The DOI matches its OpenAlex record; 48 of the 48 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
The Case for Participatory Evaluation
Abstract
Participatory evaluation is presented as an extension of the stakeholder-based model with a focus on enhancing evaluation utilization through primary users’ increased depth and range of participation in the applied research process. The approach is briefly described and then justified from theoretical and empirical bases. The literature on organizational learning provides theoretical support for participatory evaluation stemming primarily from the view that knowledge is socially constructed and cognitive systems and memories are developed and shared by organization members. Twenty-six recent empirical studies were found to support an organizational learning justification of the model. Studies were classified into one of six emergent categories: conceptions of use; effects of participation on the use of research; effects of participation on the use of disseminated knowledge; effects of research training; school-university partnerships; and internal evaluation. Requirements of organizations and evaluators and an agenda for research are discussed.
Overview
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cites
Kytle, J., & Bandura, A. (1978) · Contemporary Sociology · doi:10.2307/2065952 · Cited by 25,422
(1985) · Medical Entomology and Zoology · Cited by 19,180
Organizational Learning: A Theory of Action Perspective
Argyris, C., & Schön, D. A. (1997) · Reis · doi:10.2307/40183951 · Cited by 11,113
Pierce, W. D., & Bandura, A. (1977) · Canadian Journal of Sociology / Cahiers canadiens de sociologie · doi:10.2307/3340496 · Cited by 9,650
Levitt, B., & March, J. G. (1988) · Annual Review of Sociology · doi:10.1146/annurev.so.14.080188.001535 · Cited by 6,447
Toward a Model of Organizations as Interpretation Systems
Daft, R. L., & Weick, K. E. (1984) · The Academy of Management Review · doi:10.2307/258441 · Cited by 5,013
Fiol, C. M., & Lyles, M. A. (1985) · The Academy of Management Review · doi:10.5465/amr.1985.4279103 · Cited by 3,385
Utilization-Focused Evaluation
(2018) · The SAGE Encyclopedia of Educational Research, Measurement, and Evaluation · doi:10.4135/9781506326139.n729 · Cited by 2,308
(1981) · Cited by 1,972
Handbook of organizational design
Hanken, A. F. G. (1982) · European Journal of Operational Research · doi:10.1016/0377-2217(82)90139-4 · Cited by 1,812
Cited by
A Systematic Review of Theory-Driven Evaluation Practice From 1990 to 2009
Coryn, C. L. S., Noakes, L. A., Westine, C. D., & Schröter, D. C. (2011) · American Journal of Evaluation · doi:10.1177/1098214010389321 · Cited by 531
Pedagogical Principles of Evaluation: Interpreting Freire
Patton, M. Q. (2017) · New Directions for Evaluation · doi:10.1002/ev.20260 · Cited by 47
Metadata
- Authors
- Cousins, J. B., & Earl, L. M.
- Venue
- Educational Evaluation and Policy Analysis
- Publisher
- SAGE Publishing
- Published
- 1992-01-01
- Volume
- 14
- Issue
- 4
- Pages
- 397-397
- ISSN
- 0162-3737 (ISSN-L)
- OpenAlex
- W2013450091
- Cited by
- 507
- References
- 48
- FWCI
- 7.93
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
How to cite
Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.
- This page
- CoChat. (2026). Citation check: The Case for Participatory Evaluation. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.2307/1164283
- The paper
- Cousins, J. B., & Earl, L. M. (1992). The Case for Participatory Evaluation. Educational Evaluation and Policy Analysis. https://doi.org/10.2307/1164283
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.