Inclusiveness and Social Justice in Evaluation: Can the Transformative Agenda Really Alter the Status Quo? A Conversation with Donna M. Mertens
Main Article Content
Abstract
Background: Evaluation is sometimes viewed as a professional practice rather than a discipline corresponding to a well defined set of theories. However, Shadish, Cook and Leviton (1991) were able to demonstrate that evaluators’ work does have theoretical foundations. In particular, the authors identified five main elements for evaluation theory and described the contribution made to each of them by seven of the most influential scholars in the field over the last five decades.
Purpose: This paper intends to further the discussion on evaluation theory, by examining some of the contributions made by Donna Mertens. The main focus of the paper is on her innovative ideas on each of the five main elements of evaluation theory.
Setting: Not applicable.
Subjects: Not applicable.
Research Design: Not applicable.
Data Collection and Analysis: The paper is the result of both a desk review of her work on transformative evaluation, inclusiveness, and social justice, and a phone interview with her. For the sake of accuracy, the text of the interview and the corresponding analysis were submitted to Mertens for review prior to publication.
Findings: The author demonstrates how Mertens has incorporated the five principles into her own work and practice. According to Mertens, evaluators need first to be cognizant of the plurality of values held by the communities where they work and second to let those very same values guide the design, implementation, and use of evaluation. Based on her belief that knowledge is not neutral but is influenced by human interests, Mertens calls upon evaluators to play a more active role in the construction of new and “socially compensatory” knowledge. In doing so, Mertens particularly stresses how evaluation practice could address and challenge the social, cultural and economic inequities perpetuated by the status quo.
Conclusions: Pursuing inclusiveness and social justice in evaluation is possible. Transformative evaluation is capable of altering the status quo. Transformative evaluation is instrumental in bringing about not only social change but also social transformation. This article also shows that the debate on evaluation’s main theoretical foundations is still relevant. Such theoretical categories are especially beneficial in that provide common ground for understanding.
Keywords: transformative evaluation, social justice, cultural competence, inclusiveness, valuing, social programming, knowledge, practice, use
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
Chilisa, B. (2005). Educational research within postcolonial Africa: A critique of HIV/AIDS research in Botswana. International Journal of Qualitative Studies in Education, 18, 659-684. https://doi.org/10.1080/09518390500298170 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/09518390500298170
Freire, P. (2006). Pedagogy of the oppressed, 30th Anniversary edition. New York, NY: Continuum.
House, E. R. (1993). Professional evaluation: Social impact and political consequences. Newbury Park, CA: Sage.
Lincoln, Y. S., & Denzin, N. K.,(2005). The eighth and ninth moments: Qualitative research in/and the fractured future. In Y. S. Lincoln & N. K. Denzin (Eds.), The Sage handbook of qualitative research (3rd ed.; pp.1115-1126). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
Madison, A. M., (2000). Language in defining social problems and in evaluating social programs. In R. K. Hopson (Ed.), How and why language matters (pp. 17-28). New Directions for Evaluation, No. 86. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass. https://doi.org/10.1002/ev.1169 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1002/ev.1169
Mertens, D. M. (2003). Mixed methods and the politics of human research: The transformative-emancipatory perspective. In A. Tashakkori & C. Teddlie (Eds.), Handbook of mixed methods in social and behavioral research (pp. 135-166). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage
Mertens, D. M. (2003). The inclusive view of evaluation: Visions for the new millennium. In S. I. Donaldson & M. Scriven (Eds.), Evaluating social programs and problems: Visions for the new millenium, (pp. 91-108). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
Mertens, D. M. (2007a). Transformative considerations: Inclusion and social justice. American Journal of Evaluation, 28(1), 86-90. https://doi.org/10.1177/1098214006298058 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1177/1098214006298058
Mertens, D. M. (2007b). Transformative paradigm: Mixed methods and social justice. Journal of Mixed Methods Research, 1(3), 212-225. https://doi.org/10.1177/1558689807302811 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1177/1558689807302811
Mertens, D. M. (2008). Stakeholder representation in culturally complex communities: Insights from the transformative paradigm. In N. L. Smith & P. R. Brandon (Eds.), Fundamental issues in evaluation, (pp. 41-59). New York: Guilford.
Mertens, D. M. (2009). Transformative research and evaluation. New York: Guilford.
Shadish, W. R., Cook, T. D., & Leviton, L. C. (1991). Foundations of program evaluation: Theories of practice. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage
Tarsilla, M. (2009). Being blind in a world of multiple perspectives: The evaluator's dilemma between the hope of becoming a team player and the fear of becoming a critical friend with no friends. Journal of MultiDisciplinary Evaluation, 13, 200-205. https://doi.org/10.56645/jmde.v6i13.257 DOI: https://doi.org/10.56645/jmde.v6i13.257