The Program Evaluation Standards in International Settings

29Considerations on the Development of Culturally Relevant EvaluationStandardsBy Nick L. Smith, Saviour Chircop and Prachee MukherjeeReprinted from Studies in Educational Evaluation, Vol. 19(1), 1993, pp.3-13 with permissionfrom Elsevier Science.What standards should be invoked in establishing proper evaluation procedures whenworking in a different cultural context? Western evaluators working in cross-cultural settingshave suggested that what constitutes appropriate evaluation behavior depends on the culture inwhich one is working. Smith (1991), for example, provides a detailed summary of culturalinfluences in evaluation, noting the different cultural norms about what constitutes incompetent,unethical, and criminal behavior.For example, in the U.S., it is expected that one pay a small amount of extra money tosomeone providing a service if he or she is a waiter or cab driver, but not if he or she is apolice officer or court clerk – the difference between a tip and a bribe. Other cultures havedifferent standards ... Just what is ethical evaluator behavior and by whose standards do wejudge? Will cross-cultural evaluators have the same problems as U.S. multi-nationalcorporations who insist they have to bribe (tip?) Foreign bureaucrats as the culturallyaccepted way to conduct business, but are then subject to U.S. criminal prosecution?Conducting evaluations in culturally sensitive ways might cause serious problems for theevaluator upon returning home (Smith, 1991, p.17).The Standards for Evaluations of Educational Programs, Projects, and Materials of theJoint Committee (1981) has been developed and widely distributed as a guide to the properpractice of educational evaluation in the U.S. To what extent are these standards applicable innon-U.S. or non-western settings for prescribing proper evaluation practice? U.S. evaluatorsChapman and Boothroyd (1988) suggest that the combined centralized authority in ministryoffices and the impact of U.S. AID influence. . . opens doors to evaluative researchers that are usually unavailable in more industrializedsocieties where teachers are unionized and where student and family rights are given a highlevel of importance. Principles of privacy, the public’s right to know, and the Hatchamendment would never permit many practices in the United States that are common inevaluation studies in developing countries (Chapman and Boothroyd 1988, p.41).These practices might be seen as violations of the Joint Committee (1981) standards, or asculturally sensitive and adaptive evaluation procedures. Should an evaluator working in a crossculturalsetting conform to the mores of his or her own culture or to the mores of the culture inwhich the evaluation is being conducted?