|
Why are Some Public Agencies More Active in Policy Evaluation Than Others?
|
| Presenter(s):
|
| Valerie Pattyn, University of Leuven, valerie.pattyn@soc.kuleuven.be
|
| Abstract:
Why do public sector organisations differ in policy evaluation activeness? While a long list of potential explanations can be collected in evaluation circles, systematic research evidence on this issue is only scarcely available. The only certainty thus far is that context highly matters. This observation should not discourage us, however, from searching for patterns behind this contingency.
The paper deals with part of this research agenda. Central focus is to explain the extent of evaluation activeness: differentiating between organisations that have not yet conducted evaluations; that plan to evaluate; and that indeed conducted evaluations. Explanatory variables are ordered along four dimensions: actor characteristics (capabilities; orientations), institution related characteristics, policy issue characteristics and legacies.
28 public sector organisations of the Flemish administration (Belgium) constitute the area of investigation. In line with the contingent nature of evaluation practices, the research relies on the'family' of configurational comparative methods (QCA).
|
|
Differences and Similarities in American and European Evaluation Research
|
| Presenter(s):
|
| Nanna Friche, Aalborg University, nanna@learning.aau.dk
|
| Leanne Kallemeyn, Loyola University, Chicago, lkallemeyn@luc.edu
|
| Jori Hall, University of Georgia, jorihall@uga.edu
|
| Abstract:
Current bibliometric research documents how evaluation theorists in North America tend to focus on methodological issues of (educational) evaluation compared to issues of use and valuing. The authors of this paper expect this tendency to be reflected in the literature cited by these theorists. In contrast European theorists tend to be far more influenced by Continental philosophy than their U.S. counterparts. It is these apparent differences between evaluation in Europe and North America that this paper is engaged with. Thus, the purpose of the study described in this paper is to explore empirically the similarities and differences between articles published in the American Journal of Evaluation and Evaluation, a journal supported by the European Evaluation Association in order to address the question; what do the literature cited in Europe and the United States say about the field of evaluation, as well as evaluation theory and practice on each continent?
|
|
Values in Evaluation: The What and How Values in Swedish School Inspections
|
| Presenter(s):
|
| Christina Segerholm, MidSweden University, christina.segerholm@miun.se
|
| Abstract:
This paper analyses values permeating the Swedish school Inspections. School inspection is becoming increasingly influential in education policy and practice globally. As all evaluative activities school inspection conveys particular values albeit sometimes disguised in a more supervisory or legal rhetoric. This analysis highlights the What (substantial) and How (procedural) values embedded in the Inspectorate as expressed in interviews with high-ranking officers. Results point to tensions and ambiguities in values. Values concerning what to promote stress each child's right to be awarded a pass grade in a safe environment. Values about how inspections are to be undertaken underline assessments based on equal requirements on schools, but also on a needs-oriented procedure. Reports are to sustain: Credibility, clarity, accessibility, comprehensiveness and impartiality. These values are not easily reconciled with the reporting style (deviation reports) where mainly flaws and irregularities are noticed, i.e. a style based on values like shaming and blaming.
|
| | |