Page 184 - DLIS401_METHODOLOGY_OF_RESEARCH_AND_STATISTICAL_TECHNIQUES

Unit 14: Evaluation Research

The order of the American Evaluation Association principles does not imply priority among Notes
them; priority will vary by situation and evaluator role. The principles run as follows:
• Systematic Inquiry: Evaluators conduct systematic, data-based inquiries about whatever
is being evaluated.
• Competence: Evaluators provide competent performance to stakeholders.
• Integrity / Honesty: Evaluators ensure the honesty and integrity of the entire evaluation
process.
• Respect for People: Evaluators respect the security, dignity and self-worth of the respondents,
program participants, clients, and other stakeholders with whom they interact.
• Responsibilities for General and Public Welfare: Evaluators articulate and take into account
the diversity of interests and values that may be related to the general and public welfare.
Furthermore, the international organizations such as the I.M.F. and the World Bank have
independent evaluation functions. The various funds, programmes, and agencies of the United
Nations has a mix of independent, semi-independent and self-evaluation functions, which
have organized themselves as a system-wide UN Evaluation Group (UNEG), that works together
to strengthen the function, and to establish UN norms and standards for evaluation. There is
also an evaluation group within the OECD-DAC, which endeavors to improve development
evaluation standards.

14.2 Evaluation Approaches

Evaluation approaches are conceptually distinct ways of thinking about, designing and conducting
evaluation efforts. Many of the evaluation approaches in use today make truly unique contributions
to solving important problems, while others refine existing approaches in some way.
Classification of Approaches
Two classifications of evaluation approaches by House and Stufflebeam & Webster can be
combined into a manageable number of approaches in terms of their unique and important
underlying principles.
House considers all major evaluation approaches to be based on a common ideology, liberal
democracy. Important principles of this ideology include freedom of choice, the uniqueness of
the individual, and empirical inquiry grounded in objectivity. He also contends they are all
based on subjectivist ethics, in which ethical conduct is based on the subjective or intuitive
experience of an individual or group. One form of subjectivist ethics is utilitarian, in which
“the good” is determined by what maximizes some single, explicit interpretation of happiness
for society as a whole. Another form of subjectivist ethics is intuitionist / pluralist, in which
no single interpretation of “the good” is assumed and these interpretations need not be explicitly
stated nor justified.
These ethical positions have corresponding epistemologies—philosophies of obtaining knowledge.
The objectivist epistemology is associated with the utilitarian ethic. In general, it is used to
acquire knowledge capable of external verification (intersubjective agreement) through publicly
inspectable methods and data. The subjectivist epistemology is associated with the intuitionist/
pluralist ethic. It is used to acquire new knowledge based on existing personal knowledge and
experiences that are (explicit) or are not (tacit) available for public inspection.
House further divides each epistemological approach by two main political perspectives. Approaches
can take an elite perspective, focusing on the interests of managers and professionals. They
also can take a mass perspective, focusing on consumers and participatory approaches.

LOVELY PROFESSIONAL UNIVERSITY 179