This article's primary concern is with clarifying and, more importantly, developing the nature of 'fourth generation' evaluation coming from the work of Guba and Lincoln (I989). The suggested developments to this evaluatory model are intended to make the approach somewhat more practical and relevant to specific evaluatory concerns. Guba and Lincoln's 'fourth generation' evaluatory process, suitably developed, is advanced as providing the wide-ranging approach for this evaluation. This article describes the nature of this approach, which relies on and encourages all stakeholders' critically discussing the claims, concerns and issues on the focus of interest, leading to action outcomes. By probing into this approach, a number of problems in its design are highlighted. Guba and Lincoln's proposed model is enriched by suggesting possible solutions to the challenges offered by the solipsism of their approach, the implicit privileging of the client and evaluator, the underspecification of the processes of discourse and the accountability of the processes.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
Arrington, C.E. and A.G. Puxty (1991) 'Accounting, Interests and Rationality: A Communicative Relation', Critical Perspectives on Accounting2(1): 31-58.
2.
Broadbent, J. (1996) 'The Gendered Nature of "Accounting Logic" and Pointers To an Accounting that Encompasses Multiple Values'. Working Paper. Colchester: University of Essex Department of Acccounting and Financial Management.
3.
Broadbent, J. and R. Laughlin (1994) 'Moving Towards an Accounting that Will Be Enabling: Accounting, Habermas and Issues of Gender', Proceedings from the Fourth Interdisciplinary Perspectives on Accounting Conference1(3): 1-18.
4.
Broadbent, J. and R. Laughlin (1996) 'Contracts and Competition? A Reflection on the Nature and Effects of Recent Legislation on Modes of Control in Schools'. Working Paper. Colchester: University of Essex D epartment of Acccounting and Financial Management.
5.
Broadbent, J., M. Dietrich and R. Laughlin (1996) 'The Development of Principal-Agent, Contracting and Accountability Relationships in the Public Sector: Conceptual and Cultural Problems', Critical Perspectives on Accounting17(3): 259-84.
6.
Broadbent, J., M. Dietrich and J. Roberts (forthcoming) The Transformation of the Professions. London: Routledge.
7.
Broadbent, J., R. Laughlin and H. Willig-Atherton (1994) 'Financial Controls and Schools: Accounting in "Public" and "Private" Spheres', The British Accounting Review26(3): 255-80.
8.
Burrell, G. and G. Morgan (1979) Sociological Paradigms and Orgamsational Analysis . London: Heinemann.
9.
Campbell, D.T. (1979) 'Degrees of Freedom and Case Study', in T. D. Cook and C. S. Reichardt (eds) Qualitative and Quantitative Methods in Evaluation Research, pp. 49-67. Beverly Hills, CA: Sage.
10.
Caulley, D.N. (1993) 'Overview of Approaches to Program Evaluation: The Five Generations', in J. Guthrie (ed.) The Australian Public Sector: Pathways to Change in the 1990s , pp. 124-33. Sydney: IIR Conferences Pty.
11.
Cronbach, L.J. (1982) Designing Evaluations of Educational and Social Programs. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass .
12.
Everitt, A. (1996) 'Developing Critical Evaluation', Evaluation2(2): 173-88.
13.
Filstead, W.J. (1979) 'Qualitative Methods: A Needed Perspective in Evaluation Research', in T. D. Cook and C. S. Reichardt (eds) Qualitative and Quantitative Methods in Evaluation Research, pp. 33-48. Beverly Hills, CA : Sage.
14.
Fischer, F. (1990) Technocracy and the Politics of Expertise. Newbury Park, CA: Sage.
15.
Fraser, N. (1987) 'What's Critical about Critical Theory? The Case of Habermas and Gender', in S. Benhabib and D. Cornell (eds) Feminism as Critique, pp. 31-56. Oxford: Polity.
16.
Friedson, E. (1970a) Profession of Medicine. New York: Dodd, Mead and Co.
17.
Friedson, E. (1970b) Professional Dominance: The Social Structure of Medical Care. Chicago, IL: Aldine .
18.
Friere, P. (1973) Education for Critical Consciousness. New York: Seabury.
19.
Friere, P. (1979) Pedagogy of the Oppressed. New York: Seabury.
20.
