In this paper, I report on the work of a practitioner inquiry group that went awry when the sponsor refused to publish and disseminate the participants' final reports, stating that they were of poor quality and did not contribute to the knowledge base. I, the facilitator of the group, disagreed strongly with her. I suggest that the difference…

It is suggested that there are some serious problems with defining the concept of empowerment evaluation, with its underlying assumptions, and with its proposed justification. Although devolving some responsibility for evaluation is good, devolving all of it to stakeholders is bad, as is thinking that the devolution creates a new kind of…

The author feels that the stakeholder approach unavoidably pushes the evaluation toward technical compromises and accommodations that diminish the long-term gains in knowledge. (PN)

Issues involved in empowering evaluation conducted with grass-roots organizations are discussed. One major issue centers on conflicting evaluation standards evaluators and stakeholders may have, and another is whether there is harmony between the empowerment model's goals of evaluation ownership and group advocacy. (SLD)

Stakeholder-based studies modify the relationship between evaluator and user, producing conflict that can cause evaluators to regress to familiar, traditional patterns that leave interactive evaluation strategies only partially implemented. (Author/PN)

Fostering self-determination is the defining focus of empowerment evaluation, but this type of evaluation overlaps participatory, collaborative, stakeholder-involving, and utilization-focused approaches to evaluation. It becomes critical to distinguish empowerment evaluation from other approaches as the field debates its boundaries and…

Analysis of the assumptions underlying the stakeholder approach to evaluation combined with the limited experience in testing the approach reported in this volume, suggests that some claims are cogent and others problematical. (Author)

Two main themes are found in the previous critiques (TM 510 180, TM 510 181, and TM 510 182) of the Tellado evaluation (TM 510 179): that Tellado lacked a clear audience for his evaluation and that he lacked an appropriate change orientation. A major problem with utilization-focused and stakeholder-based approaches to evaluation is revealed.…

The promise of the stakeholder approach to evaluation lies in its potential to counter criticism that evaluation is too narrow, unrealistic in its standards for success, unfair to program staff and participants, and irrelevant to decision makers. (Author)

Critiquing the stakeholder idea, the author states: if government chooses to take account of competing views in social program evaluation, it can get a better result if it encourages the competing views to find a voice of their own, not to speak through the government's chosen instrument. (Author/PN)

Deliberately involving urban education stakeholders in the Cities-in-Schools evaluation study improved the utility of the findings for formative evaluation stakeholders but not for summative evaluation stakeholders. (Author/PN)

Stakeholder evaluation was designed to address widely recognized problems in the conduct of evaluation. However, global propositions about the problems and prospects of program evaluation obscure the circumstances in which social science can contribute to social problem solving. (Author/PN)

Applies empirical data from case studies of assessment to illustrate the student-stakeholder viewpoint of assessment within a fitness-for-purpose approach. Finds students identify purposes for assessment in terms that are educationally sound, such as its effects on learning and motivation, extent of openness and clarity, and feedback and guidance…