This Article Full Text (PDF) References Alert me when this article is cited Alert me if a correction is posted Citation Map Services Email this article to a friend Similar articles in this journal Alert me to new issues of the journal Add to Saved Citations Download to citation manager Request Permissions Request Reprints Add to My Marked Citations Citing Articles Citing Articles via HighWire Citing Articles via Google Scholar Google Scholar Articles by Weiss, C. H. Search for Related Content PubMed Articles by Weiss, C. H. Social Bookmarking                   What's this?

How Can Theory-Based Evaluation Make Greater Headway?

Harvard University

The idea of theory-based evaluation (TBE) is plausible and cogent, and it promises to bring greater explanatory power to evaluation. However, problems beset its use, including inadequate theories about pathways to desired outcomes in many program areas, confusion between theories of implementation and theories of programmatic action, difficulties in eliciting or constructing usable theories, measurement error, complexities in analysis, and others. This article explores the problems, describes the nature of potential benefits, and suggests that the benefits are significant enough to warrant continued effort to overcome the obstacles and advance the feasibility of TBE.

CiteULike    Connotea    Del.icio.us    Digg    Reddit    Technorati    What's this?

This article has been cited by other articles:

				A. Sampson Developing Robust Approaches to Evaluating Social Programmes Evaluation, October 1, 2007; 13(4): 477 - 493. [Abstract] [PDF]

				A. Parmar and A. Sampson Evaluating Domestic Violence Initiatives Br. J. Criminol., July 1, 2007; 47(4): 671 - 691. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				K. Zvoch, L. E. Letourneau, and R. P. Parker A Multilevel Multisite Outcomes-by-Implementation Evaluation of an Early Childhood Literacy Model American Journal of Evaluation, June 1, 2007; 28(2): 132 - 150. [Abstract] [PDF]

				R. Renger Consequences to Federal Programs When the Logic-Modeling Process Is Not Followed With Fidelity American Journal of Evaluation, December 1, 2006; 27(4): 452 - 463. [Abstract] [PDF]

				M. Dooris Healthy settings: challenges to generating evidence of effectiveness Health Promot. Int., March 1, 2006; 21(1): 55 - 65. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				K. L. Bledsoe and J. A. Graham The Use of Multiple Evaluation Approaches in Program Evaluation American Journal of Evaluation, September 1, 2005; 26(3): 302 - 319. [Abstract] [PDF]

				S. R. Rosas Concept Mapping as a Technique for Program Theory Development: An Illustration Using Family Support Programs American Journal of Evaluation, September 1, 2005; 26(3): 389 - 401. [Abstract] [PDF]

				J. A. Supovitz and B. S. Taylor Systemic Education Evaluation: Evaluating the Impact of Systemwide Reform in Education American Journal of Evaluation, June 1, 2005; 26(2): 204 - 230. [Abstract] [PDF]

				P. Kautto and J. Simila Recently Introduced Policy Instruments and Intervention Theories Evaluation, January 1, 2005; 11(1): 55 - 68. [Abstract] [PDF]

				S. Yampolskaya, T. M. Nesman, M. Hernandez, and D. Koch Using Concept Mapping to Develop a Logic Model and Articulate a Program Theory: A Case Example American Journal of Evaluation, June 1, 2004; 25(2): 191 - 207. [Abstract] [PDF]

				E. Bowen and E. Gilchrist Comprehensive Evaluation: A Holistic Approach to Evaluating Domestic Violence Offender Programmes Int J Offender Ther Comp Criminol, April 1, 2004; 48(2): 215 - 234. [Abstract] [PDF]

				M. Bamberger, J. Rugh, M. Church, and L. Fort Shoestring Evaluation: Designing Impact Evaluations under Budget, Time and Data Constraints American Journal of Evaluation, March 1, 2004; 25(1): 5 - 37. [Abstract] [PDF]

				R. E. Crew Jr. and M. R. Anderson Accountability and Performance in Charter Schools in Florida: A Theory-Based Evaluation American Journal of Evaluation, June 1, 2003; 24(2): 189 - 212. [Abstract] [PDF]

				L. Forsetlund, K. O. Talseth, P. Bradley, L. Nordheim, and A. Bjorndal Many A Slip Between Cup And Lip: Process Evaluation of a Program to Promote and Support Evidence-Based Public Health Practice Eval Rev, April 1, 2003; 27(2): 179 - 209. [Abstract] [PDF]

				B. C. Weitzman, D. Silver, and K.-N. Dillman Integrating a Comparison Group Design into a Theory of Change Evaluation: The Case of the Urban Health Initiative American Journal of Evaluation, December 1, 2002; 23(4): 371 - 385. [Abstract] [PDF]

				I. Sanderson Making Sense of 'What Works': Evidence Based Policy Making as Instrumental Rationality? Public Policy and Administration, July 1, 2002; 17(3): 61 - 75. [Abstract] [PDF]

				M. Fishbein, M. Hennessy, M. Kamb, G. A. Bolan, T. Hoxworth, M. Iatesta, F. Rhodes, J. M. Zenilman, and Project Respect Study Group Using Intervention Theory to Model Factors Influencing Behavior Change: Project Respect Eval Health Prof, December 1, 2001; 24(4): 363 - 384. [Abstract] [PDF]

				V. J. Friedman Designed Blindness: An Action Science Perspective on Program Theory Evaluation American Journal of Evaluation, June 1, 2001; 22(2): 161 - 181. [Abstract] [PDF]

				D. L. KINCAID Mass Media, Ideation, and Behavior: A Longitudinal Analysis of Contraceptive Change in the Philippines Communication Research, December 1, 2000; 27(6): 723 - 763. [Abstract] [PDF]

				L. Desimone, M. Finn-Stevenson, and C. Henrich Whole School Reform in a Low-Income African American Community: The Effects of the CoZi Model on Teachers, Parents, and Students Urban Education, September 1, 2000; 35(3): 269 - 323. [Abstract] [PDF]

				M. Hennessy and J. Greenberg Bringing It All Together: Modeling Intervention Processes Using Structural Equation Modeling American Journal of Evaluation, September 1, 1999; 20(3): 471 - 480. [Abstract] [PDF]

				C. McClintock and L. A. Colosi Evaluation of Welfare Reform: A Framework for Addressing the Urgent and the Important Eval Rev, October 1, 1998; 22(5): 668 - 694. [Abstract] [PDF]