A realist theory of evaluation practice

New Directions for Evaluation

Volumn 1998, Issue 78, 1998, Pages 3-32

  Mark, Melvin M ^a   Henry, Gary T ^b   Julnes, George ^c  

^a PENNSYLVANIA STATE UNIVERSITY   (United States)

^b GEORGIA STATE UNIVERSITY   (United States)

^c UNIVERSITY OF ILLINOIS AT SPRINGFIELD   (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

EID: 79958072654     PISSN: 10976736     EISSN: 1534875X     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1002/ev.1098     Document Type: Article

References (68)

1. Alexander, K., and Entwisle, D. “Educational Tracking During the Early Years: First-Grade Placements and Middle-School Constraints.” In A. Kerckhoff (ed.), Generating Social Stratification: Toward a New Research Agenda. Boulder, Colo. Westview Press, 1996.
2. Barnett, W. “Long-Term Effects of Early Childhood Programs on Cognitive and School Outcomes.” The Future of Children, 1995, 5 (3), 25–49.
3. Bhaskar, R. A. A Realist Theory of Science. Atlantic Highlands, N.J.: Humanities Press, 1978.
4. Borkovec, T. D., and Miranda, J. “Between-Group Psychotherapy Outcome Research and Basic Science.” Psychotherapy and Rehabilitation Research Bulletin, 1996, 5, 14–20.
5. Bryk, A. S., and Raudenbush, S. W. “On Heterogeneity of Variance in Experimental Studies: A Challenge to Conventional Interpretation.” Psychological Bulletin, 1988, 104, 396–404.
6. Bryk, A. S., and Raudenbush, S. W. Hierarchical Linear Models: Applications and Data Analysis Methods. Newbury Park, Calif.: Sage, 1992.
7. Campbell, D. T. “Factors Relevant to the Validity of Experiments in Social Settings.” Psychological Bulletin, 1957, 54, 456–453.
8. Campbell, D. T. “Pattern Matching as an Essential in Distal Knowing.” In K. R. Hammond (ed.), The Psychology of Egon Brunswik. New York: Holt, Rinehart and Winston, 1966.
9. Campbell, D. T. “Qualitative Knowing in Action Research.” Kurt Lewin Address; Annual meeting of the American Psychological Association, New Orleans, La., 1974.
10. Campbell, D. T. “Can We Be Scientific in Applied Social Science?” In R. F. Connor, D. G. Altman, and C. Jackson (eds.), Evaluation Studies Review Annual, Vol. 9. Newbury Park, Calif.: Sage, 1984.
11. Caracelli, V. J., and Greene, J. C. “Crafting Mixed-Method Evaluation Designs.” In J. C. Greene, and D. J. Caracelli (eds.), Advances in Mixed-Method Evaluation: The Challenges and Benefits of Integrating Diverse Paradigms. New Directions for Evaluation, no. 74. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass, 1997.
12. Carey, T. S., and others. “The Outcomes and Costs of Care for Acute Back Pain Among Patients Seen by Primary Care Practitioners, Chiropractors, and Orthopedic Surgeons: The North Carolina Back Pain Project.” New England Journal of Medicine, 1995, 333 (14), 913–917.
13. Carnegie Task Force on Meeting the Needs of Young Children. Starting Points: Meeting the Needs of Our Youngest Children. 1994.
14. Consortium for Longitudinal Studies (ed.). As the Twig is Bent.…:Lasting Effects of Preschool Programs. Hillsdale, N.J.: Erlbaum, 1983.
15. Cook, T. D. “Postpositivist Critical Multiplism.” In R. L. Shotland, and M. M. Mark (eds.), Social Science and Social Policy. Beverly Hills, Calif.: Sage, 1985.
16. Cook, T. D. “A Quasi-Sampling Theory of the Generalization of Causal Relationships.” In L. B. Sechrest, and A. G. Scott (eds.), Understanding Causes and Generalizing About Them. New Directions for Program Evaluation, no. 57, 1993.
17. Cook, T. D., and others. Meta-Analysis for Explanation: A Casebook. New York: Russell Sage Foundation, 1992.
18. Cook, T. D., and Campbell, D. T. Quasi-Experimentation: Design and Analysis Issues for Field Settings. Chicago: Rand McNally, 1979.
19. Cronbach, L. J. “Beyond the Two Disciplines of Scientific Psychology.” American Psychologist, 1975, 30, 116–127.
20. Cronbach, L. J. Designing Evaluations of Educational and Social Programs. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass, 1982.
