|
Session Title: Learning From Research on Evaluation Practices and Theories
|
|
Panel Session 442 to be held in International Ballroom A on Thursday, November 8, 5:15 PM to 6:00 PM
|
|
Sponsored by the Presidential Strand
and the Theories of Evaluation TIG
|
| Chair(s): |
| Jody Fitzpatrick,
University of Colorado, Denver,
jody.fitzpatrick@cudenver.edu
|
| Discussant(s):
|
| Melvin Mark,
Pennsylvania State University,
m5m@psu.edu
|
| Marvin Alkin,
University of California at Los Angeles,
alkin@gseis.ucla.edu
|
| Abstract:
For many years evaluators have been proposing various theories and models for practice. These models are intended to offer principles, rationales, and organization for the procedural choices made by evaluators and to orient practitioners to the issues and problems with which they must deal. Until recently, there has been little research on the use of these models and how they relate to evaluators' practice. This session will bring together two strands of research on evaluation: broader-based studies and more focused case studies. The presenters will discuss current empirical studies of evaluation and contrast what each has learned about evaluation practice and its connection to theory. Pathways to learning about evaluation practice will be addressed, e.g., the influence of context and organization on practice, categorization systems and advance organizers. Furthermore, the impact of evaluation issues in determining the choices evaluators make, such as stakeholders' and evaluators' positions, will be discussed.
|
|
Conducting Research on Evaluation: Necessary, Challenging, and Insightful
|
| Christina Christie,
Claremont Graduate University,
tina.christie@cgu.edu
|
|
The development of good evaluation theory has consequences for the discipline, the profession, and the practitioner. With the demand for evaluation increasing steadily, the field needs to move toward establishing firm academic grounding so to supply a continuous stream of well-trained practitioners and scholars of evaluation, as well as more advanced understandings of what it means to conduct evaluation. This can be accomplished by shifting from theories based on discourse and experience to those developed from empirical study. Theory development in other fields can be conducted in labs with college students; this is not the case with evaluation. I will discuss the various ways in which we might enhance our current research on evaluation literature base, as well as the challenges specific to conducting such research. As an example of this work, the findings from a recent study on the relationship between evaluators' training and practice will be presented.
|
|
|
Examining Theories of Evaluation in Practice through Case Studies
|
| Jody Fitzpatrick,
University of Colorado, Denver,
jody.fitzpatrick@cudenver.edu
|
|
Just as evaluators make use of mixed methods to study programs, our understandings of evaluation theories in practice are greatly enhanced by using a variety of methods. My interviews of evaluators operating in different settings and in different roles provides insight into how exemplars, often ones who espouse a particular theory, apply that theory to an individual study. The case studies can be examined individually to learn more about how a theorist, when serving as a practitioner, applies or adapts his or her theory. Further, the case studies can be examined across cases to identify areas in which these evaluators are rather similar in practice, in spite of quite different settings, and where they differ, sometimes rather dramatically. I will discuss the findings of the interviews focusing, in particular, on advance organizers, stakeholder involvement, and methodology to illustrate what we can learn about theory in practice.
| |