Drawing on a qualitative study of an educational reform and its external evaluation, I describe how a well-intentioned but poorly conceptualized evaluation helped perpetuate asymmetries in the generation and use of evaluation findings. This article explores this project’s failure to clarify evaluator roles, identify intended users and expected subjects, and generate formal agreements so that the evaluation could meet the information needs of its diverse stakeholder groups. I offer suggestions for minimizing evaluators’ contributions to the creation or maintenance of these kinds of asymmetries and, when these prove to be of limited avail, when to opt out of an evaluation project.
BourdieuP. (1991). Language and symbolic power. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
4.
FoucaultM. (1977). Discipline and punish: The birth of the prison. New York, NY: Vintage.
5.
GramsciA. (1971). Selections from the prison notebooks. New York, NY: International Publishers.
6.
GhorashiH.WelsH. (2009). Beyond complicity: A plea for engaged ethnography. In YbemaS.YanowD.WelsH.KamsteegF. (Eds.), Organizational ethnography: Studying the complexities of everyday organizational life (pp. 231–253). London, England: Sage.
7.
GreeneJ.LeeJ. H. (2006) Quieting educational reform … with educational reform. American Journal of Evaluation, 27, 337–352.
8.
HopsonR. (2009). Reclaiming knowledge at the margins: Culturally responsive evaluation in the current evaluation moment. In RyanK.CousinsB. (Eds.), The Sage international handbook of educational evaluation (pp. 429–446). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
9.
HouseE. R. (1983). Professional evaluation: Social impact and political consequences. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
10.
HouseE. R. (2005). Deliberative democratic evaluation. In MathisonS. (Ed.), Encyclopedia of evaluation (pp. 104–108). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
11.
JanssenM.SteyaertC. (2001). Meerstemmigheld: Organiseren met verschil[Multivocality: Organizing with a difference]. Leuven: Universitaire Pers; Assen: Koninklijke Van Gorcum.
12.
KirkhartK. (2010). Eyes on the prize: Multicultural validity and evaluation theory. American Journal of Evaluation, 31, 400–413.
13.
LiketK.Rey-GarciaM.MaasK. (2014). Why aren’t evaluations working and what to do about it: A framework for negotiating meaningful evaluation in nonprofits. American Journal of Evaluation, 35, 171–188.
SturgesK. M. (2013). Representing failure. In HallJ. (Ed.), Children’s human rights and public schooling in the United States (pp. 137–158). New York, NY: Sense Publishers.
19.
VisseM. A.AbmaT. A.WiddershovenG. A. M. (2012). Relational responsibilities in responsive evaluation. Evaluation and Program Planning, 35, 97–104.
20.
YarbroughD.ShulhaL.HopsonR.CaruthersF. (2011). The program evaluation standards: A guide for evaluators and evaluation users (3rd ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
