Evaluation in Today’s World. Veronica G. Thomas
design. It also highlighted some potential hazards in executing and drawing evaluative conclusions built on longitudinal designs. Several follow-up evaluations have been conducted over the past 70 years to assess the impact of the program.
Program Description
The Cambridge-Somerville Youth Study involved mentoring boys placed at risk, ages 5–13 from low-income backgrounds, who lived in facilities in eastern Massachusetts in an effort to prevent or lower rates of juvenile delinquency (Cabot, 1940; Powers, 1951).
Method and Procedures
A randomized, experimental trial of the program was conducted in 1939 and lasted for 5 years on average. Six hundred and fifty boys (later reduced to 506) of average and difficult temperament between the ages of 5 and 13 years (median = 10.5 years) from Cambridge and Somerville, Massachusetts, who were considered at risk were placed in matched pairs, and one member of each pair was randomly assigned to the treatment group. Referred to as directed friendship, the preventive intervention involved individual counseling through a range of activities and home visits with the families. Counselors talked to the boys, took them on trips and to recreational facilities, tutored them in reading and arithmetic, encouraged them to participate in the YMCA and in summer camps, played games with them at the project’s center, and encouraged them to attend church. Boys in the control condition received no special services.
Selected Results
In the initial and 10-year follow up, there was either no difference or a higher rate of negative results as reported by the authors (Cabot, 1940; McCord, 1978). A 30-year follow-up evaluation found that the program had no impact on the delinquency of juveniles or when children in the program aged into adulthood (McCord, 1978). Likewise, the program had no positive effects on health of either juveniles or, later, adults. In fact, those in the program were more likely to be rearrested for crimes as youth and adults. Some negative impacts on physical and psychological health were found.
Reflect and Discuss
1 What do you see as important contributions of the Cambridge-Somerville Youth Study to the field of evaluation?
2 What are some issues raised by this study, particularly in relation to its longitudinal experimental approach? (Longitudinal studies will be covered in more detail in Chapter 11.)
Sputnik’s Impact on the Growth of Evaluation
Russia’s launch of Sputnik, the first artificial satellite to reach space and orbit the Earth, in 1957 was a major coup for the Soviet Union. It resulted in many U.S. policymakers feeling that the country was falling dangerously behind its Cold War rival in science and technology. The launch of Sputnik was so serious that then president Dwight D. Eisenhower appeared on national television to apologize to the country for its failure, and he promised a boost to U.S. science efforts. As a result, there was sizable investment in educational reform (especially science and technology), and the federal government approved $1 billion to enact the National Defense Education Act of 1958. This act funded curriculum development and new educational programs in mathematics, science, and foreign language. Additionally, funds were provided to evaluate these new initiatives.
Prominent Influencers and Users of Evaluation During the 20th-Century Early Years: 1930s–1950s
In the first half of the 20th century, there were a number of individuals whose philosophy, values, and research work helped to shape how evaluation evolved during that time and in subsequent years. There were also individuals whose evaluation work may not have impacted the evolution of evaluation theory and practice, per se, but who instead used evaluation as a tool to expose major social injustices of the time. Some of these influential scholars were not identified as evaluators during their time, yet their work made contributions to evaluation as theorized and practiced today. While they are too numerous for our coverage to be exhaustive, we highlight a few well-known, and a few lesser-known, early contributors to the evaluation field.
Kurt Lewin
In their book Social Psychology and Evaluation, editors Melvin M. Mark, Stewart I. Donaldson, and Bernadette Campbell (2011) explored the relationship between social psychology and the evaluation of programs, policies, and practices. They stress that Kurt Lewin, one of the most prominent social psychologists of the early 20th century, made important historical contributions—more than are often recognized—to evaluation. Considered the father of social psychology, Lewin contributed to evaluation most notably through his action research movement (Mark et al., 2011). He described action research as comparative research on the conditions and effects of various forms of social action, and research leading to social action, that uses a spiral of steps, each of which is composed of a “circle of planning, action and fact-finding about the result of the action” (Lewin, 1946, p. 38). This movement, taking place during the 1940s, led to the application of social psychology to social problem solving coupled with the need to evaluate those efforts in field settings. Another important area of Lewin’s work that was groundbreaking during his time (and became an important focus in contemporary evaluation approaches) is his focus on context. His field theory approach focused on studying behavior but without separating it from its natural context.
Mark et al. (2011) cited a number of contemporary approaches that were influenced by Lewin’s action research perspective. These include, for example, Fetterman’s (1998) empowerment evaluation, Rothman’s (1997) action evaluation research, Cousins and Whitmore’s (1998) practical participatory evaluation, and Patton’s (2008) developmental evaluation.
Alva and Gunnar Myrdal
The 1930s and 1940s work of Swedish scholars Alva and Gunnar Myrdal had an enormous influence on social science research, policy, and social justice perspectives in evaluation. Alva Myrdal was one of the most influential social reformers of the 20th century, seeking to end inequalities among all peoples. Gunnar Myrdal, an economist and sociologist, made an international reputation with his study and 1944 book, An American Dilemma, which provided deep insight into the contradictions of American democracy and its treatment of African Americans. It is worth noting that Ralph Bunche, the first African American to win the Nobel Peace Prize and a longtime distinguished member of the United Nations diplomatic corps, collaborated with Myrdal between 1938 and 1940 in the monumental study of U.S. race relations. The American Evaluation Association (AEA) bestows an annual award named in honor of Alva and Gunnar Myrdal. The Alva and Gunnar Myrdal Evaluation Practice Award is presented to an evaluator who exemplifies outstanding evaluation practice and who has made substantial cumulative contributions to the field of evaluation through the practice of evaluation and whose work is consistent with the association’s Evaluators’ Ethical Guiding Principles.
Ralph W. Tyler
For more than 60 years in the early part of the 20th century, Ralph Tyler was undoubtedly one of the most influential figures, both nationally and internationally, in education and evaluation. Tyler is credited with coining the term educational evaluation (Stufflebeam & Shinkfield, 2007), and his contributions to education, in general, and to testing and evaluation, in particular, have been extensively documented (e.g., Bloom, 1986; Madaus, 2004; Madaus & Stufflebeam, 1989). One of Tyler’s most notable achievements is his role as head of evaluation in the monumental Eight-Year Study of 1932–1940. This research is considered the second major landmark in educational evaluation (after Rice’s spelling performance evaluation in the 1800s), and it introduced educators throughout the United States to a new and broader view of educational evaluation than that which had been prevalent at that time (Madaus & Stufflebeam, 2000). Tyler viewed this comprehensive study as having multiple evaluation-related purposes including grading, grouping, and guiding students; reporting to parents on their children’s attainment; reinforcing teachers; reporting to school boards on