The "Baggaging" of Theory-Based Evaluation
Main Article Content
Abstract
Program theory and its use in evaluation seems to be an argument that just won’t go away—depending on which part of the world one is in. What is it about theory-based evaluation (or the different understandings of it) that polarizes some but brings others together? A little digging shows that there are some serious misconceptions among both the program theory evangelists and the “theoro-skeptics,” while some of the best innovations are coming from those who understand program theory’s potential and limitations and are just getting on with using it to move our discipline forward.
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
Chen, H. T. (1990). Theory-driven evaluations. Newbury Park, CA: Sage.
Chen, H. T. (1994). A panel of theory-driven evaluation and evaluation theories. Evaluation Practice, 15, 73-74. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/0886-1633(94)90061-2
https://doi.org/10.1177/109821409401500107 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1177/109821409401500107
Chen, H. T. (1996). A comprehensive typology for program evaluation. Evaluation Practice, 17, 121-130. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/S0886-1633(96)90017-3
https://doi.org/10.1177/109821409601700204 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1177/109821409601700204
Davidson, E. J. (2000). Ascertaining causality in theory-based evaluation. In P. J. Rogers, T. A. Hacsi, A. Petrosino, & T. A. Huebner (Eds.), Program theory in evaluation: Challenges and opportunities [Special issue]. New Directions for Evaluation, 87, 17-26. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1002/ev.1178
https://doi.org/10.1002/ev.1178 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1002/ev.1178
Davidson, E. J. (2004) Evaluation methodology basics: The nuts and bolts of sound evaluation. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage. DOI: https://doi.org/10.4135/9781452230115
https://doi.org/10.4135/9781452230115 DOI: https://doi.org/10.4135/9781452230115
Donaldson, S. I. (2003). Theory-driven evaluation in the new millennium. In Evaluating social programs and problems: Visions for the new millennium.Claremont Symposium Series, Claremont, CA. DOI: https://doi.org/10.4324/9781410606556
https://doi.org/10.4324/9781410606556 DOI: https://doi.org/10.4324/9781410606556
Pawson, R., & Tilley, N. (1997). Realistic evaluation. London: Sage.
Rogers, P. J. (2000). Causal models in program theory evaluation. In P. J. Rogers, T. A. Hacsi, A. Petrosino, & T. A. Huebner (Eds.), Program theory in evaluation: Challenges and opportunities [Special issue]. New Directions for Evaluation, 87, 47-55. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1002/ev.1181
https://doi.org/10.1002/ev.1181 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1002/ev.1181
Rogers, P. J., Petrosino, A., Huebner, T. A., & Hacsi, T. A. (2000). Program theory evaluation: Practice, promise, and problems. In P. J. Rogers, T. A. Hacsi, A. Petrosino, & T. A. Huebner (Eds.), Program theory in evaluation: Challenges and opportunities [Special issue]. New Directions for Evaluation, 87, 5-13. Scriven, M. (1994). The fine line between evaluation and explanation. Evaluation Practice, 15, 75-77. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1002/ev.1177
https://doi.org/10.1002/ev.1177 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1002/ev.1177
Scriven, M. (1997). Minimalist theory: The least theory that practice requires. American Journal of Evaluation 19(1), 575-604. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/S1098-2140(99)80180-5
https://doi.org/10.1177/109821409801900105 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1177/109821409801900105
Stufflebeam, D. L. (2001). Evaluation Models. New Directions for Evaluation, 89(complete issue). DOI: https://doi.org/10.1002/ev.1
https://doi.org/10.1002/ev.3 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1002/ev.3
Stufflebeam, D. L. (2004). The 21st century CIPP model. In M. C. Alkin (Ed.), Evaluation Roots (pp. 245-266). DOI: https://doi.org/10.4135/9781412984157.n16
https://doi.org/10.4135/9781412984157.n16 DOI: https://doi.org/10.4135/9781412984157.n16