NCJ Number
54799
Journal
Evaluation and Program Planning Volume: 1 Issue: 3 Dated: (1978)
Date Published
1978
Length
6 pages
Annotation
THE VALIDITY OF EXPERIMENTAL EVALUATION MODELS, WHICH SIMPLIFY PROGRAM REALITIES INTO GENERALIZED ANALYSES OF DISCRETE CAUSES, AND CONTEXTUAL MODELS, WHICH EXAMINE A PROGRAM HOLISTICALLY, ARE COMPARED.
Abstract
THE THEORETICAL SPLIT BETWEEN THE TWO APPROACHES TO EVALUATION HAD LED TO AN 'EITHER-OR' VIEW WHEN, IN REALITY, THE TWO APPROACHES ARE COMPLIMENTARY. EXPERIMENTAL EVALUATION IS GENERALLY MORE FAVORED BY RESEARCHERS. THESE EVALUATIONS ASSUME THAT EXPLICIT PROGRAM GOALS CAN BE ISOLATED AND RESULTS OF TREATMENT CAN BE QUALITATIVELY MEASURED. THEY SIMPLIFY ACTION PROGRAM DYNAMICS INTO AN EXPLICIT ANALYSIS OF CAUSE AND EFFECT. CONTEXTUAL EVALUATIONS TREAT PROGRAMS AS ONGOING SOCIAL REALITIES, AND GOALS AND TREATMENT RESULTS ARE SEEN AS EVOLVING FROM CONTINUING INTERACTIONS AMONG PROGRAM PARTICIPANTS. THE USE OF CONTEXTUAL EVALUATIONS AND THE RESULTS WHICH CAN BE EXPECTED ARE EXPLAINED. IT IS SUGGESTED THAT CONTEXTUAL EVALUATIONS SHOULD BE USED TO DEFINE MEASUREMENTS FOR LATER EXPERIMENTAL ASSESSMENT, THAT THEY SHOULD BE USED WHENEVER THE DYNAMICS OF AN ORGANIZATION SEEM TO BE INTERFERING WITH THE ACHIEVEMENT OF HOPED-FOR GOALS, AND THAT THEY ARE A VALUABLE ADJUNCT TO ANY EXPERIMENTAL EVALUATION. THE CHOICE OF MODEL IS EXAMINED IN TERMS OF PROGRAM GOALS, PROGRAM TREATMENT, PROGRAM THEORY, RESULTS, PROGRAM TYPE, AND VARIOUS PROGRAM CHARACTERISTICS. GUIDELINES FOR DECIDING ON AN EVALUATION MODEL ARE GIVEN. REFERENCES ARE APPENDED. (GLR)