Greer, P. (1994) Transforming Central Government. Buckingham: Open University Press.
21.
Guba, E.S. and Y.S. Lincoln (1981) Effective Evaluation. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.
22.
Guba, E.S. and Y.S. Lincoln (1989) Fourth Generation Evaluation. Newbury Park, CA: Sage.
23.
Habermas, J. (1974) Theory and Practice. London : Heinemann.
24.
Habermas, J. (1978) Knowledge and Human Interests (2nd edn). London: Heinemann.
25.
Habermas, J. (1979) 'What is Universal Pragmatics?', in Communication and the Evolution of Society, pp. 1-68. London: Heinemann.
26.
Habermas, J. (1984) The Theory of Communicative Action (Vol. 1). Reason and the Rationalization of Society . London: Heinemann.
27.
Habermas, J. (1987) The Theory of Communicative Action (Vol. 2). The Critique of Functionalist Reason. London: Heinemann.
28.
Hood, C. (1991) 'A Public Management for All Seasons?', Public Administration69 (Spring): 3-19.
29.
Hood, C. (1995) 'The "New Public Management" in the 1980s: Variations on a Theme', Accounting, Organizations and Society20(3): 93-109.
30.
House, E.R. (1980) Evaluating with Validity. Beverly Hills, CA: Sage.
31.
Johnson, T.J. (1972) Professions and Power. London : Macmillan.
32.
Kushner, S. (1996) 'The Limits of Constructivism in Evaluation', Evaluation2(2): 189-200.
33.
Larson, M.S. (1977) The Rise of Professionalism: A Sociological Analysis . Berkeley: University of California Press.
34.
Laughlin, R. (1987) 'Accounting Systems in Organizational Contexts: A Case for Critical Theory', Accounting, Organizations and Society12(5): 479-502.
35.
Laughlin, R. and J. Broadbent (1993) 'Accounting and Law: Partners in the Juridification of the Public Sector in the UK?', Critical Perspectives on Accounting4(4): 337-68.
36.
Laughlin, R. and J. Broadbent (1996) 'Evaluating the "New Public Management" Reforms in the UK: A Constitutional Possibility?' Working Paper. Colchester: University of Essex Department of Acccounting and Financial Management.
37.
MacDonald, B. (1976) 'Evaluation and the Control of Education', in D. Tawney (ed.) Curriculum Evaluation Today: Trends and Implications, pp. 125-36. London: Macmillan.
38.
Meisenhelder, T. (1979) 'Habermas and Feminism: The Future of Critical Theory', in R. A. Wallace (ed.) Feminism and Sociological Theory, pp. 119-32. Newbury Park, CA: Sage.
39.
Norris, N. (1990) Understanding Educational Evaluation. London: Kogan Page.
40.
Patton, M.Q. (1981) Creative Evaluation. Beverly Hills, CA: Sage.
41.
Pawson, R. (1996) 'Three Steps to Constructivist Heaven', Evaluation2(2): 213-19.
42.
Pollitt, C. (1993) Managerialism and the Public Services (2nd edn). Oxford: Blackwell .
43.
Pollitt, C. (1995) 'Justification by Works or by Faith? Evaluating the New Public Management', Evaluation1(2): 133-54.
44.
Roberts, J. and R. Scapens (1985) 'Accounting Systems and Systems of Accountability-Understanding Accounting Practices in their Organisational Contexts', Accounting, Organizations and Society10(4): 443-56.
45.
Rorty, R. (1979) Philosophy and the Mirror of Nature. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.
46.
Schon, D.A. (1983) The Reflective Practitioner. New York: Basic Books.
47.
Scriven, M. (1967) The Methodology of Evaluation in Curriculum Evaluation 1: 39-83. Chicago, IL: Rand McNally.
48.
Stake, R.E. (1975) Evaluating the Arts in Education. Columbus, OH: Merrill.
49.
Thompson, J.B. (1984) Studies in the Theory of Ideology. Cambridge: Polity.
50.
Werner, W. (1978) Evaluation: Sense-making of School Programmes. Monograph Series No. 1. Vancouver: Vancouver Centre for the Study of Curriculum and Instruction, Faculty of Education, University of British Columbia.
51.
Zifcak, S. (1994) New Managerialism: Administrative Reform in Whitehall and Canberra. Buckingham: Open University Press.
