From Perpetuation to Disruption of Disadvantages: Learning from a Young Ray Rist and Implications for the Future of the Field of Evaluation
Main Article Content
Abstract
Background: Given the amplification of vulnerabilities created by the COVID-19 pandemic, the need for evaluation to more intentionally explore the intended and unintended consequences of interventions in contemporary society has increased. In this paper, we analyze one of Ray Rist's earliest papers, "Student Social Class and Teacher Expectations: The Self-Fulfilling Prophecy in Ghetto Education" to explore whether it has lessons for contemporary evaluators
Purpose: This paper seeks to learn lessons for evaluation (in identifying themes important to addressing inequities) from a seminal paper published more than 50 years ago. We explore lessons that research study conducted in a classroom in the USA might have for contemporary evaluators.
Setting: Not applicable.
Intervention: Not applicable.
Research Design: Not applicable.
Data Collection and Analysis: This paper analyzes key themes from Rist's seminal paper and leverages our experience as evaluators working in multiple settings to assess the implication of his paper to contemporary evaluations. The analysis is informed by a realist lens that recognizes the importance of contexts and mechanisms in the generation of outcomes.
Findings: The following four implications of Rist's ideas are discussed: (1) the need to pay close attention to the architecture of interventions; (ii) explore how the implementation of some interventions can lead to exclusion of individuals; (iii) evaluation as a field needs to move from verdicts to explanations; (iv) evaluators need to pay attention to the dynamics of mutually reinforcing processes that exacerbate disadvantages over time.
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
Davidoff, F. (2017). Can knowledge about heterogeneity in treatment effects help us choose wisely? Annals of Internal Medicine, 166(2), 141-142. https://doi.org/10.7326/m16-1721 DOI: https://doi.org/10.7326/M16-1721
Meyer, M. A. (2001). Our own liberation: Reflections on Hawaiian epistemology. The Contemporary Pacific, 13(1), 124-148. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1353/cp.2001.0024
Nakaima, A., & Sridharan, S. (2023). Steps toward evaluation as decluttering: Learnings from Hawaiian epistemology. Journal of MultiDisciplinary Evaluation, 19(44), 183-196. https://doi.org/10.56645/jmde.v19i44.809 DOI: https://doi.org/10.56645/jmde.v19i44.809
Patton, M. Q. (2010). Developmental evaluation: Applying complexity concepts to enhance innovation and use. Guilford Press.
Pawson, R. (2024). How to think like a realist: A methodology for social science. Edward Elgar Publishing. DOI: https://doi.org/10.4337/9781035321100
Pawson, R., & Tilley, N. (1997). Realistic evaluation. Sage.
Rist, R. C. (1970). Student Social Class and Teacher Expectations: The Self-Fulfilling Prophecy in Ghetto Education. Harvard Education Review, 40(3), 411-451. DOI: https://doi.org/10.17763/haer.40.3.h0m026p670k618q3
Sridharan, S., & Nakaima, A. (2019). Till time (and poor planning) do us part: Programs as dynamic systems—Incorporating planning of sustainability into theories of change. Canadian Journal of Program Evaluation, 33(3), 375-394. https://doi.org/10.3138/cjpe.53055 DOI: https://doi.org/10.3138/cjpe.53055
Sridharan, S., Zhao, K., & Nakaima, A. (2017). Editors' notes. New Directions for Evaluation, 2017(154), 9-16. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1002/ev.20242