Reference no: EM133424984

Question: Donald Campbell has placed evaluation research into a scientific research paradigm. He emphasized social science research methods and recommended that evaluators use the most robust methods available to them to answer questions about the effectiveness and worth of social programs. Lee Chronbach, on the other hand, claimed that evaluation is more an art than a science. He sharply differentiates evaluation research from scientific research, stating that the most important thing that evaluations can do is provide useful information to program decision-makers and stakeholders. Methods are important, but only to the extent that they elicit this useful information. Where do you fall in this debate? Is evaluation research more a science, an art, a combination of both? What, in your estimation, should the primary role of evaluation be (e.g., adding knowledge to a field, offer accountability, provide useful information, etc and Why?