Findings From an Empirical Exploration of Evaluators’ Values

Abstract

Psychological theory suggests that evaluators’ individual values and traits play a fundamental role in evaluation practice, though few empirical studies have explored those constructs in evaluators. This paper describes an empirical study on evaluators’ individual, work, and political values, as well as their personality traits to predict evaluation practice and methodological orientation. The results suggest evaluators value benevolence, achievement, and universalism; they lean socially liberal but are slightly more conservative on fiscal issues; and they tend to be conscientious, agreeable, and open to new experiences. In the workplace, evaluators value competence and opportunities for growth, as well as status and independence. These constructs did not statistically predict evaluation practice, though some workplace values and individual values predicted quantitative methodological orientation. We conclude by discussing strengths, limitations, and next steps for this line of research.

Redesigning a University-Based Evaluator Education Program for Scholarship and Practice

“…Similarly, while data-collection techniques (e.g., surveys, tests, interviews, focus groups) are integral to inquiry, they are tools, not theory. Evaluation theory, in contrast, focuses on the values evaluators bring to their work (e.g., LaVelle et al, 2022), the actions they take in practice (Fitzpatrick et al, 2008), the desired and predictable outcomes of such activities (Henry & Mark, 2003;Mark & Henry, 2004;Miller, 2010), and how the process aligns with evaluation's overarching principles and guidelines (Yarbrough et al, 2010).…”

“…An example of this distinction is illustrated in contrasting a study of how diff erent evaluation approaches lead to different outcomes in a health-care setting (research on evaluation) with a study on the use of a participatory approach to conduct an evaluation in a health-care setting (research on health care using evaluation as an inquiry tool). This is a point of ongoing discussion, though the majority agree that a doctoral disserta tion in evaluation must be research on evaluation contexts, processes, outcomes, or professional issues (Mark, 2008), or research on evaluators themselves (e.g., LaVelle et al, 2022).…”

Evaluator education through an LGBTQ+ lens: Interrogating power and privilege in the classroom

“…We recognize, however, that not all LGBTQ+ people will see their personal story reflected in these prompts, and are also aware that such prompts could even trigger microaggressions in the classroom. This would run against the principles espoused in critical queer theory as well as the evaluators' personal value of benevolence (LaVelle et al, 2022), leading us to urge caution.…”

“…The LGBTQ+ Principles discussed in Chapter 1 (Phillips et al., this issue) are largely framed as attitudes, cognitions, and values that are antecedents to explicit behaviors, and the links between these antecedents and behaviors are not explicitly clear in education processes (Posner & Rudnitsky, 2006) or in evaluation practice (LaVelle et al., 2022), though social psychologists have tested these relationships in many other contexts (e.g., Ajzen, 1991; Bardi & Schwartz, 2003). Empirical research suggests that values, cognitions, and attitudes may be changed through experiences such as formal education (e.g., DePoy and Merrill, 1988) – providing evaluator education programs with the opportunity to help their students think differently about programs and the people they are designed to serve.…”

The evaluator and evaluation: Critical considerations for the future of education and training

“…The history of evaluation as a field and a profession has been detailed and re‐examined many times (e.g., the American Journal of Evaluation's Oral History Project, Miller & Caracelli, 2013; Shadish et al., 1991), in work which we think has implicitly informed the definitions and descriptions of evaluator education over time (see LaVelle, 2020; LaVelle et al., 2023, this volume). While various documents and narratives detail parts of evaluation history, we invite consideration to advance the role of this history in education and training.…”