Citation

Hallett MA, Rogers R. Eval. Program Plann. 1994; 17(2): 187-196.

Copyright

(Copyright © 1994, Elsevier Publishing)

DOI

10.1016/0149-7189(94)90056-6

PMID

unavailable

Abstract

This article promotes the use of contextual constructionism in evaluation research. The article extends Palumbo and Hallett's 1992 argument rejecting traditional models of evaluation which assume that "consensus" is reached among "key policymakers, managers and staff" regarding program goals. Palumbo and Hallett argue that "conflict" more accurately characterizes program evaluation, due to the existence of "multiple realities" among stakeholders. They advocate a constructionist grounding for evaluation research. In the present article, the call for "truth in sentencing" in Tennessee (and to a lesser extent, across the country) is used to further illustrate conflict and to promote the use of a "contextual constructionist" approach to evaluation research.