Jump to:Page Content
You are seeing this message because your web browser does not support basic web standards. Find out more about why this message is appearing and what you can do to make your experience on this site better.
The Harvard Family Research Project separated from the Harvard Graduate School of Education to become the Global Family Research Project as of January 1, 2017. It is no longer affiliated with Harvard University.
Volume XI, Number 3, Fall 2005 Issue Topic: Democratic EvaluationThis issue of The Evaluation Exchange periodical focuses on democratic evaluation. At the forefront of the discussion are equity and inclusion in the evaluation of programs for children, families, and communities, as well as evaluation to promote public accountability and transparency. Katherine Ryan leads off the issue by presenting major theoretical approaches to democratic evaluation. Several contributors examine these different strands, highlighting the importance of power sharing. Jennifer Greene emphasizes the importance of broad inclusion of stakeholder perspectives in evaluations, while Saville Kushner offers guidelines for people and communities to help evaluation reposition itself as a collaborative effort and thereby begin to address the crisis in public trust between the professional bureaucracy and citizens. Kathleen McCartney and Heather Weiss focus on public accountability, especially the conduct of flagship evaluations to maintain their scientific integrity while also serving the public good. Several contributors provide practical methods and tools to promote democratic evaluation, including the facilitation of dialogue, the training of youth researchers, the use of photovoice and cell phone technology, and access to interactive information through the Internet. |
An introduction to the issue on Democratic Evaluation by HFRP's Founder & Director, Heather B. Weiss, Ed.D.
Theory & PracticeKatherine Ryan, Associate Professor of Educational Psychology at the University of Illinois, describes three approaches to democratic evaluation and argues that they can provide field-tested methods for addressing equity and inclusion issues in evaluations of programs for children, youth, and families.
Promising PracticesKathleen McCartney and Heather Weiss of the Harvard Graduate School of Education describe the conditions for evaluations to maintain scientific integrity and serve the public good despite a politicized environment.
Promising PracticesTim Ross, Research Director at the Vera Institute of Justice, explains Vera's rigorous and multitiered data collection process and the benefits of partnerships with public programs.
Promising PracticesDennis Arroyo describes the performance-monitoring mechanisms that nongovernment agencies use to make public officials accountable to citizens.
Promising PracticesErnest House, Emeritus Professor at the University of Colorado, argues that democratic evaluation calls for more ingenuity than other forms of evaluation and that as a result its methods can take many forms.
Promising PracticesAnju Malhotra and Sanyukta Mathur from the International Center for Research on Women describe a study in Nepal that compared participatory and more traditional approaches to evaluating adolescent reproductive health interventions.
Beyond Basic TrainingKristine Lewis shares Research for Action's experience with training youth to use social science research methods in their campaigns to im-prove their local high schools.
Questions & AnswersJennifer Greene of the University of Ilinois talks about her efforts to advance the theory and practice of alternative forms of evaluation, including qualitative, participatory, and mixed-method evaluation.
SpotlightCheryl MacNeil, an evaluation consultant, describes the asymmetries of power in evaluation and her efforts to make her evaluation practice more democratic.
SpotlightAndrew Nachison, director of the Media Center, an organization that studies the intersection of media, technology, and society, writes about social capital and democratic processes in a digital society.
Evaluations to WatchArnold Love and Betty Muggah describe how Hamilton Community Foundation applied democratic evaluation principles to transform challenged neighborhoods into vibrant communities.
Evaluations to WatchSeema Shah, a researcher at the Institute for Education and Social Policy, shares her experience of engaging community organizing groups to develop a logic model on how community organizing leads to better student outcomes.
Evaluations to WatchKatrina Bledsoe of the College of New Jersey writes about the inclusion of student voices in the evaluation of an obesity prevention program
Ask the ExpertSaville Kushner of the Centre for Research in Education and Democracy at the University of the West of England suggests ways that an evaluation's participants can make evaluations more democratic.
Ask the ExpertSally Leiderman, President of the Center for Assessment and Policy Development, explains how evaluation can be a tool to help communities and their partners do work in racial equity.
The New & Noteworthy section features an annotated list of papers, organizations, initiatives, and other resources related to the issue's theme of Democratic Evaluation.
This web only version of the New & Noteworthy section features an expanded annotated list of papers, organizations, initiatives, and other resources related to the issue's theme of Democratic Evaluation.
This issue of The Evaluation Exchange was published by Harvard Family Research Project. The managing editor for the issue is M. Elena Lopez , Ph.D., senior consultant; the contributing editors are Elizabeth Blair, graduate student at HGSE, and Margaret Post, consultant; and the assistant editor is Margaret Caspe, consultant. It was produced by Stacey Miller, publications/communications manager, and Carrie-Anne DeDeo, publications editor. All rights reserved. This periodical may not be reproduced whole or in part without written permission from the publisher. To request reprint permission, email hfrp_pubs@gse.harvard.edu.
Harvard Family Research Project gratefully acknowledges the support of the Annie E. Casey Foundation, the Marguerite Casey Foundation, the Ewing Marion Kauffman Foundation, the W. K. Kellogg Foundation, the John S. and James L. Knight Foundation, and the C. S. Mott Foundation. The contents of this publication are solely the responsibility of Harvard Family Research Project and do not necessarily reflect the view of our funders.
Free. 20 Pages.