Advanced Search

Journal Navigation

Journal Home

Subscriptions

Archive

Contact Us

Table of Contents

CiteULike is a free service for managing and discovering scholarly references - click here to get started.

Sign In to gain access to subscriptions and/or personal tools.
Evaluation
This Article
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow References
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Right arrow Citation Map
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Add to Saved Citations
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrowRequest Permissions
Right arrow Request Reprints
Right arrow Add to My Marked Citations
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via HighWire
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Right arrow Citing Articles via Scopus
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Shaw, I.
Right arrow Articles by Crompton, A.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
Social Bookmarking
 Add to CiteULike   Add to Complore   Add to Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us   Add to Digg   Add to Reddit   Add to Technorati   Add to Twitter  
What's this?

Theory, Like Mist on Spectacles, Obscures Vision

Ian Shaw

University of Nottingham, UK lan.Shaw{at}nottingham.uk

Amanda Crompton

University of Nottingham, UK lqxajc{at}nottingham.ac.uk

This article reflects upon the choice of theory in theory-driven evaluation. While theory is helpful in focusing evaluator's attention and facilitating investigation, it also excludes evidence that does not fit within its framework. The argument is that evaluators need to be aware of all theories that may impinge upon a programme and to defend the theory of choice. They also need to be explicit about what may be excluded from their investigation. Governments aim at change at a macro-level, often using macro-theory, whereas evaluators often concerned with the implementation of programmes may use theory that is at a different, usually the micro-level. Theories at these two levels are not always compatible. The article briefly outlines the development of the theory-driven approach before focusing upon evaluation in health promotion as a case study to highlight the issues.

Key Words: evaluation theory • health promotion • new public health • social order

Evaluation, Vol. 9, No. 2, 192-204 (2003)
DOI: 10.1177/1356389003009002005


Add to CiteULike CiteULike   Add to Complore Complore   Add to Connotea Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us Del.icio.us   Add to Digg Digg   Add to Reddit Reddit   Add to Technorati Technorati   Add to Twitter Twitter    What's this?


This article has been cited by other articles:


Home page
American Journal of EvaluationHome page
A. P. Williams and J. C. Morris
The Development of Theory-Driven Evaluation in the Military: Theory on the Front Line
American Journal of Evaluation, March 1, 2009; 30(1): 62 - 79.
[Abstract] [PDF]


Home page
Global Health PromotionHome page
R. Bodstein
The complexity of the discussion on effectiveness and evidence in health promotion practices
Global Health Promotion, March 1, 2007; 14(1_suppl): 16 - 20.
[Abstract] [PDF]