Framing the future
Exploring the values that underpin the Australian Evaluation Society’s Evaluators’ Professional Learning Competencies
Datos Bibliográficos
| ID | 12347342 |
|---|---|
| Autores | Will Domvo (0000-0002-4693-8999, The University of Melbourne, autor de correspondencia), Amy Gullickson (0000-0001-5408-9846, The University of Melbourne), Lauren Wildschut (0000-0002-7002-2323, Stellenbosch University) |
| Año | 2024 |
| Volumen | 24 |
| Número | 4 |
| Páginas | 301-321 |
| Fecha de publicación | 2024-11-28 |
| Peer Reviewed | Sí |
| Open Access | Sí |
| Tipo | ARTICLE |
| Revista | Evaluation Journal of Australasia (JOURNAL) |
| Identificadores de la revista | ISSN: 1035-719X • E-ISSN: 2515-9372 |
| Editorial | SAGE Publishing (PUBLISHER • US) |
| DOI | 10.1177/1035719x241293807 |
| OpenAlex | W4404811840 |
| Idioma | EN |
| Citas recibidas | 1 |
| Referencias citadas | 28 |
In the last two decades, evaluator competency frameworks have become ubiquitous. Many have been developed by reviewing the literature and engaging in various research processes to ask evaluation practitioners what they do, in order to determine what evaluators should know and be able to do. Due to this practice focused approach, the underlying philosophical and theoretical assumptions of competencies are rarely questioned. In this article, the authors explore this territory by categorising competencies using two taxonomies. Mertens and Wilson’s 2018 Program evaluation theory and practice provides a philosophical framework, and Schwandt & Gates’ 2021 Evaluating and valuing in social research provides a theoretical framework. The authors apply these frameworks to the three evaluation specific domains of the Australian Evaluation Society (AES) Evaluators’ Professional Learning Competency Framework as refined for the Learn Evaluation Assessment Platform in 2020. Findings of this exploratory study suggest that the AES ’ conception of evaluator competencies aligns primarily with Mertens and Wilson’s pragmatist/neopragmatist paradigm and Schwandt and Gates ’ expanded frame. The authors discuss implications of the results and propose ideas for further improvement and testing of this research approach
Engineering ethics · Framing (construction · Mathematics education · Pedagogy · Sociology · Educational Assessment and Improvement · Engineering · Evaluation and Performance Assessment · Psychology · Student Assessment and Feedback
Assessing competency-based evaluation course impacts
Expanding evaluator competency research
Redesigning a University-Based Evaluator Education Program for Scholarship and Practice
Competency-Based Evaluation Education
A Professional Grounding and History of the Development and Formal Use of Evaluator Competencies
Frameworks for program evaluation
Situational Awareness and Interpersonal Competence as Evaluator Competencies
Toward a Taxonomy of Essential Evaluator Competencies
Establishing Essential Competencies for Program Evaluators
Influences on Evaluation Quality
Evaluator Training Needs and Competencies
Evaluator Competencies
Fly High, Go Deep, Add Value
Moving from guideline to measure to findings
| Obras citantes distintas | 1 |
|---|---|
| Citas por año | 1 |
| Intervalo de citas | 2026 - 2026 (1) |
| Velocidad de citación | current |
| Altamente citado | No |
| Tipos de cita | Neutras: 1 |