Beardsley, R.M., & Miller, M. (1993). Toward a feminist model of program evaluation . Paper presented at the annual meeting of the American Evaluation Association, Dallas, TX.
2.
Chen, H. (1990). Issues in constructing program theory. In L. Bickman (Ed.)., New directions: No. 47. Advances in program theory. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.
3.
Collins, P.H. (1990). Black feminist thought. New York: Routledge.
4.
Farley, J., & Mertens, D.M. (1993). Feminist perspectives: Implications for evaluation . Paper represented at the Annual Meeting of the American Evaluation Association, Dallas, TX.
5.
Fine, M. (1992). Passions, politics, and power: Feminist research possibilities. In M. Fine (Ed.), Disruptive voices. Ann Arbor, MI: The University of Michigan Press.
6.
Guba, E.G., & Lincoln, Y.S. (1989). Fourth generation evaluation. Newbury Park, CA: Sage. Harding, S. (1991). Whose science? Whose knowledge? Thinkingfrom women's lives. Ithaca, NY: Cornell University Press.
7.
Haraway, D. (1988). Situated knowledge: The science question in feminism and the privilege of partial perspective. Feminist Studies14(3).
8.
Hartsock, N.C.M. (1983). The feminist standpoint: Developing the ground for a specifically feminist historical materialism. In S. Harding & M.B. Hintikka (Eds.), Discovering reality: Feminist perspectives on epistemology, metaphysics, methodology, and philosophy of sciences. Dordrect, Holland: D. Reidel Publishing Co.
9.
House, E.R. (1993). Professional evaluation: Social impact and political consequences. Newbury Park, CA: Sage.
10.
Kirkup, G. (1986). The feminist evaluator. In E. House (Ed.), New directions in educational evaluation . Philadelphia, PA: The Falmer Press .
11.
Lather, P. (1992). Critical frames in educational research: Feminist and post-structural perspectives. Theory into Practice31(2), 1-13.
12.
Madison, A.M. (1993). Culturally diverse minority program participants as the ultimate stakeholder. Paper presented at the Annual Meeting of the American Evaluation Association, Dallas, TX.
13.
Madison, A.M. (Ed.). (1992). Minority issues in program evaluation. San Francisco, CA : Jossey-Bass.
14.
Mertens, D.M., & McLaughlin, J. (in press). Research methods in special education . Newbury Park, CA: Sage.
15.
Patton, M.Q. (1986). Utilization-focused evaluation. Newbury Park, CA: Sage.
16.
Reinharz, S. (1992). Feminist methods in social research. New York: Oxford University Press.
17.
Shapiro, J.P. (1987). Collaborative evaluation: Towards a transformation of evaluation forfeminist program and projects. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the American Educational Research Association, Washington, D.C.
18.
Shaprio, J.P., & Reed, B., (1982). Illuminative evaluation: Meeting the special needs of feminist projects. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the American Educational Research Association, New York.
19.
Singleton, P. (1993). Evaluation perspectives of a deaf feminist. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the American Evaluation Association, Dallas, TX.
20.
Sirotnik, K.A. (Ed). (1990). Evaluation and social justice: Issues in public education. In New directions for program evaluation (No. 45). San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass, Inc.
21.
Sirotnik, K.A., & Oakes, J. (1990). Evaluation as critical inquiry: School improvement as a case in point. In K.A. Sirotnik (Ed.), New directions: No. 45. Evaluation and social justice: Issues in public education. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass Publishers.
22.
Stanfield J.H., & Dennis, R.M. (Eds.). (1993). Race and ethnicity in research methods. Newbury Park, CA: Sage.
23.
Villegas, A.M. (1991). Culturally responsive pedagogy for the 1990's and beyond. Princeton, NJ: Educational Testing Service.