21. Entwisle, D. “The Role of Schools in Sustaining Early Childhood Program Benefits.” The Future of Children: Long-Term Outcomes of Early Childhood Programs, 1995, 5 (3), 133–144.
22. Gamoron, A. “Educational Stratification and Individual Careers.” In A. Kerckhoff (ed.), Generating Social Stratification: Toward a New Research Agenda. Boulder, Colo.: Westview Press, 1996.
23. Greene, J. C, and Caracelli, V. J. “Defining and Describing the Paradigm Issue in Mixed-Method Evaluation.” In J. C. Greene and D. J. Caracelli (eds.) Advances in Mixed-Method Evaluation: The Challenges and Benefits of Integrating Diverse Paradigms. New Directions for Evaluation, no. 74. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass, 1997.
24. Guba, E.G., and Lincoln, Y. S. Fourth-Generation Evaluation. Newbury Park, Calif.: Sage, 1989.
25. Hanushek, 1997
26. Hendricks, M. “Making a Splash: Reporting Evaluation Results Effectively.” In J. S. Wholey, H. P. Hatry, K. E. Newcomer (eds.) Handbook of Practical Program Evaluation. San Fransisco, Jossey-Bass, 1994.
27. Henry, G. T. Graphing Data: Techniques for Display and Analysis. Thousand Oaks, Calif.: Sage, 1995.
28. Henry, G. T. “Community-Based Accountability: A Theory of Accountability and School Improvement.” Phi Delta Kappan, 1996, 78 (1), 85–90.
29. Henry, G. T. Creating Effective Graphs: Solutions for a Variety of Evaluation Data. New Directions for Evaluation, no. 73. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass, 1997.
30. Henry, G., and Bugler, D. Evaluation of the Georgia HOPE Scholarship Program: Impact on Students Attending Public Colleges and Universities. Atlanta, Ga.: Council for School Performance Report, 1997.
31. Henry, G. T. and others. School Performance Reports. Atlanta, Ga.: Council for School Performance. 1996.
32. House, E. R. Jesse Jackson and the Politics of Charisma: The Rise and Fall of the PUSH/Excel Program. Boulder, Colo.: Westview, 1988.
33. House, E. R. “Realism in Research.” Educational Researcher, 1991, 20, 2–9.
34. Jones, J., Dolan, K., and Henry, G. Two Miles Down a Ten-Mile Road: Instructional Technology and the Impact of Lottery Funding in Georgia. Council for School Performance, 1996.
35. Julnes, G. “Context-Confirmatory Methods for Supporting Disciplined Induction in Post-Positivist Inquiry.” Paper presented at the annual meeting of the American Evaluation Association, Vancouver, British Columbia, November 2, 1995.
36. Kingdon, J. Agendas, Alternatives, and Public Policies. (2nd ed.) HarperCollins, 1995.
37. Lee, V., and Leob, S. “Where Do Head Start Attendees End Up? One Reason Why Preschool Effects Fade Out.” Educational Evaluation and Policy Analysis, 1995, 17 (1), 62–82.
38. Majone, G. Evidence, Argument, and Persuasion in the Policy Process. New Haven, Conn.: Yale University Press, 1988.
39. Marcon, R. “Differential Effects of Three Preschool Models on Inner-City Four-Year-Olds.” Early Childhood Research Quarterly, 1992, 7, 517–530.
40. Marcon, R. Early Learning and Early Identification Follow-Up Study: Transition from the Early to the Later Childhood Grades. Washington, D.C., 1994, 1–22. (ED 263984)
41. Mark, M. M. “Validity Typologies and the Logic and Practice of Quasi-Experimentation.” In W.M.K. Trochim (ed.), Advances in Quasi-Experimental Design and Analysis. New Directions for Program Evaluation, no. 31. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass, 1986.
42. Mark, M. M. “From Program Theory to Tests of Program Theory.” In L. Bickman (ed.), Advances in Program Theory. New Directions for Program Evaluation, no. 47. San Francisco: Jossey Bass, 1990.
43. Mark, M. M. “On the Integration of Discovery, Confirmation, and Monitoring in Evaluation.” Paper presented at the Trinity Symposium on Public Management Research. San Antonio, Tex., 1995.
44. Mark, M. M., Feller, I., and Button, S. B. “Integrating Qualitative Methods in a Predominantly Quantitative Evaluation: A Case Study and Some Reflections.” In J. C. Greene, and D. J. Caracelli (eds.), Advances in Mixed-Method Evaluation: The Challenges and Benefits of Integrating Diverse Paradigms. New Directions for Evaluation, no. 74. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass, 1997.
