Descriptor
| Evaluation Methods | 2 |
| Advocacy | 1 |
| Classification | 1 |
| Credibility | 1 |
| Cultural Awareness | 1 |
| Cultural Differences | 1 |
| Democracy | 1 |
| Ethics | 1 |
| Evaluation Problems | 1 |
| Evaluation Utilization | 1 |
| Evaluators | 1 |
| More ▼ | |
Author
| House, Ernest R. | 2 |
| Howe, Kenneth R. | 1 |
Publication Type
| Book/Product Reviews | 2 |
| Journal Articles | 2 |
| Reports - Descriptive | 1 |
Education Level
Audience
Location
Laws, Policies, & Programs
Assessments and Surveys
What Works Clearinghouse Rating
Peer reviewedHouse, Ernest R.; Howe, Kenneth R. – American Journal of Evaluation, 1998
Chelimsky, former head of the Program Evaluation and Methodology Division of the General Accounting Office, suggested that advocacy by evaluators destroys their credibility. Evaluators should, this author argues, be advocates for democracy and the public interest, with the question being how explicitly and how defensibly. (SLD)
Descriptors: Advocacy, Credibility, Democracy, Ethics
Peer reviewedHouse, Ernest R. – American Journal of Evaluation, 1999
Discusses the inappropriate racial categorizations of minorities that have routinely infected evaluations and social research. By adhering to principles of democracy and including minorities as participants in dialogue, evaluators can avoid such damaging effects in their work. (Author/SLD)
Descriptors: Classification, Cultural Awareness, Cultural Differences, Evaluation Methods
