Discusses the concept of process use as an important distinction between the evaluation theories of E. House and D. Fetterman, thus helping to explain the discordant results of C. Christie for these two theories. (SLD)

Makes summary comments on the empirical study of evaluation theory and practice. Research has indicated that the statistical fit between theorists' and everyday evaluators' practice is weak, and the approaches used by everyday evaluators are not easily aligned with constructs assumed to be the theoretical terrain. (SLD)

Examined six published papers using a theory-based evaluation (TBE) approach. Found that authors of the papers did not always make explicit the relation of their data to the theory of the program. Identified some ways in which TBE contributed to the merit of the evaluation. Outlines lessons for the future of TBE. (SLD)

Reviews some of the central insights from the preceding chapters of this issue as they relate to historical marker events from the past three decades that have influenced the evaluation profession and expanded notions of evaluation use. (Author/SLD)

Suggests that the key issue in the evaluation problem scenario is not so much an ethical problem as it is a strategic problem. The evaluator needs to be educator, change agent, and organizational development practitioner to make this evaluation a success. (SLD)

The viewpoints of contributors to the forum are reviewed. Many of the disagreements represent fundamental differences in what constitutes evaluation. All four authors agree that the formative/summative distinction is useful and will continue to be an important concept in program evaluation, although the distinction needs greater clarification.…

Builds on C. Christie's innovative work to chart a future course for research on evaluation. Describes a variety of forms that a more evidence-based approach to evaluation theory could take and offers suggestions to help increase the amount and impact of evidence in evaluation theory. (SLD)

Reviews the conclusions drawn in articles in this special issue and comments on some of the major themes, including paradigm debates, context issues, the role of evaluators and evaluation, the performance measurement movement, and the impact of new technologies on evaluation. (SLD)

In 1991, Michael Scriven published "Beyond Formative and Summative Evaluation," a reconsideration of the classic distinction in evaluation roles. Debate about the roles of evaluation continued in the four papers that follow this introduction, all of which were presented at a forum at the 1995 International Evaluation Conference. (SLD)

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)

"Feedback to Managers" is a two-volume report. Volume 2 compares 16 of the better feedback instruments available. The following are the instruments: (1) ACUMEN Group Feedback; (2) BENCHMARKS; (3) the Campbell Leadership Index; (4) COMPASS: the Managerial Practices Survey; (5) the Executive Success Profile; (6) Leader Behavior Analysis…

Critiques the ways in which evaluators and professional organizations have come to terms with research on, issues about, and interests that impact people of color. Focuses on ways to create institutional change, including fostering the participation of researchers of color. (SLD)