Professionalization, Ethics, and Fidelity to an Evaluation Ethos

Abstract

Current discussion of the professionalization of the practice of evaluation is focused on matters of competencies and credentialing and largely overlooks several significant issues. These include conflating professionalizing the practice with promoting the value of evaluation as a social good, assuming there is widespread agreement on what the terms profession and professional mean, and not considering how processes of professionalization are affected by the incorporation of evaluative activities in systems of managerial control. Most glaring is the absence of vigorous discussion of what professionalism means in evaluation and what the profession itself aims to add to society, or the social good it seeks to serve. In a word, there is little discussion of the professional ethos of evaluation.

Useful to whom? Evaluation utilisation theory and boundaries for programme evaluation scope

“…These movements have traditionally emphasised technical competence 71 . However, contemporary evaluation theorists contend that any capacity‐building efforts must also inculcate professional ethos about ethical standards for evaluation practice 72 . In this way, evaluators can be better prepared to consider broader system harms and benefits in relation to the utilisation of evaluation, and develop strategies for navigating these issues in practice.…”

“…Programme evaluation is more than a purely technical form of in- However, contemporary evaluation theorists contend that any capacity-building efforts must also inculcate professional ethos about ethical standards for evaluation practice. 72 In this way, evaluators can be better prepared to consider broader system harms and benefits in relation to the utilisation of evaluation, and develop strategies for navigating these issues in practice. Health professions education can take lessons from these movements and use existing faculty development infrastructure to develop innovative professional development interventions for educators engaging in evaluation scholarship.…”

Towards systemic evaluation in turbulent times – Second-order practice shift

“…The STiP focus on the evaluator as practitioner and their central role in enacting responsible and systemically desirable evaluations could be seen as a response to the call for an enhanced evaluation ethos within evaluation professionalisation discourse. Schwandt (2015Schwandt ( , 2017 criticises the dominant focus on normative technical evaluation knowledge and competencies in the advancement of the evaluation professionalisation agenda and notes a lack of vigorous discussion of developing a professional ethos for evaluation. Professionalising evaluation as an occupation (and supply-and-demand commodity and service) with a focus on credentials and certification falls short of advancing evaluation as a public good of societal value.…”

Post-normal evaluation?

“…It raises the expectation that citizens act as co-creators of a public world, citizens making a public life together (Dzur, 2008). As politics returns to the people, the independent professional stance characteristic of normal evaluation gives way to a role for the evaluator as a facilitator of public discussion in ways that share power and responsibility with citizens (Schwandt, 2017(Schwandt, , 2018. The political scientist Albert Dzur (2008: 130) defines this role as "democratic professionalism": "Sharing previously professionalized tasks and encouraging lay participation in ways that enhance and enable broader public engagement and deliberation about major social issues inside and outside professional domains.…”