Anticipating and Addressing Stakeholders’ Stereotypes of Evaluation

Authors

  • John LaVelle University of Minnesota

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.3138/cjpe.61723

Keywords:

attitudes toward evaluation, communication, evaluation, evaluator education, stereotypes of evaluation, teaching evaluation

Abstract

It is likely that program and policy stakeholders hold biases and stereotypes about both evaluators and evaluation. Evaluators can challenge stakeholders’ negative stereotypes through communication strategies and intentional word choice, but first they must recognize the existence of stakeholders’ stereotypes. This Practice Note describes an instructional activity designed to help evaluators and participants in evaluator education experiences hone their communication skills, with a focus on describing evaluative perspectives, processes, and tools in a way that is accessible to stakeholders. The process helps evaluators both to be better aware of the stereotypes and biases that stakeholders are likely to possess and to provide language to help challenge negative and/or inappropriate perceptions. The Practice Note also provides a list of common biases about evaluation, and language to help evaluators anticipate and address them.

References

Alkin, M. C. (Ed.) (2012). Evaluation roots: A wider perspective of theorists’ views and influences. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.

Canadian Evaluation Society (CES). (2010). Competencies for Canadian evaluators. Retrieved from http://www.eval.org

Donaldson, S. I., Gooler, L. E., & Scriven, M. (2002). Strategies for managing evaluation anxiety: Toward a psychology of program evaluation. American Journal of Evaluation, 23(3), 261 – 273. https://doi.org/10.1177/109821400202300303

Guillickson, A. M., King, J. A., LaVelle, J. M., & Clinton, J. M. (2019). The current state of educating evaluators: A situation analysis and call to action. Evaluation and Program Planning, 75, 20 – 30. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.evalprogplan.2019.02.012. Medline:31015094

King, J. A., & Stevahn, L. (2013). Interactive evaluation practice: Mastering the interpersonal dynamics of program evaluation. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.

Knowles, M. S. (1980). The modern practice of adult education: From pedagogy to andragogy. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Cambridge Adult Education.

Lane, N., & Crane, A. (2002). Revisiting gender role stereotyping in the sales profession. Journal of Business Ethics, 40(2), 121 – 132. https://doi.org/10.1023/a:1020343504126

LaVelle, J. M. (2011). Planning for evaluation’s future: Undergraduate students’ interest in program evaluation. American Journal of Evaluation, 32(3), 362 – 375. https://doi.org/10.1177/1098214011398953

LaVelle, J. M. (2014). An analysis of evaluation education programs and evaluator skills across the world [Doctoral dissertation]. Claremont Graduate University, Claremont, CA.

LaVelle, J. M. (2018). 2018 directory of evaluator education programs in the United States. University of Minnesota Libraries Publishing. Retrieved from https://conservancy.umn.edu/handle/11299/200790

LaVelle, J. M. (2019). Educating evaluators 1976–2017: An expanded analysis of university-based evaluation education programs. American Journal of Evaluation. Advance online publication. https://doi.org/10.1177/1098214019860914

LaVelle, J. M. (in press, 2020). Using a program evaluation course to foster service and humanize students, faculty, and community partners. In E. Sengupta, P. Blessinger, and M. Makhanya (Eds.), International perspectives on integrating community service into the curriculum: Humanizing higher education. Innovations in Higher Education Teaching and Learning, V. (pp. 129–146). Bingley, England: Emerald Group Publishing.

LaVelle, J. M., & Donaldson, S. I. (2010). University-based evaluation training programs in the United States 1980–2008: An empirical examination. American Journal of Evaluation, 31(1), 9 – 23. https://doi.org/10.1177/1098214009356022

LaVelle, J. M., Lovato, C., & Stephenson, C. L. (2020). Towards a pedagogy for the teaching of evaluation. Evaluation and Program Planning. Advance online publication. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.evalprogplan.2020.101786

Mark , M. ( 2008 ). Building a better evidence base for evaluation theory: Beyond general calls to a framework of types of research on evaluation. In N. L. Smith & P. Brandon (Eds.), Fundamental issues in evaluation (pp. 111 - 134). New York, NY: The Guilford Press.

Mathison, S. (2005a). Attitudes. In S. Mathison (Ed.), Encyclopedia of evaluation (p. 23). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.

Mathison, S. (2005b). Bias. In S. Mathison (Ed.), Encyclopedia of evaluation (p. 33). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.

Preskill, H., & Russ-Eft, D. (2005). Building evaluation capacity: 72 activities for teaching and training. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.

Preskill, H., & Russ-Eft, D. (2016). Building evaluation capacity: Activities for teaching and training (2nd ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.

Russ-Eft, D., & Preskill, H. (2009). Evaluation in organizations a systematic approach: A systematic approach to enhancing learning, performance, and change. New York, NY: Basic Books .

Scott, B. (2000). Consulting on the inside: An internal consultant’s guide to living and working inside organizations. Alexandria, VA: ASTD Press.

Torres, R. T., Preskill, H., & Piontek, M. E. (2005). Evaluation strategies for communicating and reporting: Enhancing learning in organizations (2nd ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.

Triandis, H. C. (1995). A theoretical framework for the study of diversity. In M. Chemers , S. Oskamp , & M. A. Costanzo (Eds.), Diversity in organizations: New perspectives for a changing workplace (pp. 11 – 36). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.

Downloads

Published

2020-04-21

How to Cite

LaVelle, J. (2020). Anticipating and Addressing Stakeholders’ Stereotypes of Evaluation. Canadian Journal of Program Evaluation, 35(2), 230–239. https://doi.org/10.3138/cjpe.61723

Issue

Vol. 35 No. 2 (2020): Fall

Section

Research and Practice Notes

License

Copyright (c) 2020 John LaVelle

Creative Commons License

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License.

Authors contributing to The Canadian Journal of Program Evaluation agree to release their articles under the Creative Commons Attribution-Noncommercial 4.0 (CC-BY-NC) license. This licence allows this work to be copied, distributed, remixed, transformed, and built upon for any purpose provided that appropriate attribution is given, a link is provided to the license, and changes made were indicated.

Authors retain copyright of their work and grant the journal right of first publication.

Authors are able to enter into separate, additional contractual arrangements for the non-exclusive distribution of the journal's published version of the work (e.g., post it to an institutional repository or publish it in a book), with an acknowledgement of its initial publication in this journal.