Ethnography and Evaluation: Their Relationship and Three Anthropological Models of Evaluation
Main Article Content
Abstract
This paper examines the relationship between ethnographic research methods and evaluation theory and methodology. It is divided into two main sections: (a) ethnography in evaluation and (b) anthropological models of evaluation. Three levels of the leading anthropological models of evaluation are summarized, which include responsive evaluation, goal-free evaluation, and constructivist evaluation. In conclusion, (a) there is no consensual definition of ethnography; (b) in many circumstances, ethnographic evaluation models may be beneficial; and (c) ethnography can be used in evaluation but requires a high level of analysis to transform ethnographic data into useful information for eliciting an evaluative conclusion.
Downloads
Article Details
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License.
Copyright and Permissions
Authors retain full copyright for articles published in JMDE. JMDE publishes under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License (CC BY - NC 4.0). Users are allowed to copy, distribute, and transmit the work in any medium or format for noncommercial purposes, provided that the original authors and source are credited accurately and appropriately. Only the original authors may distribute the article for commercial or compensatory purposes. To view a copy of this license, visit creativecommons.org
References
Altschuld, J. W. and Witkin, B. R. (2000).From needs assessments to action: Transforming needs into solution strategies. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications, Inc.
Beebe, J. (n.d.). Rapid assessment process. Gonzaga University website. Retrieved January 27, 2005 from http://208.164.121.55/reference/SOME/Outlines/rapid_assessment _process.html
Beebe, J. (1995). Basic concepts and techniques of rapid appraisal. Human Organization, 54(1), 42-51. DOI: https://doi.org/10.17730/humo.54.1.k84tv883mr2756l3
https://doi.org/10.17730/humo.54.1.k84tv883mr2756l3 DOI: https://doi.org/10.17730/humo.54.1.k84tv883mr2756l3
Carney, T. (1991). Fourth generation evaluation. Canadian Journal of Communication, 16(2).
Davidson, E. J. (2005). Evaluation methodology basics: The nuts and bolts of sound evaluation. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications, Inc. DOI: https://doi.org/10.4135/9781452230115
https://doi.org/10.4135/9781452230115 DOI: https://doi.org/10.4135/9781452230115
Denzin, N. K. & Lincoln, Y. S. (Eds). (2000). Handbook of qualitative research (2nd ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications Inc.
Deneberg, V. (1969). Prolizityies A. Zeitgeister. Psychology Today, 311(50).
Evers, J. W. (1980).A field study of goal-based and goal-free evaluation techniques. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, Western Michigan University, Kalamazoo.
Fetterman, D. M. (1982). Ethnography in educational research: The dynamics of diffusion. Educational Researcher, 11(3), 17-29. DOI: https://doi.org/10.3102/0013189X011003017
https://doi.org/10.2307/1175870 DOI: https://doi.org/10.2307/1175870
Fetterman, D. M. (1986a). The ethnographic evaluator. Stanford University. Retrieved January 24, 2005 from http://www.stanford.edu/~,davidf/230c1ass/ethnographicevaluator.html
Fetterman, D. M. (1986b). Conceptual crossroads: Methods and ethics in ethnographic evaluation. In D. D. Williams (Ed.), Naturalistic evaluation: New directions for program evaluation. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1002/ev.1424
https://doi.org/10.1002/ev.1424 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1002/ev.1424
Fetterman, D. M. (1998). Ethnography. In L. Bickman & D. J. Rog (Eds.)Handbook of applied social research methods (pp. 473-504). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications, Inc.
Genzuk, M. (2004). A synthesis of ethnographic research. University of Southern California-Center for Multilingual, Multicultural Research. Retrieved February 3, 2005 from http://www-ref.usc.edu/~genzuk/Ethnographic_Research.pdf
Guba, E. G. & Lincoln, Y. S. (1989). Fourth generation evaluation. Newbury Park, CA: Sage Publications.
