Evaluation Practice
Proof, Truth, Client Relationships, and Professional Growth
Bibliographic Data
| ID | 12470670 |
|---|---|
| Authors | George F Grob (Center for Public Program Evaluation, Midlothian, VA, USA, corresponding author) |
| Year | 2017 |
| Volume | 39 |
| Issue | 1 |
| Pages | 123-132 |
| Publication date | 2017-11-09 |
| 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 | 10.1177/1098214017734640 |
| OpenAlex | W2767406908 |
| Language | EN |
| Citations received | 3 |
This article is the fifth in a series on the relationship of evaluation theory and practice. It was commissioned by the Eastern Evaluation Research Society and the American Evaluation Association as part of The Chelimsky Forum, launched in 2013 to honor Eleanor Chelimsky, one of the most influential and respected program evaluators of our era, and the former director of the Program Evaluation and Methodology Division of the U.S. Government Accountability Office. Supported by the Robert Wood Johnson Foundation, the forum is aimed at discussing challenges in the fit between theory and practice and strategies for addressing them. This article focuses on the relationships between evaluators and their users, especially policy makers. It tries to see things through the eyes of these users, recognizing their values and concepts related to evidence, proof, and “the truth” as they see it. It therefore tries to come to grips with the common core of evaluation thinking among a host of such clients, aiming to speak to them in their own language, but without sacrificing evaluator independence. It also recognizes the modern world of electronic reports and the possibility of both widespread and targeted dissemination of evaluation results. Finally, it offers some hints about evaluator development in this modern world, especially in the volatile world of policy and politics
Accountability · Engineering ethics · Foundation (evidence · Government (linguistics · Honor · Independence (probability theory · Political science · Politics · Public relations · Sociology · Computer Science · Engineering · Evaluation and Performance Assessment · Law
| Citations per year | 0.33 |
|---|---|
| Citation span | 2017 - 2021 (5) |
| Highly cited | No |