|
Session Title: Equity and Quality in Evaluation: Ideas and Illustrations From the Field
|
|
Panel Session 502 to be held in Lone Star A on Friday, Nov 12, 9:15 AM to 10:45 AM
|
|
Sponsored by the Presidential Strand
and the Research on Evaluation TIG
|
| Chair(s): |
| Jennifer Greene, University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign, jcgreene@illinois.edu
|
| Discussant(s):
|
| Valerie Williams, The Globe Program, vwilliams@globe.gov
|
| Abstract:
As a judgmental practice, evaluation inherently advances particular values. The values may be those of methodological integrity and defensibility, political independence and credibility, usefulness, cultural responsiveness, democratization, or some combination thereof. These different value stances well reflect the theoretical pluralism of the evaluation field. The values of evaluation show up in evaluation practice through the evaluation’s purpose and audience, the key questions asked, and especially the criteria used to make judgments of program quality. This panel explores the justification for and characteristics of an evaluation practice that intentionally and explicitly advances the value of equity, and its contributions to evaluation quality. Equity refers to the explicit representation of the interests of stakeholders least well served in the context at hand toward greater fairness in opportunity and accomplishment for these stakeholders. The panel features the contexts of STEM education program evaluation.
|
|
What is Equity in Educational Evaluation and How Does It Matter in Evaluation Quality?
|
| Jennifer Greene, University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign, jcgreene@illinois.edu
|
|
Equity, in our educative and values-engaged evaluation approach (EVEN), pertains to the fairness with which all members of the context are treated. It rests on a contextualized understanding of the dimensions of diversity that matter in that context. To advance equity means to ask evaluation questions about how well all diverse subgroups in a context are afforded program access and meaningful programs experiences, and have opportunities to attain outcomes of consequence. It also means to attend in particular to subgroups that are under-served and under-represented in the context being studied. Advancing equity in these ways also contributes to evaluation quality. Following Ernie House, truth and beauty in evaluation are neither if not accompanied by justice. Our work on equity-oriented evaluation updates and extends House’s argument about evaluation quality.
|
|
|
Educative and Values-Engaged Evaluation Approach (EVEN) We Can Use Values
|
| Jeremiah Johnson, University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign, jeremiahmatthewjohnson@yahoo.com
|
| Maria Jimenez, University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign, mjimene2@illinois.edu
|
|
This presentation will highlight the experiences and perspectives of a team of internal evaluators applying the EVEN approach to evaluate a Math Science Partnership (MSP) funded by the National Science Foundation (NSF). Evaluation team members will offer snapshots of the EVEN approach in action and reflect on the ways in which equity (as an intentional values positioning) has influenced their evaluation practice, and consequently, the program at hand. Evaluators will highlight particularly successful and unsuccessful efforts to engage stakeholders with issues related to equity and diversity. Evaluators will also discuss ways in which their efforts fall short of the “ideal” EVEN evaluation. The presentation will conclude with a brief list of lessons learned and recommendations for engaging issues of equity in STEM evaluation contexts, with particular attention to quality of EVEN evaluations.
| |
|
Forewarned Is Forearmed: A Tale of Two EVEN Evaluations
|
| Jeehae Ahn, University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign, jahn1@illinois.edu
|
| Ayesha Boyce, University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign, boyce3@illinois.edu
|
|
This presentation shares a tale of two equity-oriented evaluations culled from our recent fieldwork. One was an evaluator-initiated evaluation of a public high school mathematics program serving a diverse student body, including a considerable number of underrepresented and underserved students, and the other, a school-requested evaluation of a private middle school science outreach project involving just as diverse students but with highly involved parents and on the whole, more affluent backgrounds. Set against the backdrop of these different contextual circumstances and constraints, both evaluations endeavored to centrally engage with values of equity and diversity in access to, opportunities and experiences in STEM education, without compromising important evaluation priorities of the given context. In this presentation, we revisit some of the key equity-oriented practice decisions and actions we carried out, reflecting on the meanings of equity in these contexts and their connections to evaluation quality.
| |