EVALUATION RESEARCH AND POLITICAL SCIENCE: AN ARGUMENT AGAINST THE DIVISION OF SCHOLARLY LABOR

Anne L. Schneider

Review of Policy Research, 1986, vol. 6, issue 2, 222-232

Abstract: Political science might have been the birthplace of evaluation research, but it has instead been unreceptive to it for a number of reasons. Hofferbert's suggestion that political scientists become involved by studying the impact of policy on democratic processes does not take into account the ferment that has been taking place in the field of evaluation. Political scientists should not conduct evaluation studies using the same methodology they normally use because these may not produce the kind of information needed for improving policies or programs. A disciplinary division of labor is impractical for a number of reasons. Instead, they should use a policy sciences framework, which contains normative elements and focuses on potentials for change, among other things.

Date: 1986
References: Add references at CitEc
Citations:

Downloads: (external link)
https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1541-1338.1986.tb00688.x

Related works:
This item may be available elsewhere in EconPapers: Search for items with the same title.

Export reference: BibTeX RIS (EndNote, ProCite, RefMan) HTML/Text

Persistent link: https://EconPapers.repec.org/RePEc:bla:revpol:v:6:y:1986:i:2:p:222-232

Ordering information: This journal article can be ordered from
http://www.wiley.com/bw/subs.asp?ref=1541-132x

Access Statistics for this article

Review of Policy Research is currently edited by Christopher Gore

More articles in Review of Policy Research from Policy Studies Organization Contact information at EDIRC.
Bibliographic data for series maintained by Wiley Content Delivery ().