This Article Full Text (PDF) References Alert me when this article is cited Alert me if a correction is posted Services Email this article to a friend Similar articles in this journal Alert me to new issues of the journal Add to Saved Citations Download to citation manager Request Permissions Request Reprints Add to My Marked Citations Citing Articles Citing Articles via HighWire Citing Articles via Google Scholar Google Scholar Articles by Greene, J. C. Search for Related Content Social Bookmarking                   What's this?

Evaluation as Advocacy

Cornell University, Department of Human Service Studies, N136B MVR, Ithaca, NY 14853

The argument advanced in this article is that advocacy in evaluation is inevitable. This is so when advocacy is understood not as program partisanship or contaminating bias, but rather as a value commitment to a particular regulative ideal (of rational decision making, interpretive meaning, community activism). The regulative ideal for evaluation advanced in this discussion is a commitment to democratic pluralism. These ideas are illustrated and substantiated with three case examples.

The question is not whether we should take sides, since we inevitably will, but rather whose side are we on? (Becker, 1967, p. 239).

CiteULike    Connotea    Del.icio.us    Digg    Reddit    Technorati    What's this?

This article has been cited by other articles:

				J. C. Greene Evaluation Extrapolations American Journal of Evaluation, September 1, 2001; 22(3): 397 - 402. [PDF]