Session Number: GSNE1
Track: Graduate Student and New Evaluators
Session Type: TIG Multipaper
Session Chair: Leah McMillan Polonenko [Project Evaluator & Applied Researcher - Independent Evaluation & Applied Research Consultant]
Presenter 1: Faun Rockcliffe [Ms]
Presenter 2: Leah McMillan Polonenko [Project Evaluator & Applied Researcher - Independent Evaluation & Applied Research Consultant]
Presentation 1 Additional Author: Akashi Kaul, Student [Research Assistant - George Mason University]
Presentation 1 Additional Author: William Harry Rodick, III [George Mason University]
Time: Nov 09, 2017 (02:15 PM - 03:00 PM)
Room: Marriott Balcony B
Abstract 1 Title: Development of the DC Consortium Student Conference on Evaluation and Policy - Towards Graduate Student Knowledge Brokering.
Presentation Abstract 1: The DC Consortium Student Conference on Evaluation and Policy (SCEP) is a collaboration of universities in the District of Columbia, Northern Virginia and Maryland regions, representing the interests of students aspiring to be evaluators and policy makers. This collaboration aims to provide students with a platform to present their research and engage with evaluation experts in the opportunity-rich region of Washington, D.C., thereby serving as a bridge between students, academia and other evaluation and policy agencies/organizations. In this presentation, students from the Organizing Committee discuss lessons learned from DC SCEP’s inaugural conference. Features of the conference include a keynote address, interdisciplinary panel, and about 30 student presentations. We will highlight lessons learned concerning how the conference served to broker knowledge towards its theme, ‘Advancing Social Justice in Evaluation and Policy Integration’ with Consortium graduate students in the region.
Presentation 1 Other Authors: Stacey McDonald-Lowe, Sophia Brown, Shelley Starkley et al.
Abstract 2 Title: From Academic to Evaluator: Bridging the Divide
Presentation Abstract 2:
Academia and evaluation share many common practices, but their differences are equally robust. Recognizing these differences can be particularly challenging to the new evaluator entering the world of evaluation from the academy. The purpose and the audience are the two biggest differences that must be bridged. Whilst the academic is writing to advance knowledge the evaluator is creating a report to be of benefit to his/her client. And whilst the academic is predominantly crafting their dialogue for discussion within their discipline, the evaluator is focussed on the beneficiaries as audience. This paper presentation reflects on these variances and asserts that, while the rigours and research practices of academia are relevant to the evaluator, it is imperative that the differences between these two disciplines are well understood. This presentation uses examples from field work in East Africa to inform the lessons learned.
Theme: Select one
Audience Level: None
Session Abstract (150 words): Bridging the Divide