The view from Main Street and the view from 40, 000 feet: Can a national evaluation understand local communities?

New Directions for Evaluation

Volumn 1999, Issue 83, 1999, Pages 67-86

  Saxe, Leonard ^a   Tighe, Elizabeth ^b  

^a UNIVERSITY OF NEW YORK   (United States)

^b BRANDEIS UNIVERSITY   (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

EID: 84937190793     PISSN: 10976736     EISSN: 1534875X     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1002/ev.1146     Document Type: Article

References (42)

1. Beveridge, A., and others.Monitoring Archival Indicators of Alcohol and Other Drug Harm.Report prepared for the Robert Wood Johnson Foundation. Waltham, Mass.: Brandeis University, 1997.
2. Beveridge, A., and others.“Survey Estimates of Drug Use Trends in Urban Communities: General Principles and Cautionary Examples.“Journal of Substance Use and Misuse, Forthcoming.
3. Bickman, L., and Noser, K., “Meeting the Challenges in the Delivery of Child and Adolescent Services in the Next Millennium: The Continuous Quality Improvement Approach.“Journal of Applied and Preventive Psychology, forthcoming
4. Botvin, G. J., “Substance Abuse Prevention Research: Recent Developments and Future Directions.“Journal of School Health, 1986, 56, 369-374.
5. Botvin, G. J., and others.“A Psychological Approach to Smoking Prevention for Urban Black Youth.“Public Health Report, 1989, 104(6), 573-582.
6. Botvin, G. J., Baker, E., Filazzola, A. D., and Botvin, E. M., “A Cognitive Behavioral Approach to Substance Abuse Prevention: One Year Follow-Up.“Addictive Behaviors, 1990, 15, 47-63.
7. Botvin, G. J., and others.“Smoking Prevention Among Urban Minority Youth: Assessing Effects on Outcome and Mediating Variables.“Health Psychology, 1992, 11 (5), 290-299.
8. Botvin, G. J., and others.“Long-Term Follow-up Results of a Randomized Drug Abuse Prevention Trial in a White, Middle-Class Population.“Journal of the American Medical Association, 1995, 273(14), 1106-1112.
9. Campbell, D. T., “Reforms as Experiments, “American Psychologist, 1969, 24, 409-429.
10. Campbell, D. T., “Methods for the Experimenting Society.“Paper presented at the meeting of the Eastern Psychological Association, New York, and at the meeting of the American Psychological Association, Washington, D.C., 1971.
11. Campbell, D. T., Methodology and Epistemology for Social Science: Selected Papers.Ed. E. S.Overman.Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1988.
12. Center for Substance Abuse Prevention.Fourth Annual Report of the National Evaluation of the Community Partnership Demonstration Grant Program.Rockville, Md.: CSAP, U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, 1996.
13. Chen, H., and Rossi, P. H., “Evaluating with Sense: The Theory-Driven Approach.“Evaluation Review, 1983, 7, 283-302.
14. Connell, J. P., Kubisch, A. C., Schorr, L. B., and Weiss, C. H. (eds.).New Approaches to Evaluating Community Initiatives: Concepts, Methods, and Contexts.Washington, D.C.: Aspen Institute, 1995.
15. Cronbach, L. J., Designing Evaluation of Educational and Social Programs.San Francisco: Jossey-Bass, 1982.
16. Fetterman, D. M., “Empowerment Evaluation: An Introduction to Theory and Practice.“In D. M.Fetterman, S. J.Kaftarian, and A.Wandersman (eds.), Empowerment Evaluation: Knowledge and Tools for Self-Assessment and Accountability.Thousand Oaks, Calif.: Sage, 1996.
17. Fetterman, D. M., Kaftarian, S. J., and Wandersman, A. (eds.).Empowerment Evaluation: Knowledge and Tools for Self-Assessment and Accountability.Thousand Oaks, Calif.: Sage, 1996.
18. Hawkins, J. D., Catalano, R., and Miller, J., “Risk and Protective Factors for Alcohol and Other Drug Problems in Adolescence and Early Adulthood: Implications for Substance Abuse Prevention.“Psychological Bulletin, 1992, 112(1), 64-105.
19. Hunt, M., The New Know-Nothings: The Political Foes of the Scientific Study of Human Nature.New Brunswick, N. J.: Transaction Publishers, 1998.
