education

Alternative Approaches to Program Evaluation In Part One, we referred to the varying roles that evaluation studies can play in education, government, business, nonprofit agencies, and many related areas, and readers were introduced to some of the different purposes of evaluation. We hinted at some of the different approaches to evaluation, but we have not […]

What types of ethical violations do you think would occur most commonly in organizations with which you are familiar? Major Concepts and Theories 1. Good evaluation practice involves much more than methodological skills. Evalua- tors must have the skills to work well in a sometimes highly political environment, must be able to communicate well with

Ethics Beyond a Code of Ethics The evaluation standards and guidelines described earlier are, in our judgment, singularly useful in improving the practice of evaluation. We urge anyone aspir- ing to do high-quality evaluation to become intimately familiar with those stan- dards and guidelines and to apply them diligently. At the same time, mere adherence

Organizational Relationships of Evaluator to Client Evaluator Employed To Do One Evaluation or Successive Evaluations Evaluator Reports 1. Within organization which has responsibility for the program being evaluated 1. Successive evaluations 1. Directly to director of program evaluated 2. Within organization which has responsibility for the program being evaluated 2. One evaluation 2. Directly to

Interpersonal Relationships and Bias. It is apparent to even the casual observer that individuals’ feelings toward one another can color their judgments, not only about each other but about practically anything with which the other person is perceived to be associated. Hence, we have legal restrictions on testimony about one’s spouse and anti-nepotism policies that

Strategies for Reducing Bias. What can an evaluator do to minimize the bias that personal views and experience bring to an evaluation? One strategy recom- mended by qualitative researchers (Lincoln and Guba, 1985, Miles & Huberman, 1994; Schwandt & Halpern, 1989) is to maintain an “audit trail,” which Schwandt defines as “a systematically maintained documentation

Principle C.7 addresses expectations concerning financial disclosures: C.7 Evaluators should disclose all sources of financial support for an evaluation, and the source of the request for the evaluation (American Evaluation Association, 2004, Section C, Integrity/Honesty). Several standards also reveal critical expectations for the evaluation itself in regard to the nature of reporting information, the credibility

Reflecting on Sources of Bias and Conflicts of Interest Several of the Program Evaluation Standards (U.1, U.4, P.6, A.8) and Guiding Principles (C.3 and C.4) are concerned with the importance of evaluations being honest and impartial, avoiding conflicts of interest and conducting evaluations with integrity. Yet, as research has shown, many evaluators do not believe

Protections to Human Subjects and the Role of Institutional Review Boards Both the Standards and the Guiding Principles emphasize that to behave ethically, evaluators must protect the rights of people from whom they collect data. Institu- tional Review Boards (IRBs) are committees of five or more peer researchers who review the data collection plans, or

The principle of Integrity/Honesty also mirrors many of the issues articulated in the Standards. It addresses ethical concerns regarding negotiations with clients and relevant stakeholders, conflicts of interest, sources of financial support, misrepre- sentation of findings, and consideration of methods. Let us highlight two issues here: Guiding Principle C.5 explicitly states, “Evaluators should not misrepresent