45. Mark, M. M., Henry, G. T., and Julnes, G. “Evaluation, A Realist Approach: Monitoring, Classification, Causal Analysis, and Values Inquiry.” In preparation.
46. Mark, M. M., Hofmann, D., and Reichardt, C. S. “Testing Theories in Theory-Driven Evaluations: (Tests of) Moderation in All Things.” In H.-t. Chen, and P. H. Rossi (eds.), Using Theory to Improve Program and Policy Evaluations. New York: Greenwood Press, 1992.
47. Maxwell, J. Qualitative Research Design: An Interactive Approach. Thousand Oaks, Calif.: Sage, 1996.
48. McKey, R. The Impact of Head Start on Children, Families, and Communities. Washington, D.C., 1985. (ED 263984)
49. Mohr, L. B. Impact Analysis of Program Evaluation. (2nd ed.) Thousand Oaks, Calif.: Sage, 1995.
50. Patton, M. Q. “Paradigms and Pragmatism.” In D. M. Fetterman (ed.), Qualitative Approaches to Evaluation in Education: The Silent Scientific Revolution. New York: Praeger, 1988.
51. Patton, M. Q. Utilization-Focused Evaluation: The New Century Text. Thousand Oaks, Calif.: Sage, 1997.
52. Pawson, R., and Tilley, N. Realistic Evaluation. Thousand Oaks, Calif.: Sage, 1997.
53. Reichardt, C. S., and Mark, M. M. “Quasi-Experimentation.” In L. Bickman and D. J. Rog (eds.), Handbook of Applied Social Research Methods. Thousand Oaks, Calif.: Sage, 1998.
54. Ross, L. and Nisbett, R. E. The Person and the Situation. New York: McGraw Hill, 1991.
55. Ross, H. L., Campbell, D. T., and Glass, G. V. “Determining the Social Effects of Legal Reform: The British ‘Breathalyser’ Crackdown in 1967.” American Behavioral Scientist, 1970, 13, 493–509.
56. Scriven, M. The Evaluation Thesaurus. Thousand Oaks, Calif.: Sage, 1990.
57. Sechrest, L., and Yeaton, W. E. “Assessing the Effectiveness of Social Programs: Methodological and Conceptual Issues.” In S. Ball (ed.), Assessing and Interpreting Outcomes. New Directions for Program Evaluation, no. 9. San Francisco: Jossey Bass, 1981.
58. Shadish, W. R., Cook, T. D., and Leviton, L. C. Foundations of Program Evaluation: Theories of Practice. Newbury Park, Calif.: Sage, 1991.
59. Smith M. L. “Mixing and Matching: Methods and Models.” In J. C. Greene and D. J. Caracelli (eds.), Advances in Mixed-Method Evaluation: The Challenges and Benefits of Integrating Diverse Paradigms. New Directions for Evaluation, no. 74. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass, 1997.
60. Smith, N. L. “Aspects of Investigative Inquiry in Evaluation.” In N.L. Smith (ed), Varieties of Investigate Evaluation. New Directions for Program Evaluation, no. 50. San Francisco: Jossey Bass, 1992.
61. Trochim, W.M.K. “Pattern Matching, Construct Validity, and Conceptualization in Program Evaluation.” Evaluation Review, 1985, 9, 575–604.
62. Tukey, J. W. Exploratory Data Analysis. Reading, Mass.: Addison-Wesley, 1977.
63. White, L. “Policy Analysis as Discourse.” Journal of Policy Analysis and Management, 1994, 12 (3), 322–359.
64. Wholey, J. S. “Evaluability Assessment: Developing Program Theory.” In L. Bickman (ed.), Using Program Theory in Evaluation. New Directions in Program Evaluation, no. 33. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass, 1987.
65. Wilson, J. “Culture, Incentives, and the Underclass.” In H. J. Aaron, T. E. Mann, and T. Taylor (eds). Values and Public Policy. Washington, D.C.: The Brookings Institution, 1994.
66. Wright, J. D. “Methodological Issues in Evaluating the National Health Care for the Homeless Program.” In D. J. Rog (ed.), New Directions for Program Evaluation, no. 52. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass, 1991.
67. Yankelovich, D. “How Changes in the Economy are Reshaping American Values.” In H. J. Aaron, T. E. Mann, and T. Taylor (eds), Values and Public Policy. Washington, D.C.: The Brookings Institution, 1994.
68. Yin, R. K. Case Study Research: Design and Methods. (2nd ed.) Thousand Oaks, Calif.: Sage, 1994.