Toward Valuing With Critical Systems Heuristics
Bibliographic Data
| ID | 12470592 |
|---|---|
| Authors | Emily Gates (0000-0003-2352-5064, University of Illinois Urbana-Champaign, corresponding author), Emily F Gates (University of Illinois at Urbana–Champaign, Champaign, IL, USA) |
| Year | 2017 |
| Volume | 39 |
| Issue | 2 |
| Pages | 201-220 |
| Publication date | 2017-07-21 |
| Peer Reviewed | Yes |
| Open Access | Yes |
| Type | ARTICLE |
| Venue | American Journal of Evaluation (JOURNAL) |
| Journal identifiers | ISSN: 1098-2140 • E-ISSN: 1557-0878 |
| Publisher | SAGE Publishing (PUBLISHER • US) |
| DOI | 10.1177/1098214017703703 |
| OpenAlex | W2737214414 |
| Language | EN |
| Citations received | 21 |
| References cited | 45 |
Evaluation is defined by its central task of valuing—the process and product of judging the merit, worth, or significance of a policy or program. However, there are no clear-cut ways to consider values and render value judgments in evaluation practice. There remains contention in the evaluation field about whether and how to make value judgments. No approach to valuing eliminates the uncertainty, plurality, and potential for conflict that comes with considering values. This article explores what critical systems heuristics (CSH), an area of applied systems thinking, might contribute to four long-standing issues regarding valuing: envisioning the social value of evaluation, framing the evaluand and evaluation, selecting and justifying criteria, and determining the roles of the evaluator(s) and stakeholders in valuing. CSH contributes concepts and tools that, in theory, support more reflective, responsible valuing although further practical application is needed
Economics · Framing (construction · Heuristics · Management · Management science · Process (computing · Task (project management · Value (mathematics · Community Health and Development · Complex Systems and Decision Making · Computer Science · Evaluation and Performance Assessment
Beyond “best practices”
Critical systems practice 4
‘Good’ evaluation
Digital health interventions for adolescents living with HIV in low- and middle-income countries
It takes an ecosystem
Determinación histórico-material de la evaluación escolar contemporánea
Ethics of evaluation for socio-ecological transformation
Towards systemic evaluation in turbulent times – Second-order practice shift
Unraveling the complexities of learning in community development evaluation
Systems thinking concepts within a collaborative program evaluation methodology
Re-purposing evaluation to learn about social justice
Strengthening the ethical expertise of evaluators
A critical, integrative review on evaluating systems change and transformation, Part One
The Other Side of Inequality
Rich Pictures
Evaluation as Reparation, Reclamation, and Renewal
Supporting Evaluation Practice Through Mindfulness
Conceptualizing and Engaging in Reflective Practice
Managing ethical requirements elicitation of complex socio-technical systems with critical systems thinking
Making Systems Thinking Accessible for Qualitative Researchers
The Weight of Words
Values in Evaluation and Social Research
Evaluation Methodology Basics
Standards-Based & Responsive Evaluation
Systemic Intervention
Culturally Responsive Evaluation
Equity-focused developmental evaluation using critical systems thinking
Choosing Criteria to Judge Program Success
Politics and Evaluation
Unfinished Business
Educating for Intelligent Belief in Evaluation
Public-Interest Values and Program Sustainability
Values Engagement in Evaluation
Encyclopedia of Evaluation
Prosaic or Profound? The Adoption of Systems Ideas by Impact Evaluation
(Breaking) The Iron Triangle of Evaluation
Immanuel Kant's Critique of Pure Reason
Immanuel Kant’s Critique of Pure Reason
| Unique citing works | 21 |
|---|---|
| Citations per year | 2,63 |
| Citation span | 2018 - 2025 (8) |
| Citation velocity | recent |
| Highly cited | No |
| Citation types | Neutral: 21 |