Theory-based evaluation: Reflections ten years on: Theory-based evaluation: Past, present, and future

New Directions for Evaluation

Volumn 2007, Issue 114, 2007, Pages 63-81

  Rogers, Patricia J ^b   Weiss, Carol H ^a  

^a Royal Melbourne Institute of Technology ^*

^b RMIT UNIVERSITY   (Australia)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

EID: 84968752497     PISSN: 10976736     EISSN: 1534875X     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1002/ev.225     Document Type: Article

References (54)

1. Cook, T. D., “The False Choice Between Theory-Based Evaluation and Experimentation.” In P. J.Rogers, T. A.Hasci, A.Petrosino, and T. A.Huebner (eds.), Challenges and Opportunities in Program Theory Evaluation.New Directions in Evaluation, no. 87. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass, 2000.
2. Funnell, S., “Developments in the New South Wales Approach to Analysing Program Logic.“Proceedings of the Annual Conference of the Australasian Evaluation Society, 1990, 2, 247-256.
3. Judge, K., and Bauld, L., “Strong Theory, Flexible Methods: Evaluating Comprehensive Community-Based Initiatives.“Critical Public Health, 2001, 11(1), 19-38.
4. Kriz, W. C., and Hense, J. U., “Theory-Oriented Evaluation for the Design of and Research in Gaming and Simulation.“Simulation & Gaming, 2006, 37(2), 268-283.
5. “Logical Framework.“An unpublished approach and training materials developed for U.S. Agency for International Development, 1971.
6. Marra, M., “How Much Does Evaluation Matter? Some Examples of the Utilization of theEvaluation of the World Bank’s Anti-Corruption Activities.“Evaluation, 2000, 6(1), 22-36.
7. Murray-Johnson, L., and others.“Using Health Education Theories to Explain Behav-iour Change: A Cross-Country Analysis.“International Quarterly of Community Health Education, 2000-01, 20(4), 323-345.
8. New York State Energy Research and Development Authority. Quarterly Report to the Department of Public Service.Quarter ending Sept. 30, 2006.Retrieved Feb. 5, 2007, from http://www.nyserda.org/Energy_Information/SBC/sbcsept2006.pdf.
9. Pawson, R. D., and Tilley, N., Realistic Evaluation.London: Sage, 1997.
10. Public Service Commission, South Africa.The PSC’s Public Administration Monitoring and Evaluation System: First Consolidated Report.2003.Retrieved Feb. 5, 2007, from http://www.pmg.org.za/docs/2003/appendices/031112psc.ppt.
11. Rog, D. J., and Randolph, F. L., “A Multisite Evaluation of Supported Housing: Lessons Learned from Cross-Site Collaboration.” In J. M.Herrell, and R. B.Straw (eds.), Conducting Multiple Site Evaluations in Real-World Settings.New Directions in Evaluation, no. 94.San Francisco: Jossey-Bass, 2002.
12. Stufflebeam, D. L., Evaluation Models.New Directions for Evaluation, no. 89.San Francisco: Jossey-Bass, 2001.
13. Tilley, N., Realistic Evaluation: An Overview.2000.Retrieved Feb. 5, 2007, from http://www.danskevalueringsselskab.dk/pdf/Nick%20Tilley.pdf.
14. Weiss, C., “Theory-Based Evaluation: Past, Present and Future.” In D. J.Rog, and D.Fournier (eds.), Progress and Future Directions in Evaluation: Perspectives on Theory, Practice and Methods.New Directions for Evaluation, no. 76, San Francisco: Jossey-Bass, 1997.
15. Auditor General of Canada.Audit Guide: Auditing of Procedures for Effectiveness.Ottawa: Office of Auditor General, 1981.
