Interfacing theories of program with theories of evaluation for advancing evaluation practice: Reductionism, systems thinking, and pragmatic synthesis

被引:24
|
作者
Chen, Huey T. [1 ]
机构
[1] Mercer Univ, Dept Publ Hlth, Macon, GA 31207 USA
关键词
Theories of program; Theories of evaluation; Evaluation practice; Reductionism; Systems thinking; Pragmatic synthesis; COMPLEX INTERVENTIONS; HEALTH; FRAMEWORK; MODELS;
D O I
10.1016/j.evalprogplan.2016.05.012
中图分类号
C [社会科学总论];
学科分类号
03 ; 0303 ;
摘要
Theories of program and theories of evaluation form the foundation of program evaluation theories. Theories of program reflect assumptions on how to conceptualize an intervention program for evaluation purposes, while theories of evaluation reflect assumptions on how to design useful evaluation. These two types of theories are related, but often discussed separately. This paper attempts to use three theoretical perspectives (reductionism, systems thinking, and pragmatic synthesis) to interface them and discuss the implications for evaluation practice. Reductionism proposes that an intervention program can be broken into crucial components for rigorous analyses; systems thinking view an intervention program as dynamic and complex, requiring a holistic examination. In spite of their contributions, reductionism and systems thinking represent the extreme ends of a theoretical spectrum; many real-world programs, however, may fall in the middle. Pragmatic synthesis is being developed to serve these moderate complexity programs. These three theoretical perspectives have their own strengths and challenges. Knowledge on these three perspectives and their evaluation implications can provide a better guide for designing fruitful evaluations, improving the quality of evaluation practice, informing potential areas for developing cutting-edge evaluation approaches, and contributing to advancing program evaluation toward a mature applied science. (C) 2016 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
引用
收藏
页码:109 / 118
页数:10
相关论文
共 49 条
  • [21] Theories for Understanding the Effect of Impact Assessment and Project Evaluation on the Practice of Science
    McRoberts, Neil
    Brinker, Samuel
    Coleman, Kaity
    ANNUAL REVIEW OF PHYTOPATHOLOGY, 2024, 62 : 385 - 400
  • [22] Theories of firm Bbehavior in the nonprofit sector - A synthesis and empirical evaluation
    Malani, Anup
    Philipson, Tomas
    David, Guy
    GOVERNANCE OF NOT-FOR-PROFIT ORGANIZATIONS, 2003, : 181 - 215
  • [23] Advancing Systems Thinking Through the Healthy Kids, Healthy Communities Evaluation
    Sallis, James F.
    JOURNAL OF PUBLIC HEALTH MANAGEMENT AND PRACTICE, 2015, 21 : S88 - S89
  • [24] Repositioning Construct Validity Theory: From Nomological Networks to Pragmatic Theories and Their Evaluation by Explanatory Means
    Haig, Brian D.
    PERSPECTIVES ON PSYCHOLOGICAL SCIENCE, 2025, 20 (02) : 340 - 356
  • [25] An Australian doula program for socially disadvantaged women: Developing realist evaluation theories
    O'Rourke, Kerryn M.
    Yelland, Jane
    Newton, Michelle
    Shafiei, Touran
    WOMEN AND BIRTH, 2020, 33 (05) : E438 - E446
  • [26] Evaluation in health outcomes research: linking theories, methodologies and practice in health promotion
    Hepworth, J
    HEALTH PROMOTION INTERNATIONAL, 1997, 12 (03) : 233 - 238
  • [27] Teaching Note-A Call for Including Theories of Evaluation in Program Evaluation Courses Taught in Schools of Social Work
    Shaw, Jessica
    JOURNAL OF SOCIAL WORK EDUCATION, 2019, 55 (03) : 596 - 601
  • [28] Toward more effective stakeholder dialogue: Applying theories of negotiation to policy and program evaluation
    Campbell, Bernadette
    Mark, Melvin M.
    JOURNAL OF APPLIED SOCIAL PSYCHOLOGY, 2006, 36 (12) : 2834 - 2863
  • [30] Improving conservation practice with principles and tools from systems thinking and evaluation
    Knight, Andrew T.
    Cook, Carly N.
    Redford, Kent H.
    Biggs, Duan
    Romero, Claudia
    Ortega-Argueta, Alejandro
    Norman, Cameron D.
    Parsons, Beverly
    Reynolds, Martin
    Eoyang, Glenda
    Keene, Matt
    SUSTAINABILITY SCIENCE, 2019, 14 (06) : 1531 - 1548