Search

"Testing" and "evaluating" are money-making activities that offer a rewarding professional career; perhaps it is no surprise that the field includes numbers of self-styled "evaluators" who provide services without the required training. Evaluation means the systematic application of given criteria for judging the merit or value of a variety of 'assessables' - capacities, powers and services, including social policy interventions. The conventional perspective is rationalist (in diagnosis, planning, intervention and impact analysis), even though rationalisms have lost their pre-eminence in the social sciences, in favour of political, symbolic or chaotic alternatives, as the history of organizational thought reveals. Alternatively, from a constructionist perspective, we see the power of evaluation criteria to reify what they ostensibly assess. Evaluations suggest or impose what is right; criteria of value define, give meaning and prioritize just one way of understanding social relations, program goals or individual and organizational behaviour. The suggestion in this article is to make a positive virtue of this inevitable pragmatic consequence of evaluation: to openly embrace it as an agent of change, emphasizing a strategical function beyond the traditional purposes of enhancement and accountability. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]