Rationality to ritual: The multiple roles of evaluation in governmental processes

The disillusion with social science evaluation can be partly attributed to an overly narrow view of the function of evaluation. In the accepted model, evaluation functions to provide information needed by rational decision-makers for discrete decisions. But evaluations often cannot perform this function. However, evaluation often does serve other functions. In one such function, it acts as a means for managing conflict and promoting social change. It often also stimulates program staff to critically examine their assumptions and behavior. Consideration of these additional functions leads to suggestions for changes in recruitment of evaluators and in the definition of the evaluators' role. Finally, one can view evaluation as a societal ritual whose function is to calm the citizenry and to perpetuate an image of government rationality.The Stanford Evaluation Consortium is supported by a grant from the Russell Sage Foundation. Robert E. Floden is Assistant Professor of Education at Michigan State University. Stephen S. Weiner is Assistant Professor of Education at Stanford University.     

Toward a national youth employment policy: Mapping the route from problems to programs

The United States has not had a consistent, comprehensive youth employment policy. Program objectives are not clear and are often in conflict with the objectives of other programs aimed at the same target population. The primary needs at this juncture are a clearly specified policy objective and a method for identifying the ways in which potential interventions can help attain that objective.The authors argue that the genesis of public concern with youth employment problems lies in the general acceptance of greater equality of opportunity as a national goal. The appropriate objective of youth employment policy is conceptualized as the reduction of certain inequalities in economic opportunity that confront the young.Equality of economic opportunity is a long-run concept. The relations between actions at a point in time and opportunity over time are developed within a model of youth behavior. The analysis focuses on the notions of career paths, employment success, and economic oportunity.The Research reported here was supported by the Office of Economic Opportunity. The authors owe much to the deliberations and suggestions of: K. Arrow, A. Carlin, J. Coleman, A. Cook, Jr., R. Dorfman, G. Fishman, T. Glennan, Jr., D. Greenberg, P. Katsky, S. M. Lipset, L. Rapping, T. Schelling, E. Sheldon, R. Summers, T. Tomlinson, B. Williams, W. Williams, and A. Wohlstetter. Sole responsibility for any errors or omissions, of course, resides with the authors.     

Commentary on Seagrave and Grisso: Impressions of the State of the Art

Seagrave and Grisso (2001) questioned the clinical-forensic utility of tests designed to assess juvenile psychopathy. They discussed potential problems with such tests and some avenues for future research. We agree with the points made by Seagrave and Grisso, but believe their critique did not go far enough. The state of the art with respect to the assessment of juvenile psychopathy is like an Impressionist painting: fine from a distance;but the closer you get, the messier it looks. We conclude that although tests of juvenile psychopathy measure something, it is impossible to be sure at this time they are actually measuring psychopathy.