Assumptions at the philosophical and programmatic levels in evaluation

Donna M. Mertens

Evaluation and Program Planning, 2016, vol. 59, issue C, 102-108

Abstract: Stakeholders and evaluators hold a variety of levels of assumptions at the philosophical, methodological, and programmatic levels. The use of a transformative philosophical framework is presented as a way for evaluators to become more aware of the implications of various assumptions made by themselves and program stakeholders. The argument is examined and demonstrated that evaluators who are aware of the assumptions that underlie their evaluation choices are able to provide useful support for stakeholders in the examination of the assumptions they hold with regard to the nature of the problem being addressed, the program designed to solve the problem, and the approach to evaluation that is appropriate in that context. Such an informed approach has the potential for development of more appropriate and culturally responsive programs being implemented in ways that lead to the desired impacts, as well as to lead to evaluation approaches that support effective solutions to intransigent social problems. These arguments are illustrated through examples of evaluations from multiple sectors; additional challenges are also identified.

Keywords: Transformative; Climate change; Sexual violence; International development; Human rights; Social justice; Assumptions (search for similar items in EconPapers)
Date: 2016
References: View references in EconPapers View complete reference list from CitEc
Citations: View citations in EconPapers (1)

Downloads: (external link)
http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0149718916301045
Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only

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:eee:epplan:v:59:y:2016:i:c:p:102-108

DOI: 10.1016/j.evalprogplan.2016.05.010

Access Statistics for this article

Evaluation and Program Planning is currently edited by Jonathan A. Morell

More articles in Evaluation and Program Planning from Elsevier
Bibliographic data for series maintained by Catherine Liu ().