Hall, B. (n.d.). Methods: What is ethnography? Center for Public Interest Anthropology at University of Pennsylvania. Retrieved January 24, 2005 from http://www.sas.upenn.edu/ anthro/CPIA/METHODS/Ethnography.html
Hopson, R. K. (2002). Making (more) room at the evaluation table for ethnography: Contributions to the responsive constructivist generation. Exploring evaluation role and identity (pp. 37-56). Information Age Publishing. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1108/978-1-60752-506-620251004
Jessor, R., Colby, A., & Shwedler, R. A. (1996). Ethnography and human development: Context and meaning in social inquiry. Chicago, IL: The University of Chicago Press.
Maxwell, J. A. (1998). Designing a Qualitative Study. In L. Bickman & D. J. Rog (Eds.) Handbook of Applied Social Research Methods (pp. 69-100). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications, Inc.
McLean, L. D. (1975). Judging the quality of a school as a place where the alis might thrive." In R. Stake (Ed.), Evaluating the arts in education: A responsive approach (pp.41-58). Columbus, OH: Charles E. Merrill Publishing Company.
Nastasi, B. K. & Berg, M. J (1999). Using ethnography to strengthen and evaluate intervention programs. In J. J. Schensul, M. D. LeCompte, G. A. Hess, B. K. Nastasi, M. J. Berg, L. Williamson, J. Brecher, & R. Glassner (Eds.). Ethnographers toolkit. Walnut Creek, CA: Altamira Press.
Patton, M. Q. (1990). Qualitative evaluation and research methods (2nd ed.).Sage Publications Newbury Park, CA.
Payne, D. A. (1994). Designing educational project and program evaluations: A practical overview based on research and experience. Boston, MA: Kluwer Academic Publishers. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-011-1376-2
https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-011-1376-2 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-011-1376-2
Sanders, J. (1994). The program evaluation standards (2nd Ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications, Inc.
Scriven, M. (2004). Zen and art of everyday evaluation. Journal of MultiDisciplinary Evaluation, 1. Retrieved July 20, 2005 from http://www.wmich.edu/evalctr/jmde/content/JMDE_Num_001_Part_I.htm DOI: https://doi.org/10.56645/jmde.v1i1.145
Scriven, M. (1991). Evaluation thesaurus (4th ed.). Newbury Park, CA: Sage Publications, Inc.
Scriven, M. (1973). Goal-free evaluation. In E. R. House (Ed), School evaluation: The politics and process. Berkeley, CA: McCutchan Publishing Corporation.
Scriven, M. (1967). The methodology of evaluation. AERA Monograph Series on Curriculum Evaluation, Vol. 1 (pp. 39-83). Chicago, IL: Rand McNally.
Seafield Research & Development Services. (n.d.). Fourth generation evaluation. Retrieved January, 27, 2005 from http://www.srds.ndirect.co.uk/4th.htm
Shadish, W. R. (1994): The guiding principals of evaluation. Boston, MA: American Evaluation Association.
Stake, R. (1975). Evaluating the arts in education: A responsive approach. Columbus, OH: Charles E. Merrill Publishing Company.
United States General Accounting Office. (2003). Ethnographic studies can inform agencies' actions. GAO-03-455.
Wholey, J. S., Hatry, H. P., & Newcomer, K. E. (Eds.) (2004). Handbook of practical program evaluation (2nd ed.). San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.
Wikipedia (n.d.). Hermeneutics. Retrieved March 22, 2005 from http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hermeneutics.htmWolcott, H. P. (1980). How to look like an anthropologist without really being one. Practicing Anthropology, 3(2), 56-59.
Wolcott, H. F. (1982). Ethnographers sans ethnography: The evaluation compromise. Bloomington, IN: Agency for Instructional Television.
Worthen, B. R., Sanders, J. R., & Fitzpatrick, J. L. (1997). Program evaluation: Alternative approaches and practical guidelines (2nd ed.). White Plains, NY: Longman Publishers.