20. Jellinek, P. S., and Hearn, R. P., “Fighting Drug Abuse at the Local Level: Can Communities Consolidate Their Resources into a Single System of Prevention, Treatment, and Aftercare?“Issues in Science and Technology, 1991, 7(4), 78-84.
21. Lewin, K., Field Theory in Social Sciences: Selected Theoretical Papers.Ed. D.Cartwright.New York: Harpers, 1951.
22. Musto, D. F., “Historical Perspectives on Alcohol and Drug Abuse.“In J. H.Lowinson, P.Ruiz, R. B.Millman, and J. G.Langrod (eds.), Substance Abuse: A Comprehensive Textbook.(2nd ed.)Baltimore, Md.: Williams and Wilkins, 1992.
23. Office of National Drug Control Policy.The National Drug Control Strategy, 1998: A Ten Year Plan.Washington, D.C.: Executive Office of the President of the United States, 1998.
24. Office of Technology Assessment.“The Implications of Cost-Effectiveness Analysis of Medical Technology, "1980.
25. Patton, M. Q., Utilization-Focused Evaluation.Thousand Oaks, Calif.: Sage, 1978.
26. Patton, M. Q., Utilization-Focused Evaluation: The New Century Text.(3rd ed.)Thousand Oaks, Calif.: Sage, 1997.
27. Rindskopf, D., and Saxe, L., “Zero Effects in Substance Abuse Programs: Avoiding False Positives and False Negatives in the Evaluation of Community-Based Programs.“Evaluation Review, 1998, 22(1), 76-92.
28. Robert Wood Johnson Foundation.“Fighting Back: Community initiatives to Reduce Demand for Illegal Drugs and Alcohol (Call for Proposals).“Princeton: Robert Wood Johnson Foundation, 1989.
29. Saxe, L., and Fine, M., Social Experiments: Methods for Design and Evaluation.Thousand Oaks, Calif.: Sage, 1981.
30. Saxe, L., and others.“Think Globally, Act Locally: Assessing the Impact of Community Based Substance Abuse Prevention.“Evaluation and Program Planning, 1997, 20(3), 357-366.
31. Scriven, M., “Truth and Objectivity in Evaluation.“In E.Chelimsky and others (eds.), Evaluation for the 21st Century: A Handbook.Thousand Oaks, Calif.: Sage, 1997.
32. Shadish, W. R., Jr., Cook, T. D., and Leviton, L. C., Foundations of Program Evaluation: Theories of Practice.Thousand Oaks, Calif.: Sage, 1991.
33. Spickard, A., Dixon, G., and Sarver, F., “Fighting Back Against America’s Public Health Enemy Number One.“Bulletin of the New York Academy of Medicine, 1994, 71, 111-135.
34. Stake, R. E., “To Evaluate an Arts Program.“In R. E.Stake (ed.), Evaluating the Arts in Education: A Responsive Approach.Columbus, Ohio: Merrill, 1975.
35. Stake, R. E., “Program Evaluation, Particularly Responsive Evaluation.“In W. B.Dockrell and D.Hamilton (eds.), Rethinking Educational Research.London: Hodder and Stoughton, 1980.
36. Tobler, N. S., “Meta-Analysis of 143 Adolescent Drug Prevention Programs: Quantitative Outcome Results of Program Participants Compared to a Control or Comparison Group.“Journal of Drug Issues, 1986, 16(4), 537-567.
37. Tobler, N. S., and Stratton, H. H., “Effectiveness of School-Based Drug Prevention Programs: A Meta-analysis of the Research.“Journal of Primary Prevention, 1997, 18(1), 71-128.
38. Wandersman, A., and others.“Comprehensive Quality Programming: Eight Essential Strategies for Implementing Successful Prevention Programs.“Journal of Primary Prevention, 1998, 19(1).
39. Weiss, C. H., “Introduction.“In C. H.Weiss (ed.), Using Social Research in Public Policy Making.San Francisco: New Lexington Press, 1977.
40. Weiss, C. H., “Improving the Linkage Between Social Research and Public Policy.“In L. E.Lynn (ed.), Knowledge and Policy: The Uncertain Connection.Washington, D.C.: National Academy of Sciences, 1978.
41. Wholey, J. S., Evaluation and Effective Public Management.Boston: Little, Brown, 1983.
42. Winick, C., and Larson, M. J., "75 Community Action Programs.“In J. H.Lowinson, P.Ruiz, R. B.Millman, and J. G.Langrod (eds.), Substance Abuse: A Comprehensive Textbook.(3rd ed.)Baltimore, Md.: Williams and Wilkins, 1997.