beverly Hills, CA: Sage.
8.
Etheredge, L. S.
1980. Government learning: An overview. In Handbook of political behavior, edited by S. Long. New York: Plenum.
9.
Fetterman, D. M.1993. Empowerment evaluation: Theme for the 1993 Evaluation Meeting. Evaluation Practice14 (1): 115-117.
10.
Fetterman, D. M.1994. Empowerment evaluation. American Evaluation Association Presidential Address. Evaluation Practice15 (1): 1-15.
11.
Fetterman, D. M.1995. In response to Dr. Dan Stufflebeam. Evaluation Practice16 (2): 179-199.
12.
Fetterman, D. M.1997. A response to Patton and Scriven. Evaluation Practice18 (3): 253-266.
13.
Fetterman, D. M.
, A. J. Kaftarian, and A. Wandersman, eds. 1996. Empowerment evaluation: Knowledge and tools for self-assessment and accountability. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
14.
Fletcher, J.
1966. Situation ethics: The new morality. London: Westminster John Knox.
15.
Gordimer, N.
1994. None to accompany me. New York: Penguin.
16.
Greene, J. C.1990. Technical quality versus user responsiveness in evaluation practice. Evaluation and Program Planning13 (3): 267-274.
17.
Guba, E. G.
1977. Overcoming resistance to evaluation. Paper presented at the Second Annual Conference on Evaluation, University of North Dakota.
18.
Hersey, P.
1985. Situational leader. Charlotte, North Carolina: Center for Leadership.
19.
House, E. R.
1980. Evaluating with validity. Beverly Hills, CA: Sage.
20.
House, E. R.
1990. Methodology and justice. In Evaluation and social justice: Issues in public education, special issue of New Directions for Program Evaluation 45 (Spring), edited by K. A. Sirotnik, 23-36. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
21.
Joint Committee on Standards for Educational Evaluation
. 1994. The program evaluation standards. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
22.
Lincoln, Y. S.1991. The arts and sciences of program evaluation. Evaluation Practice12 (1): 1-7.
23.
Lynn, L. E., Jr.1980. Crafting policy analysis for decision makers. Interview conducted by Michael Kirst in Educational Evaluation and Policy Analysis2:85-90.
24.
Patton, M. Q.1994. Developmental evaluation. Evaluation Practice15 (3): 311-320.
25.
Patton, M. Q.1997a. Toward distinguishing empowerment evaluation and placing it in a larger context. Evaluation Practice18 (2): 147-164.
26.
Patton, M. Q.
1997b. Utilization-focused evaluation: The new century text. 3d ed.Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
27.
Scriven, M.
1991. Beyond formative and summative evaluation. In Evaluation and education: At quarter century, 90th yearbook of the National Society for the Study of Education, edited by M. W. McLaughlin and D. C. Phillips, 18-64. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
Sechrest, L.1992. Roots: Back to our first generations. Evaluation Practice13 (1): 1-7.
30.
Shadish, W. R., Jr.
, and R. Epstein. 1987. Patterns of program evaluation practice among members of the Evaluation Research Society and Evaluation Network. Evaluation Review11:555-590.
31.
Shadish, W. R., Jr.
, D. L. Newman, M. A. Scheirer, and C. Wye. 1995. Guiding principles for evaluators. New Directions for Program Evaluation, Number 66. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
32.
Sirotnik, K. A.
, ed. 1990. Evaluation and social justice: Issues in public education. New Directions for Program Evaluation, No. 45, Spring. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
33.
Stufflebeam, D.1994. Empowerment evaluation, objectivist evaluation, and evaluation standards: Where the future of evaluation should not go and where it needs to go. Evaluation Practice15 (3): 321-338.
34.
Thompson, J. D.
1967. Organizations in action. New York: McGraw-Hill.
35.
Weiss, H. B.
, and J. C. Greene. 1992. An empowerment partnership for family support and education programs and evaluations. Family Science Review5 (1, 2): 145-163.
