MORELL AND FLAHERTY (1978) ARE RIGHT IN THEIR ASSESSMENT THAT THE FIELD OF EVALUATION RESEARCH IS IN THE PROCESS OF BEING PROFESSIONALIZED; HOWEVER, THEIR JUDGMENT ABOUT THE DEGREE OF PROFESSIONALIZATION IS FLOWED DUE TO THEIR USE OF STATIC CRITERIA IN MEASURING PROFESSIONALIZATION. A STATE OF CONSENSUS AND A UNIFORM ACCEPTANCE OF A SPECIAL BODY OF KNOWLEDGE, FOR EXAMPLE, DOES NOT REFLECT PROFESSIONALIZATION SO MUCH AS CONCEPTUAL CONFLICTS THAT INDICATE COMMITMENT TO THE FORGING OF NEW APPROACHES AND KNOWLEDGE IN AREAS NOT DEALT WITH BY ESTABLISHED PROFESSIONS. SUCH CONFLICTS EXIST IN EVALUATIVE RESEARCH IN THE FOLLOWING AREAS: (1) THE TYPES OF RESEARCH THAT SHOULD BE CONDUCTED FOR SOCIAL PROGRAMS (PROCESS OR OUTCOME EVALUATION); (2) PREFERENCES FOR FORMATIVE RESEARCH (ADDRESSING THE IMPORTANCE WHICH EVALUATIVE FINDINGS HAVE IN THE REFINEMENTS AND/OR REDIRECTION OF PROGRAM IMPLEMENTATION) AND SUMMATIVE RESEARCH (ASSESSING WHETHER PROGRAMS HAVE ACHIEVED THEIR GOALS AND WHETHER UNANTICIPATED CONSEQUENCES AROSE; (3) THE RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN EVALUATION ACTIVITIES AND DECISIONMAKING; (4) PERSPECTIVES ON THE OPTIMAL RELATIONSHIP OF THE EVALUATOR TO SOCIAL PROGRAMS; AND (5) THE BEST ORGANIZATIONAL LOCATION OF THE EVALUATOR. IN FUELING THE PROCESS OF PROGESSIONALIZATION, THE FOLLOWING ACTIVITIES SHOULD BE PURSUED: THE MAINTENANCE OF CONFLICT, THE EXPANSION OF MEMBERSHIP IN EVALUATORS' ASSOCIATIONS, THE TRAINING OF EVALUATORS, THE RECOGNITION OF EXCELLENCE, AND THE ESTABLISHMENT OF QUALITY STANDARDS. REFERENCES ARE PROVIDED. (RCB)