Evaluating in a Fragmented Society
Main Article Content
Abstract
Background: Over decades American society has become increasingly fragmented, distrusting, and unequal. Distrust and inequality interact with institutions performing improperly to weaken the society.
Purpose: To suggest ways to strengthen evaluation’s role in a changing society
Setting: Evaluation has entered a post normal phase where evaluations are losing credibility and effectiveness.
Intervention: Analyze the changing society and suggest adjustments that evaluators might make.
Research design: Collate and synthesize empirical studies about society and the implications for evaluators.
Data collection and analysis: Collect and interpret seminal empirical economic, sociological, and political studies of beliefs and inequality in the United States.
Findings: To strengthen the potency of evaluations of any type, evaluators could act as moral fiduciaries, practice transparency, cultivate cognitive empathy, focus on deep stories and deep values, and mitigate inequalities in the evaluation space. They can act as critics of evaluation practices inside and outside the evaluation space. They should avoid technical, social, and situational biases, including racism, sexism, and conflicts of interest, to increase the honesty and credibility of evaluations. They should not allow career concerns to prevent them from doing the right thing. These professional ethics and practices can be applied singly or collectively to most evaluation approaches to strengthen the evaluator’s role and address major societal problems.
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
Abramoff, J. (2011). Capitol punishment. Washington DC: WND Books.
Bebchuk, L., & Fried, J. (2004). Pay without performance. Cambridge: Harvard University Press.
Beckert, S. (2014). Empire of cotton. New York: Vintage
Campbell, R., Shaw, J., & Fehler-Cabral. (2015). Shelving justice: The discovery of thousands of untested rape kits in Detroit. City and Community, 14:2, June, 151-166. https://doi.org/10.1111/cico.12108 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1111/cico.12108
Cramer, K. (2016). The politics of resentment. Chicago: University of Chicago Press. DOI: https://doi.org/10.7208/chicago/9780226349251.001.0001
Carter, Z. D. (2020). The price of peace: Money, democracy, and the life of John Maynard Keynes. New York: Random House.
Desmond, M. (2016). Evicted. New York: Crown.
DuBois, W. E. B. (1986). Writings. Library of America. New York.
Feagin, J. R. (2013). The white racial frame. (2nd ed.). New York: Routledge. https://doi.org/10.4324/9780203076828 DOI: https://doi.org/10.4324/9780203076828
Gilens, M. (2012). Affluence and influence. Princeton NJ: Princeton University Press.
Greene, J. C. (2013). Making the world a better place through evaluation. In M. C. Alkin (Ed.). Evaluation roots, 2nd ed. Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE. 208-217.
Hacker, J. S., & Pierson, P. (2020). Let them eat tweets. New York: Liveright.
Hochschild, A. R. (2016). Strangers in their own land. New York: New Press.
Hood, S., Hopson, R., & Frierson, H. (Eds.). (2005). The role of culture and cultural context. Charlotte, NC: Information Age Publishing.
House, E. R. (1997). Evaluation in the government marketplace. Evaluation Practice, 18(1), 37-48. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0886-1633(97)90006-4 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/S0886-1633(97)90006-4
House, E. R., & Howe, K. R. (1999). Values in evaluation and social research. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage. https://doi.org/10.4135/9781452243252 DOI: https://doi.org/10.4135/9781452243252
House, E. R. (2011). Conflict of interest and Campbellian validity. New Directions for Evaluation, 2011, 69-80. https://doi.org/10.1002/ev.366 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1002/ev.366
House, E. R. (2013). Evaluation's conflicted future. In S. I. Donaldson, Ed. The future of evaluation. Charlotte NC: Information Age, 63-72. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1108/978-1-62396-453-520251005
House, E. R. (2015). Evaluating: Values, biases, and practical wisdom Charlotte NC: Information Age. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1108/978-1-62396-917-2
House, E. R. (2017). Evaluation and the framing of race. American Journal of Evaluation, 38(2), 167-189 https://doi.org/10.1177/1098214017694963 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1177/1098214017694963
House, E. R. (2019). Evaluation with a focus on justice. In M. Alkin and C. A. Christie. (Eds). Theorists' Models in Action. New Directions in Evaluation, 163, Fall, 161-72. https://doi.org/10.1002/ev.20377 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1002/ev.20377
Judis, J. B. (2016). The populist explosion. New York: Columbia Global Reports. https://doi.org/10.2307/jj.17912858 DOI: https://doi.org/10.2307/jj.17912858
Judis, J. B. (2018). The nationalist revival. New York: Columbia Global Reports. https://doi.org/10.2307/j.ctv1fx4gx6 DOI: https://doi.org/10.2307/j.ctv1fx4gx6
Kahneman, D. (2011). Thinking, fast and slow. New York: Farrar, Strauss, Giroux.
