|
Metaphors, Models, and Analogies as the Tools for Constructing Understandings in an Evaluation
|
| Presenter(s):
|
| A Rae Clementz, University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign, clementz@illinois.edu
|
| Abstract:
Metaphors, models and analogies pepper our everyday speech, but research in the cognitive sciences have gone further and suggested that analogical reasoning is one of the foundational means by which we make sense of the world (Lakoff, 1993, Hofstadter, 2001). Analogical reasoning is both incredibly powerful and problematic in evaluation. Metaphors, models and analogies can be useful tools for capturing meaning and understanding of a program (Kemp, 1999) and can help us communicate with clients and stakeholders (Reddy, 1979), but the range of an evaluator’s prior experience has significant implications for the quality of observations and judgments she makes. This paper looks at the use of metaphors models and analogies by evaluators and stakeholders during meetings, in written communication, and conceptually as they work to understand the quality and characteristics of a program.
|
|
Moving From Outputs to Outcomes and Impact: Accountability and Evaluation Quality
|
| Presenter(s):
|
| Korinne Chiu, University of North Carolina at Greensboro, k_chiu@uncg.edu
|
| Kelly Graves, University of North Carolina at Greensboro, kngrave3@uncg.edu
|
| Abstract:
This paper discusses the transition within agencies from output-focused results toward impact-focused evaluations beyond what is simply required by funding agencies. A case study of a federally-funded program will provide examples of how evaluation requirements for government-funded agencies set the stage for the types of evaluation information collected. Although the information collected may meet the funding agency’s requirements, the evaluation may not provide a comprehensive view of the program. As funding agencies are transitioning to different standards of program accountability, including an emphasis on outcomes and societal impacts, programs may need guidance on how to transition their program findings into a new format and how to use the findings to inform ongoing program quality improvement. Recommendations will be provided on how to collaborate with programs in order to provide a quality evaluation that complies with funding agency standards in addition to producing a comprehensive evaluation of the program.
|
| |