| In a 90 minute Roundtable session, the first
rotation uses the first 45 minutes and the second rotation uses the last 45 minutes.
|
| Roundtable Rotation I:
Managing Program Evaluation: The Continued Invisibility of a Core Practice |
|
Roundtable Presentation 708 to be held in Conference Room 1 on Friday, Nov 4, 2:50 PM to 4:20 PM
|
|
Sponsored by the Evaluation Managers and Supervisors TIG
|
| Presenter(s):
|
| Don Compton, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, dcompton@cdc.gov
|
| Michael Baizerman, University of Minnesota, mbaizerm@umn.edu
|
| Abstract:
Our 2009 New Directions for Evaluation volume (Compton & Baizerman, Eds., No. 121, Spring) pointed out that there was then a very small evaluation literature on the everyday practice of managing evaluation. Missing too was a theoretical and conceptual evaluation literature about the mundane work of managing professional evaluators ('knowledge workers'). This drought continues.
Our text called for discussion by the field of whether managing evaluation was a(n) accepted professional practice, and if so, what a managing career might look like and what preparation for this work and career might be. We were met by silence.
To challenge this drought and silence, we again propose a Round Table to discuss these and related practice issues as a way to keep focus on this work and its importance to the evaluation field. It is expected that participants will again provide examples which will enrich understanding of this work, while also serving to keep focus and interest in the topic of managing evaluation.
|
| Roundtable Rotation II:
Assessing Outcomes of and Improving Evaluation Through Client Feedback |
|
Roundtable Presentation 708 to be held in Conference Room 1 on Friday, Nov 4, 2:50 PM to 4:20 PM
|
|
Sponsored by the Evaluation Managers and Supervisors TIG
|
| Presenter(s):
|
| Stacey Farber, Cincinnati Children's Hospital Medical Center, stacey.farber@cchmc.org
|
| Janet Matulis, Cincinnati Children's Hospital Medical Center, janet.matulis@cchmc.org
|
| John Murphy, Cincinnati Children's Hospital Medical Center, john.murphy@cchmc.org
|
| Abstract:
Client feedback is often sought to better understand satisfaction, service effectiveness, and evaluator competence or performance. However, 'reaction'-type data are generally not sufficient for communicating the benefits of evaluation and the return clients (or organization) get for investing in evaluation. Using frameworks that are typical to the evaluation of education and training (Kirkpatrick, 1975; Phillips and Phillips, 2007), our evaluation team designed a client feedback form that taps reaction-type information and higher-level outcomes, such as learning, application (evaluation use), impact (outcomes due to use), and value (monetized impact). We aver that it is here in 'outcomes' that value comes from evaluation. Our evaluation unit will share its client feedback form, process for administration, and data use for communication and business improvement. Attendees will be asked to share thoughts about their efforts to solicit and use client feedback for business improvement, communicating effectiveness and outcomes, and advertising for new business.
|