One of the challenges facing program evaluation education is how to bridge the need to train students in theoretical and methodological foundations, and also prepare them for the unpredictability and complex environment outside the classroom. This issue is particularly challenging in terms of understanding stakeholder values and interests. The Bella City Zoo role-play scenario is an effort to integrate traditional lecture material with role-playing to give students the opportunity to learn about stakeholder participation and to put that material into immediate practice.
Alkin, M.C., & Christie, C.A. (2002). The use of role-play in teaching evaluation. American Journal of Evaluation, 23, 209-218.
2.
Banta, T.W. ( 2005). Leaders’ views on engaging stakeholders in assessment . Assessment Update, 17, 3-16.
3.
Boots, K., & Midford, R. ( 2007). Involving stakeholders in the evaluation of community alcohol projects: Finding a balance between subjective insight and objective facts. Substance Use & Misuse, 42, 1955-1969.
4.
Brandon, P.R. ( 1998). Stakeholder participation for the purpose of helping ensure evaluation validity: Bridging the gap between collaborative and non-collaborative evaluations. American Journal of Evaluation, 19(3), 325.
5.
Campbell, B., & Mark, M.M. ( 2006). Toward more effective stakeholder dialogue: Applying theories of negotiation to policy and program evaluation. Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 36, 2834-2863.
6.
Center for Disease Control. (2004). CDC evaluation working group: Steps in program evaluation. Retrieved from http://www.cdc.gov/eval/steps.htm#stakeholders
7.
De Neve, K., & Heppner, M.J. ( 1997). Role-play simulations: the assessment of an active learning technique and comparisons with traditional lectures. Innovative Higher Education, 21, 231-248.
8.
Department of Energy. (1999). Public Participation Policy. http:www.ci/doe.gov/cigapol.htm . Washington: Government Printing Office.
9.
Environmental Protection Agency. (2003). Framework for Implementing EPA’s Public Involvement Policy. http://www.epa.gov/publicinvolvement/policy/2003/framework.pdf . Washington: Government Printing Office.
10.
Gilliam, A., Davis, D., Barrington, T., Lacson, R., Uhl, G., & Phoenix, U. ( 2002). The value of engaging stakeholders in planning and implementing evaluations. AIDS Education & Prevention, 14, 5.
11.
Grant, A., & Curtis, A. ( 2004). Refining evaluation criteria for public participation using stakeholder perspectives of process and outcomes. Rural Society, 14, 142-162.
12.
Greene, J.C. ( 2007). Mixed methods in social Inquiry. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.
Joint Committee on Standards for Educational Evaluation. ( 1994). The program evaluation standards. Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE.
15.
Joyner, B., & Young, L. ( 2006). Teaching medical students using role-play: Twelve tips for successful role-plays. Medical Teacher, 28, 225-229.
16.
Mertens, D.M. ( 1995). Identifying and respecting differences among participants in evaluation studies. New Directions for Program Evaluation , 66, 91.
17.
Posavac, E.J., & Carey, R.G. ( 2007). Program evaluation: Methods and case studies. Upper Saddle River, NJ: Pearson Education, Inc.
18.
Rowntree, K.M., & Fox, R.C. ( 2008). Active learning for understanding land degradation: African catchment game and riskmap. Geographical Research, 46, 39-50.
19.
Schaap, A. ( 2005). Learning political theory by role-playing. Politics, 25, 46-52.
20.
Shaw, C.M. ( 2004). Using role-play scenarios in the IR classroom: An examination of exercises on peacekeeping operations and foreign policy decision making . International Studies Perspectives, 5, 1-22.
21.
Stake, R.E. ( 1975). Evaluating the arts in education: A responsive approach . Columbus, OH: Merrill.
22.
Trevisan, M.S. ( 2004). Practical training in evaluation: A review of the literature . American Journal of Evaluation, 25, 255-272.
