1 / 10

PRACTICAL ISSUES OF STATING THE VALUES OF AN EVALUATION COMMUNITY

PRACTICAL ISSUES OF STATING THE VALUES OF AN EVALUATION COMMUNITY. MIRELA CERKEZ ADER & IAPE workshop November, 2013. REFERENCES. Australasian Evaluation Society, 2006, Guidelines for the Ethical Conduct of Evaluations

bin
Download Presentation

PRACTICAL ISSUES OF STATING THE VALUES OF AN EVALUATION COMMUNITY

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. PRACTICAL ISSUES OF STATING THE VALUES OF AN EVALUATION COMMUNITY MIRELA CERKEZ ADER & IAPE workshop November, 2013

  2. REFERENCES Australasian Evaluation Society, 2006, Guidelines for the Ethical Conduct of Evaluations Australasian Evaluation Society, 2000, Policy on the Application of the Code of Ethics Australasian Evaluation Society, 2000, Code of Ethics African Evaluation Association, 2006, African Evaluation Guidelines - Standards and Norms American Evaluation Association, 2004, Guiding Principles for Evaluators Bustelo, Maria, 2006, The Potential Role of Standards and Guidelines in the Development of an Evaluation Culture in Spain, Evaluation, vol. 12(4), pp. 437-453 Canadian Evaluation Society, 2012, Program Evaluation Standards

  3. REFERENCES Communication for the Commission from the President and Mrs. Schreyer. Evaluation standards and Good Practice. C/2002/5267.23/12/2002 Dezvoltarea unei Comunităţi de Evaluare Profesioniste în România - PHARE RO/2005/017-553.05.03.02 – code of ethics proposal German Evaluation Society, 2008, Evaluation Standards Israeli Association for Program Evaluation, 2009, Guidelines for responsible ethical evaluation Japan Evaluation Society, 2012, Guidelines for the Ethical Conduct of Evaluation

  4. REFERENCES Joint Committee on Standards for Educational Evaluation, 1981, 1988, 1994, 2003, apud Stufflebeam, Daniel L. and Shinkfield, Anthony, 2007, Evaluation Theory, Models & Applications, Jossey-Bass, San Francisco Polish Evaluation Society, 2008, Evaluation Standards Schweigert, Francis J., 2007, The priority of justice: a framework approach to ethics in program evaluation, Evaluation and Program Planning, vol. 30, pp. 394-399 Société Française de l’Évaluation, 2003, Charter of evaluation guiding principles for public policies and programmes Swiss Evaluation Society, 2000, Evaluation Standards United Kingdom Evaluation Society, 2013, Guidelines for good practice in evaluation

  5. DEVELOPING PRINCIPLES / STANDARDS / GUIDELINES FOR EVALUATION. An (partial) overview • 1981 - Standards of the Joint Committee • 1994 – Guiding Principles of the American Association of Evaluation • 1996 - Canadian Evaluation Society • 1997 - Australasian Evaluation Society • 2000 - Swiss Evaluation Society, Australasian Evaluation Society • 2001 - African Evaluation Association, German Evaluation Society • 2003 - Société Française de l’Évaluation • 2008 - Polish Evaluation Society • 2009 - Israeli Association for Program Evaluation • 2012 - Canadian Evaluation Society, Japan Evaluation Society • 2013 - United Kingdom Evaluation Society

  6. DEVELOPING PRINCIPLES / STANDARDS / GUIDELINES FOR EVALUATION. Establishing the language • principles: how evaluators should behave (Wolfgang Beywl/German Evaluation Society); ethical norms (Japan Evaluation Society) • standards: the attributes of a good evaluation (Wolfgang Beywl); expected manners in practice (Japan Evaluation Society) • guidelines: specific actions that evaluators should engage in order to fulfill principles and standards (Wolfgang Beywl) Bustelo (2006): Specific guidelines can be established in mature and non-competitive evaluation communities.

  7. DEVELOPING PRINCIPLES / STANDARDS / GUIDELINES FOR EVALUATION. Establishing the language Arguments: • the evaluation community in Romania is not consolidated so as to be able to define common views on evaluation. In that respect, the document we will develop should rather focus on ethical principles. • taking into account that the evaluation community in Romania is rather young, recommendations of practice for certain sensible aspects of the evaluation process may be useful. Challenge: keeping the balance between too general or too specific / detailed

  8. DEVELOPING PRINCIPLES / STANDARDS / GUIDELINES FOR EVALUATION. The subjects (1) • UKES (2002) and IAPE (2009) have developed sets of recommendations for several potential actors of the evaluation process: • the evaluators • the commissioners • evaluation participants • self-evaluators PROPOSAL: The document should address all the above mentioned subjects. Argument: In order to create a good environment for evaluation, all the stakeholders of an evaluation process should have an evaluation culture.

  9. DEVELOPING PRINCIPLES / STANDARDS / GUIDELINES FOR EVALUATION. The subjects (2) • members of ADER Challenge: the document might be isolated, ignored by the evaluation community • all the members of the evaluation community in Romania Challenges: • the evaluation community might lack the feeling of ownership and, thus reject it Who will be the guardian?

  10. DEVELOPING PRINCIPLES / STANDARDS / GUIDELINES FOR EVALUATION. Outline proposal • Preamble • Principles • Standards and guidelines • Planning the evaluation • evaluators • commissioners • evaluation participants • Performing the evaluation • evaluators • commissioners • evaluation participants • Communicating evaluation results • evaluators • commissioners • evaluation participants

More Related