16. Baron, R. M., and Kenny, D. A., “The Moderator-Mediator Variable Distinction in Social Psychological Research: Conceptual, Strategic, and Statistical Considerations.“Journal of Personalityand Social Psychology, 1986, 51(6), 1173-1182.
17. Bickman, L., “The Evaluation of Prevention Programs.“Journal of Social Issues, 1983, (l), 181-194.
18. Bickman, L. (ed.).Using Program Theory in Evaluation.New Directions for Program Evaluation, no. 33.San Francisco: Jossey-Bass, 1987.
19. Bickman, L. (ed.).Advances in Program Theory.New Directions for Program Evaluation, no. 47.San Francisco: Jossey-Bass, 1990.
20. Bryant, D. M., and Bickman, L., “Methodology for Evaluating Mental Health Case Management.“Evaluation and Program Planning, 1996, 19, 5-16.
21. Campbell, F. A., and Ramey, C. T., “Cognitive and School Outcomes for High-Risk African-American Students at Middle Adolescence: Positive Effects of Early Intervention.“American Educational Research, 1995, 32(4), 743-772.
22. Chen, H.-T., Theory-Driven Evaluation: A Comprehensive Perspective.Newbury Park, Calif.: Sage, 1990.
23. Chen, H.-T., “Theory-Driven Evaluations: Needs, Difficulties, and Options.“Evaluation Practice, 1994, 15, 79-82.
24. Chen, H.-T., Quane, J., Garland, T. N., and Marcin, P., “Evaluating an Antismoking Program: Diagnostics of Underlying Causal Mechanisms.“Evaluation and the Health Professions, 1988, 11(4), 441-464.
25. Chen, H.-T., and Rossi, P. H., “The Multi-Goal, Theory-Driven Approach to Evaluation: A Model Linking Basic and Applied Social Science.“Social Forces, 1980, 59, 106-122.
26. Chen, H.-T., and Rossi, P. H., “Evaluating with Sense: The Theory-Driven Approach.“EvaluationReview, 1983, 7, 283-302.
27. Chen, H.-T., and Rossi, P. H., “The Theory-Driven Approach to Validity.“Evaluation and Program Planning, 1987, 10, 95-103.
28. Cohen, D. A., and Rice, J. C., “A Parent-Targeted Intervention for Adolescent Substance Use Prevention: Lessons Learned.“Evaluation Review, 1995, 19(2), 159-180.
29. Cook, T. D., Cooper, H., Cordray, D. S., Hartmann, H., Hedges, L. V., Light, R. J., Louis, T. A., and Mosteller, F., Meta-Analysis for Explanation: ACasebook.New York: Russell Sage Foundation, 1992.
30. Fitz-Gibbon, C. T., and Morris, L. L., “Theory-Based Evaluation.“Evaluation Comment, 1975, 5(l), 1-4.
31. Goodman, R. M., and Wandersman, A., “FORECAST: A Formative Approach to Evaluating Community Coalitions and Community-Based Initiatives.American Journal of Community Psychology, 1994, special issue, 6-25.
32. Goodman, R. M., Wandersman, A., Chinman, M., Imm, P., and Morrissey, E., “An Ecological Assessment of Community-Based Interventions for Prevention and Health Promotion: Approaches to Measuring Community Coalitions.“American Journal of Community Psychology, 1996.
33. Gottfredson, D. C., “An Evaluation of an Organization Development Approach to Reducing School Disorder.“Evaluation Review, 1997, 11(6), 739-763.
34. Judd, C. M., and Kenny, D. A., “Process Analysis: Estimating Mediation in Treatment Evaluations.“Evaluation Review, 1981, 5(5), 602-619.
35. Kelly, M. P., and Maloney, W. A., “A Behavioural Modelling Approach to Curriculum Development and Evaluation of Health Promotion for Nurses.“Journal of Advanced Nursing, 1992, 17, 544-547.
