Chapter 1
History of Evaluation
• Program evaluation is a mostly modern development (20th century).
• Program evaluation has grown with:
o Advances in research methods (psychology, sociology, and public health)
o Ideological and political changes
o Demographic changes
• Key importance:
o Emergence and increased standing of social sciences in universities
o Increase support for social research
Social Research Methods- they systematically investigate the effectiveness of social intervention
programs.
• Sample survey
• Advanced statistical procedure
• Large scale, multisite evaluation studies
Terms:
• evaluation sponsor- (what do sponsors do?) the person that, group, or organization that
requests or requires the evaluation and provides the resources to conduct.
• Stakeholders- individuals, groups, or organizations having a significant interest in how
well program functions, for instance, those with decision-making authority over the
program, funders and sponsors, administrations and personnel, and clients or intended
benefices
• program evaluation- (to inform action) The use of social research methods to
symmetrically investigate the effectiveness of social interventions programs in ways that
are adapted to their political and organizational environments and are designed to inform
social action in ways that improve social conditions
• social program- (efforts designed to ameliorate a social problem or improve social
conditions) an organized, planned, and usually ongoing effort designed to ameliorate a
social problem or improve social conditions.
Who can do evaluations?
• Evaluators are diverse in backgrounds and training
• Sample of backgrounds includes: Education, Psychology, Sociology, Human
Development and Family Studies
• Sample of workplaces: College/University, Private Business, Nonprofit Organization
• Need: Social Research Training, Knowledge about target problem area (e.g., drug abuse,
crime, teen parenting), Understanding of findings of other evaluations
Chapter 2
Purposes of Evaluation:
• program improvement (formative evaluation)- intended to provide information shape the
program for better.
o program planners, administrators, oversight boards, funder
o needs for program
• accountability (summative evaluation)-intended to judge a program’s performance
(meeting goals and objectives)
o audience- decisionmakers with major roles in program oversight (funding agency,
governing board, political decisionmakers, upper management)
• knowledge generation- focus on describing nature of effects of an intervention.
o audience- sponsors, academic scholars, policy makers.
o Most scientifically rigorous
• hidden agendas- when true purpose of evaluation has little to do with actually obtaining
info and program performance
o Examples: Good PR, Impress funders/political decisionmakers, provide rationale
for decision that has already been made.
Program Structure and Circumstances/Stages of program development
o New /innovative program
o Examines social needs the program addresses
