One in a series of issue papers commissioned by the Council of Administrators of Special Education (CASE), this document presents a comparison of contemporary evaluation approaches for special education programs. The first section describes the two approaches to be compared: (1) traditional scientific inquiry which emphasizes quantitative methods; and (2) the naturalistic paradigm which emphasizes qualitative methods. The second section, written by Lester J. Horvath, is titled "A Quantitative Program Evaluation Approach to Evaluating Quality Special Education Programs," and covers such areas as: the context of the problem (administrative challenge, reasons for program evaluation, contextual issues in special education, and training); assumptions regarding special education program evaluation; the recommended approach (including description, purpose and specific stages of evaluation); and other considerations. Section Three, written by Edith E. Beatty and titled "Qualitative Responsive Approaches to Evaluating Special Education Program Quality," addresses the local context; qualitative responsive evaluation; frameworks; and implementing qualitative responsive evaluations. The fourth section, written by Kenneth R. Olsen, is a comparative analysis of the approaches presented by Horvath and Beatty and discusses areas of agreement between the two approaches (stakeholder involvement, criteria for effective evaluations, emphasis on quality) and areas in which the methods differ (issues and concerns versus decisions, knowing design in advance, need for consensus). The final section outlines administrative implications of the findings and lists questions to help special education administrators in choosing the appropriate method for evaluating the quality of their special education program. (CB)