36. Lipsey, M. W., and Pollard, J. A., “Driving Toward Theory in Program Evaluation: More Models to Choose From.“Evaluation and Program Planning, 1989, 12, 317-328.
37. Marquart, J. M., “A Pattern-Matching Approach to Link Program Theory and Evaluation Data.” In L.Bickman (ed.), Advances in Program Theory.New Directions for Program Evaluation, no. 47.San Francisco: Jossey-Bass, 1990.
38. McGraw, S. A., Sellers, D. E., Stone, E. J., Bebchuk, J., Edmundson, E. W., Johnson, C.C., Bachman, K. J., and Luepker, R. V., “Using Process Data to Explain Outcomes: An Illustration from the Child and Adolescent Trial for Cardiovascular Health (CATCH).“EvaluationReview, 1996, 20(3), 291-312.
39. Milne, C., “Using Program Logic as a Practical Evaluation Tool: Case Studies from an Australian Evaluator.“Paper given at First International Evaluation Conference, Vancouver, 1995.
40. Pentz, M. A., Trebow. E. A., Hansen, W. B., MacKinnon, D. P., Dwyer, J. H., Johnson, C. A., Flay, B. R., Daniels, S., and Cormack, C., “Effects of Program Implementation on Adolescent Drug Use: The Midwestern Prevention Project (MPP).“Evaluation Review, 1990, 14(3), 264-289.
41. Quane, J., “Back from the Future: Can Evaluation Survive Dissension in the Ranks.“Paper prepared for American Evaluation Association meeting, Boston, Nov. 1994.
42. Rush, B., and Ogborne, A., “Program Logic Models: Expanding Their Role and Structure for Program Planning and Evaluation.“Canadian Journal of Program Evaluation, 1991, 6(2), 95-106.
43. Sandler, I. N., West, S. G., Baca, L., Pillow, D. R., Gersten, J. C., Rogosch, F., Virdin, L., Beak, J., Reynolds, K. D., Kallgren, C., Tein, J-Y., Kriege, G., Cole, E., and Ramirez, R., “Linking Empirically Based Theory and Evaluation: The Family Bereavement Program.“American Journal of Community Psychology, 1992, 20(4), 491-521.
44. Sechrest, L. B., and Scott, A. G.(eds.).“Understanding Causes and Generalizing About Them.“New Directions for Program Evaluation, no. 57.San Francisco: Jossey-Bass, 1993.
45. Sheard, M. H., Marini, J. L., Bridges, C. L., and Wagner, E., “The Effect of Lithium on Impulsive Aggressive Behavior in Man.“American Journal of Psychiatry, 1976, 133(12), 1409-1413.
46. Smith, N. L., “Using Path Analysis to Develop and Evaluate Program Theory.” In L.Bickman (ed.), Advances in Program Theory.New Directions for Program Evaluation, no. 47.San Francisco: Jossey-Bass, 1990.
47. Suchman, E., Evaluative Research.New York Russell Sage Foundation, 1967.
48. Torvatn, H., “Chains of Reasoning: An Evaluation Tool.“Trondheim, Norway: SINTEF-IFTM paper, 1995.
49. Trochim, W.M.K., “Pattern Matching, Validity, and Conceptualization in Program Evaluation.“Evaluation Review, 1985, 9, 575-604.
50. Weiss, C. H., Evaluation Research: Methods for Assessing Program Effectiveness.Englewood Cliffs N. J.: Prentice Hall, 1972.
51. Weiss, C. H., “Nothing as Practical as Good Theory.” In J.Connell, A.Kubisch, L. B.Schorr, and C. H.Weiss (eds.), New Approaches to Evaluating Community Initiatives.New York: Aspen Institute, 1995.
52. Wholey, J. S., Evaluation: Promise and Performance.Washington, D.C.: Urban Institute, 1979.
53. Wholey, J. S., Evaluation and Effective Public Management.Boston: Little, Brown, 1983.
54. Worthen, B., “Editor’s Note: The Origins of Theory-Based Evaluation.“Evaluation Practice, 1996, 17(2), 169-171.