Democratizing evaluation: Meanings and methods from practice

New Directions for Evaluation

Volumn 2000, Issue 85, 2000, Pages 39-50

  Ryan, Katherine E ^a   Johnson, Trav D ^b  

^a UNIVERSITY OF ILLINOIS AT URBANA CHAMPAIGN   (United States)

^b BRIGHAM YOUNG UNIVERSITY   (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

EID: 10244272431     PISSN: 10976736     EISSN: 1534875X     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1002/ev.1160     Document Type: Article

References (19)

1. Braskamp, L., Brandenburg, D. and Ory, J., “Lessons About Clients’ Expectations.“In J. Nowakowski., (ed.), The Client Perspective on Evaluation.New Directions for Program Evaluation, no. 36. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass, 1987.
2. Goodman, P., The Community of Scholars.Random House, 1962.
3. Gray, P. J., and Diamond, R. M., “Defining Faculty Work.“In M. K. Kinnick., (ed.), Providing Useful Data for Deans and Department Chairs.New Directions for Institutional Research, no. 84.San Francisco: Jossey-Bass, 1994.
4. Greene, J. C., “Evaluation as Advocacy.“Evaluation Practice, 1997, 18, 25-36.
5. Gutmann, A., Democratic Education.Princeton, N.J.: Princeton University Press, 1987.
6. House, E. R., and Howe, K. R., “The Deliberative Democratic View.“Presentation at the annual meeting of the American Evaluation Association, Chicago, Nov. 1998.
7. House, E. R., and Howe, K. R., Values in Evaluation and Social Research.Thousand Oaks, Calif.: Sage, 1999.
8. Kerr, Clark., The Uses of the University.Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 1982.
9. Mathison, S., “Role Conflicts for Internal Evaluators.“Evaluation and Program Planning, 1991a, 14, 173-179.
10. Mathison, S., “What Do We Know About Internal Evaluation?" Evaluation and Program Planning, 1991b, 14, 159-165.
11. Mathison, S., “Evaluation as a Democratizing Force in Schools.“International Journal of Social Education, 1996, 11, 40-48.
12. Schwandt, T. A., “Recapturing Moral Discourse in Evaluation.“Educational Researcher, 1989, 18, 11-16.
13. Scriven, M., “The Methodology of Evaluation.“In R.Tyler, R.Gagne, and M.Scriven (eds.), Perspectives of Curriculum Evaluation.Skokie, Ill.: Rand-McNally, 1967.
14. Scriven, M., Evaluation Thesaurus.(4th ed.) Thousand Oaks, Calif.: Sage, 1991.
15. Stake, R. E., “Case Studies.“In N. K.Denzinand Y. S.Lincoln (eds.), Handbook of Qualitative Research.Thousand Oaks, Calif.: Sage, 1994.
16. Stake, R. E., The Art of Case Study.Thousand Oaks, Calif.: Sage, 1995.
17. Stohl, C., Organizational Communication: Connectedness in Action.Thousand Oaks, Calif.: Sage, 1995.
18. Strauss, A., and Corbin, J., “Grounded Theory Methodology: An Overview.“In N. K.Denzinand Y. S.Lincoln (eds.), Handbook of Qualitative Research.Thousand Oaks, Calif.: Sage, 1994.
19. Wolff, R. P., The Ideal of the University.Boston: Beacon Press, 1969.