Karlsson, O. (1996). A critical dialogue in evaluation: How can interaction between evaluation and politics be tackled. Evaluation, 2, 405-416. https://doi.org/10.1177/135638909600200404 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1177/135638909600200404
Kennedy, D. M. (1999). Freedom from fear. New York: Oxford University.
Krugman, P. (2017). The gilded age. In H. Boushey, J.B. DeLong, and M. Steinbaum (Eds). Beyond Piketty. Cambridge MA: Harvard University Press. 60-71.
Lessig, L. (2018). America, compromised. Chicago: University of Chicago Press. https://doi.org/10.7208/chicago/9780226316673.001.0001 DOI: https://doi.org/10.7208/chicago/9780226316673.001.0001
Mayer, J. (2016). Dark money. New York: Doubleday.
McLean, N. (2017). Democracy in chains. NY: Penguin Random House
Nielson S. B., Lemire S, and Christie C. A. 2018. The evaluation marketplace and its industry. New Directions for Evaluation, 160, 13-28. https://doi.org/10.1002/ev.20344 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1002/ev.20344
Payne, K. (2017). The broken ladder. New York: Penguin.
Piketty, T. (2014). Capital in the twenty-first century. Cambridge MA: Belknap. https://doi.org/10.4159/9780674369542 DOI: https://doi.org/10.4159/9780674369542
Rothstein. B. (2018). How the trust trap perpetuates inequality. Scientific American. 319, 5, 7. https://doi.org/10.1038/scientificamerican112018-3seaUkFgKDkIV1UpHFdk1m DOI: https://doi.org/10.1038/scientificamerican112018-3seaUkFgKDkIV1UpHFdk1m
Rothstein, B., & Varraich, A. (2017). Making sense of corruption. Cambridge UK: Cambridge University Press. https://doi.org/10.1017/9781316681596 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1017/9781316681596
Saez, E., & Zucman, G. (2020). The triumph of injustice. NY: W.W. Norton.
Schwandt, T. A. (2019). Post normal evaluation? Evaluation. Vol 25(3), 317-329. https://doi.org/10.1177/1356389019855501 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1177/1356389019855501
Small, M. L. (2019). Rhetoric and social science in a polarized society. 2019 Spencer Lecture, American Educational Research Association, Toronto, Canada, May 22.
Scriven, M. (1976). Evaluation bias and its control. In G. V Glass (Ed.). Evaluation studies review annual (pp. 119-139). Beverley Hills: Sage.
Shadish, W. R. , Cook, T. D., & Campbell, D. T. (2002). Experimental and quasi-experimental designs for generalized causal inference. Boston: Houghton Mifflin.
Stiglitz, J. E. (2018). A rigged economy. Scientific American, 319:5, 57-61 https://doi.org/10.1038/scientificamerican1118-56 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1038/scientificamerican1118-56
Tooze, A. (2018). Crashed. New York: Viking.
Waldman, G. S. (2019). The Reagan revolution. In The liberal hour. Blog, May 15. (www.garywald.net).