Depicting the logic of three evaluation theories.

Here, we describe the development of logic models depicting three theories of evaluation practice: Practical Participatory (Cousins & Whitmore, 1998), Values-engaged (Greene, 2005a, 2005b), and Emergent Realist (Mark et al., 1998). We begin with a discussion of evaluation theory and the particular theories that were chosen for our analysis. We then outline the steps involved in constructing the models. The theoretical prescriptions and claims represented here follow a logic model template developed at the University Wisconsin-Extension (Taylor-Powell & Henert, 2008), which also closely aligns with Mark's (2008) framework for research on evaluation.

[1]  J. Bradley Cousins,et al.  Framing participatory evaluation , 1998 .

[2]  William R. Shadish,et al.  Evaluation Theory is Who We Are , 1998 .

[3]  J. Bradley Cousins,et al.  Utilization Effects of Participatory Evaluation , 2003 .

[4]  W. Shadish,et al.  Foundations of Program Evaluation: Theories of Practice , 1990 .

[5]  John A. McLaughlin,et al.  Logic models: a tool for telling your programs performance story , 1999 .

[6]  Melvin M. Mark,et al.  The Mechanisms and Outcomes of Evaluation Influence , 2004 .

[7]  Melvin M. Mark,et al.  Toward an Integrative Framework for Evaluation Practice , 1999 .

[8]  Rebecca J C Luskin,et al.  Comparing the intended consequences of three theories of evaluation. , 2013, Evaluation and program planning.

[9]  Lorna Earl,et al.  The Case for Participatory Evaluation , 1992 .

[10]  Jennifer Caroline Greene,et al.  A value‐engaged approach for evaluating the Bunche–Da Vinci Learning Academy , 2005 .

[11]  S. Mathison,et al.  Advantages and Challenges of Using Inclusive Evaluation Approaches in Evaluation Practice , 1998 .

[12]  George E. P. Box,et al.  Empirical Model‐Building and Response Surfaces , 1988 .

[13]  J. Cousins,et al.  Consequences of researcher involvement in participatory evaluation , 1996 .

[14]  Lisa M. Dillman.  Comparing evaluation activities across multiple theories of practice. , 2013, Evaluation and program planning.

[15]  Nick L. Smith,et al.  Empowerment Evaluation as Evaluation Ideology , 2007 .

[16]  Christina A. Christie,et al.  AN EVALUATION THEORY TREE , 2004 .

[17]  Melvin M. Mark,et al.  Evaluation: An Integrated Framework for Understanding, Guiding, and Improving Policies and Programs , 2000 .

[18]  M. A. Scheirer,et al.  Guiding Principles for Evaluators , 1995 .

[19]  J. Greene.  ArticlesEvaluation as advocacy , 1997 .

[20]  When the Boat Gets Missed: Response to M.F. Smith , 1999 .

[21]  Jennifer Caroline Greene,et al.  An educative, values‐engaged approach to evaluating STEM educational programs , 2006 .

[22]  Melvin M. Mark,et al.  A realist theory of evaluation practice , 1998 .

[23]  F. Leeuw,et al.  Reconstructing Program Theories: Methods Available and Problems to be Solved , 2003 .

[24]  Christina A. Christie,et al.  Evaluation theory tree re-examined , 2008 .

[25]  J. Greene.  Evaluation as Advocacy , 1997 .

[26]  M. Mark,et al.  CHA P TER 6 Building a Better Evidence Base for Evaluation Theory Beyond General Calls to a Framework of Types of Research on Evaluation , 2022 .

[27]  Anne T. Vo,et al.  Visualizing context through theory deconstruction: a content analysis of three bodies of evaluation theory literature. , 2013, Evaluation and program planning.

[28]  R. Miller,et al.  Developing Standards for Empirical Examinations of Evaluation Theory , 2010 .

[29]  Nina Roberts.  Measuring Program Outcomes: A Practical Approach , 1998 .

[30]  J. Greene.  Evaluation Extrapolations , 2001 .

[31]  Gary T. Henry,et al.  Values and realist evaluation , 1998 .